Toyota became the top selling auto manufacturer in the United States last quarter, making it the first time that GM was outsold in a quarter since Q3 of 1998 (Ford did it that time) and if I am not mistaken the first time ever by a “foreign” manufacturer (688,813 vs 688,236, Ford was far behind at 475,327 this time). Of course Toyota engineers, designs, and builds a huge percentage of their vehicles in the US these days making them arguably as American as a practical matter as any of the others seeing as how many direct and indirect employees/workers they support in this country. Year to date GM still leads (slightly) in the sales count but that may be in danger as well, it’ll be interesting to watch for the rest of the year.
I can’t tell the exact model year of the older SR5 pickup, but it’s from somewhere around 1981 or so. Who would have figured then that this truck would still be hauling stuff around today but here it is with a custom fit Harbor Freight tonneau cover over some stuff in the bed, having proved itself as nigh on unkillable. These older trucks still have quite a following and are not uncommon sights, at least in the western states. Certainly more so than the very early Ranger or S-10.
Its replacement (stablemate?) is what looks to be a 2021 Tacoma in extended cab form and TRD4x4 trim package, the smallest cab offered nowadays and a mid-level equipment package. 4×4 is pretty much de rigueur around here nowadays and it’d likely be difficult to find a RWD one. It could even be equipped with a manual just like the red SR5 is, being the only truck maker to still offer a manual version in a small(er) truck. I won’t doubt that this Tacoma will still be here in 2061 as well and likely far beyond that if taken care of and maybe even if not taken care of. Toyota itself has been playing the long game for longer and better than pretty much anyone and a repeat sale, even forty years later, is likely exactly the way the game plan read and still reads.
As someone who lives in the heartland that GM absolutely owned for decades and decades, I am not sensing the strong attachment to GM cars and trucks that used to be all around me. I would love to see the age demographic of the two corporation’s buyers – my seat-of-the-pants sense is that Toyota buyers are quite a bit younger, on average.
It might be of interest that in your particular state of Indiana Toyota employs over 7,000 employees with a total payroll of about $500 million (2019 numbers) while GM employs about 4,400 with a total payroll of $351 million. (2020 numbers).
https://pressroom.toyota.com/toyota-motor-manufacturing-indiana-fact-sheet/
https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/company_info/facilities/assembly/ftw.html
I did not know those figures but it does not surprise me at all. I keep forgetting because many of Toyota’s facilities are way down towards Evansville, which is kind of more in Kentucky’s orbit than that of Central and Northern Indiana which is where I have lived.
My but how GM has fallen. Kokomo (Delco) Anderson (Guide Lamp) Muncie (Chevrolet transmission) Indianapolis (Metal stamping, Allison transmission, Allison gas turbine, and some I am surely forgetting) was just a start, and that was just in Central Indiana. I saw a figure that Anderson once employed 24k alone.
After owning a Honda and then a Nissan for 27 years that gave a minimum of trouble, I bought a new GM car that cost me $1000 for repairs when it had 20,000 miles, and has a reputation of other failures too. I am old enough to remember when foreign cars were rare, and I want the ‘home team ‘ to succeed. The car had features I wanted, but a propensity to leave me stranded and nickel & dime me wasn’t something I was seeking.
Gm’s most affordable brand, Chevrolet has had a 36,000 mile warranty for several years, if not decades. If it had only 20,000 miles, your repairs should have been covered under warranty. Shame the dealer did not cover this. I would have complained to the district service manager.
It was outside of the 3 year warranty. It was the clutch release mechanism. I use my bicycle for many city trips including my work commute. Those 20,000 miles had a high proportion of easy highway miles. GM Customer Care was no help. I figured that being a GM it would start to fall apart well shy of 100,000 miles, but never dreamed it would be unreliable at 20,000 miles.
That sound terrible. Unless you had the car soaking in salt brine, 20,000 miles is Yugo level bad.
20k miles and clutch inop! That is awful. Hard to believe that about ANY car sold in the US in the past 15-20 years
What type of car?
When my younger brother was starting out in the early 1990s, he bought a used 89 or 90 Prelude. Nice looking car. A few months after he got it, it needed CV joints. Dealer told him $800 or so.
This was in 1992, the warranty had expired. Of course, my brother had no money–good job though, so he would have to pay with his credit card.
I told him, no, I’ll pay for it, provided you do exactly as I say and are prepared to follow through, ok? OK.
You will go back and tell them that this is a Honda, not an AMC. It’s not even 4 years old, only has 45k miles. You/Honda should fix it. Not only will I not pay YOU $800 plus to fix it, but I am going to write “LEMON” on the windshield and park it across the street, and I’ll put a note on the driver window explaining what’s wrong, and what you told me.
The dealer told me brother he would see what he could do. That same day or the next day, he cut the price in half, by paying, or having Honda pay for, the parts.
I would advise everyone who pays for a ridiculous repair early in their car’s life to do the same.
2017 Cruze. I figured that since I wasn’t a truck customer they didn’t care what I thought or did.
Richard, that is terrible.
I actually considered a new 2017 Cruze–provided it was a manual trans! I really liked the “new” hatchback, so I test drove one. I wanted to like the car, but….
Unfortunately, the manual trans in particular, was disappointing. The car drove fine in general, but the gear ratios were awful in my opinion. In suburban driving, the gap between 2nd and 3rd was huge, and 5th was too tall.
I felt as if GM was telling me “get an automatic, or endure this…”
I was not willing to endure that. I test drove a new 2017 Regal, I really liked it, despite the auto. So I found a used 2014 version that drove the same, and it replaced my 2011 Malibu.
I will give GM credit: my 2011 Malibu, bought new (leased, and then bought out) was the most trouble-free vehicle I have ever owned, and probably will ever own. Just two repairs–one sensor, at 88k, covered by emission warranty, and broken seat springs at 95k. A bizarre problem–the only repair I paid for.
Unfortunately, my Regal, had a more problems by 50k, warrranty-covered and not, than the Malibu every had over 100k, despite the Regal’s top-notch Consumer Reports ratings (CR recommened it) Then again, it was a “used” car. And driving it for four years, I can see why CR thought so highly of it–it had superb ride, handling, power, fuel economy and great front seats. Car felt solid.
Your clutch issue is inexcusable, GM and/or the dealer should have paid for all, or most of it (as they agreed and did to replace the shocks on my Regal)
I also gambled on a Cobalt SS Supercharged in 2006–it was a great driving car, though personal circumstances forced me to sell it too soon, after less than four years. 40k with zero problems may not be earthshaking…but it’s a good start.
So my experience with GM the past 15 years had been quite good. Perhaps I’m an outlier here.
I respect Toyota’s reputation, resale value, and my experience with Toyota rentals make them compelling if I decide ever decide to buy a new car. And philosophically, I like Toyota’s hybrid approach–even as I dislike the dashboards, the few people I know who have them love them, and Toyota is not looking for the govt to coerce people into its’ cars.
And all those factors point to Toyota becoming number one in the US at some point–unless they deliberately choose not to go there, much like GM deliberately chose not to push it’s market share much above 50% in the 1960s, lest anti-trust regulators break it up.
Tom,
I like the car & even the manual trans; maybe I’m too easy. I had a 2001 Sentra 5 speed and before that a 1989 Accord (-i) 5 speed, so I’m familiar with good manual transmissions. The Cruze’s gap between 1st and 2nd and the relatively balky shifting, making accelerating from a right hand turn a chore, are my biggest gripes. Hoping that a switch, yet to be made, to Amsoil Synchromesh tranmsission oil will aid the latter. For sure, the transmission plus the turbo lag plus the very long time to fully warm up so that the engine provides full torque below ~2500 rpm, and that it never has really strong torque there, makes it a not-sporty ride. I figure that’s what good MPG in a non-hybrid package costs.
What this transmission is good at, is having a maximum-mpg gear for any sort of cruising in the 30-70 mph range. In suburban driving, I easily top 45 mpg with this thing, sometimes above 50 mpg for a 25 mile average. Not sure if this is exceptional but I’m happy with it. 6th gear will provide better than 50 mpg at 50 mph, but be prepared to downshift if you need any reasonable acceleration, or even for a slight rise.
The early 1st gen Cruze was known for losing pistons in early life. When I bought this, thought GM had learned its lesson. No. These are also known for losing pistons early. Another expense I have to look forward to. Putting premium fuel in to try & reduce the likelihood. Gosh, I could have had a Lexus for all them money I have & am likely to put in this thing.
In the UK, Toyota, Lexus and Honda seen as older people’s cars. In Honda’s case this has proved terminal with them closing their UK and Turkish plants and effectively becoming another SAAB.
Nothing to do with the story, but I’m just curious why they didn’t center the solar panels on the roof of the garage.
Yeah that would bug me every time I pulled in.
It would only bother the driver for a few moments when they pulled in. It would bother the neighbors across the street 24/7/365.
Notice how close it is to the lower left corner of the roof, as well. I can only guess (hope?) it has something to do with the orientation of the sun and the optimum angle to get as much sunlight as possible.
Room for expansion? Don’t you have something else you should be doing right now?
I’m going to go out on a limb (sorry) and suggest that the cut up tree might have something to do with it. If that tree was cut and piled up where it grew then that side of the garage would have been shaded.
Thought they had enough to cover the whole roof, but ran short when they discovered the measured width of each panel was six inches less than they had thought. This fella’s Missus will never let him hear the end of the whole sordid affair.
The solar panels don’t bother me at all. In fact, I didn’t even notice them until these comments.
What does bother me? All those weeds in the concrete joints! Looks like a slum. Nothing a little herbicide or gasoline couldn’t fix. Easily. Too easily.
Or—cheaper and faster and easier and safer and 100 per cent less toxic—plain old boiling water.
I still remember the widow next door from when I was about 10-12, using thermal control for the weeds and grass between the joints of her driveway and the sidewalk.
She used a tea kettle and it took her a week or more of evenings.
Musta been a tiny teakettle or a giant expanse of concrete…!
Using chemicals to kill weeds is a time hoored practice but not always wise .
I recently began using salt water to kill the unwanted weeds and grass and it works better and faster than I thought it would and hasn’t seemed to affect my dogs…
-Nate
I’d be very, very unlikely to use gasoline. However, boiling water does present logistical problems. As a landscape maintenance contractor for two and a half decades, and having possessed a pesticide applicator’s license, I’d feel naked without a backpack sprayer and glyphosate (RoundUp) on my trailer. My preference was “RoundUp Quik Pro”. A wettable powder product that’s much easier to handle than a liquid formulation, but requires a diaphragm pump sprayer rather than a piston pump. The addition of diquat gives fast burn down like a contact herbicide, but with the residual effects of the systemic herbicide, glyphosate. I had previously used glufosinate (Finale) for my non-selective herbicide needs, but it was ridiculously expensive compared to QuikPro.
I could always just use a string trimmer or shovel to scrape joints and cracks, and hand-weed beds; but herbicides kept weeds at bay for a month or two, or maybe three, rather than dealing with them every service visit, thus reducing labor costs.
Planning another row of panels when needed? Like putting up bridge pylons but only decking half of it “for the time being”. I drive under a set like that daily and it bugs me, now because the whole area is a traffic mess.
This would be a common sight hereabouts.
As to the Q2 sales, it should be pointed out that although it’s a milestone, it was also the result of production cutbacks at GM due to chip supply issues. Toyota (and Honda) apparently had few issues in that regard.
That’s also largely why Honda outsold Ford in Q2. That made Toyota and Honda #1 and #2 in Q2 sales.
True. For perspective going back to Q2 2019 (as 2020 was very Covid-impacted) the numbers were 747k GM and 610k Toyota. That Toyota though has increased sales volume by 12% when comparing quarters since then is quite impressive. It seems they have plenty of chips, GM has reportedly resorted to shipping some vehicles with lesser functionality by leaving some chips out entirely in order to ship and sell the vehicles. Ford also apparently has fields of 99% assembled vehicles awaiting chips as well.
Honda may be #2 in non-domestic brands for Q2 but GM did outsell them overall, I believe Stellantis did as well unless you mean individual brand nameplates instead of overall automaker.
Oops; yes, I mangled that part about Honda. GM was still ahead of them.
I just saw that supposedly Ford has received a big “batch of chips” to be able to complete all those F-series that were built shy and are stashed pretty much anywhere and everywhere they could find space.
So it will be interesting to see what that does to dealer’s inventories and sales in Q3. It sounds like a massive logistical nightmare.
The latest issue of Time Magazine has an article on the vehicle chip problem. They stated in the article that the AVERAGE 2021 vehicle has around 1,000 semiconductor chips in total. 1,000 chips per vehicle [CPV]!
My question is why do vehicles need 1,000 or more semiconductor chips?
It isn’t really 1,000 big processing and memory “chips”, yes there are many of those in a modern car, it is semiconductors like transistors.
The reason for the volume is that pretty much everything is controlled by one module or another.
Long gone are the days when activating a switch connected the circuit to the power source. Now for pretty much every button you push a signal is sent to a module that decides if what you are requesting is valid. If it decides your request is reasonable it activates the desired item if it can. If it can’t then it sends a signal to the module responsible for said device. So trying to roll down the passenger window can look like this SW>driver’s door module>passenger door module>window motor.
While it could still be done the old way one of the reasons they do things like that is for the ability to do convenience features. For example there are cars that will set the seats/mirrors/HVAC based on which key is used to open/start the car.
The biggest reason(s) for modern multiplex wiring are weight, cost, labor, and space. Multiplex wiring with microprocessor modules can operate systems all over the vehicle with a two-wire circuit for signal/power and ground.
This also is the reason for silly seeming items like electrically operated parking brakes. A traditional mechanical e-brake system requires designing the whole vehicle around the mechanical and physical requirements of a moving cable, maybe inside a conduit, from the driving position to the actual brake device. It’s no different than being forced to design around the physical requirements of a driveshaft or an HVAC duct.
This is the dashboard harness for a 1959 Cadillac.
The chip shortage might have given Toyota the sales crown last quarter, but it’s still nothing to sneeze at, particularly when one considers how Toyota is generally considered lacking when it comes to any kind of progressive new features.
It’s the old reliability thing. For a lot of drivers, they really don’t care all that much about the latest, greatest auto advances. They just want reasonable comfort and driving dynamics in a nice, sterile, reasonable-cost, reliable package they rarely (if ever) have to worry about running properly (and for a very long time), and that’s what keeps people coming back to Toyota, time and again.
To put it into CC context, a new, strippo Corolla is sort of like the modern equivalent of a sixties’ slant-six/Torqueflite Valiant.
Toyota is generally considered lacking when it comes to any kind of progressive new features.
Your statement strikes me as totally detached from reality. What “progressive features” are lacking on Toyotas? Their standard safety suite is about as advanced as anyone’s, if not more so. And it came standard on the basic Corolla LE I bought for my daughter’s group home four years ago.
Examples?
I think he is referring to electric drivetrains and battery technology? Compared to Tesla, Ford, or even Nissan and GM, Toyota is far behind in EVs. The closest thing they have in the US market is the plug in Prius Prime, which is a decade behind Tesla and the others in range and battery technology.
Up until recently Toyota was still peddling Corollas with 4 speed automatics and and rear drum brakes, Technology which Honda and others had long left behind.
It’s not just the EV situation. Here’s a quote from Car and Driver on the most recent Corolla’s engine:
“More disappointing still is the carryover base engine that’s standard on L, LE, and XLE models. This 1.8-liter inline-four is an ancient powertrain that has been featured in the past several generations of Corolla with minimal updates. Its 139 horsepower is on the low end of the compact segment, and the Corolla LE we drove with this engine felt less than enthusiastic getting up to speed. Perhaps a greater deterrent is the fact that the more desirable and powerful 2.0-liter engine actually gets better EPA fuel-economy ratings than the base engine.”
There’s nothing inherently wrong with the Corolla’s 1.8L engine. It’s just old and slow.
Perhaps but they do offer the larger (2.0) engine in some trims as well as the Hybrid option. Nobody else in the class has that (the hybrid) at over 50mpg. At 38mpg the 1.8 would seem to be just fine compared to 40 with the 2.0 and 0-60 in ten seconds is likely fine too for most buyers. It’s likely better than whatever is being traded in on it. In C&D’s test summary data box they indicate that they actually observed 28mpg overall from the 2.0 (an XSE with the CVT) although they don’t seem to mention that in the text.
More likely plenty of folks (like many commenters here) are looking for “proven technology” and seem to be averse to turbos, which the 1.8 certainly delivers on with three trim levels between $20k-23k and the hybrid under $24k. People still comment that Mazdas will rust into the ground before the payments are done, we always hear about the Honda’s 1.5l turbo oil dilation issues and Nissan, well, who wants to start with the ubiquitous CVT bashing. Kia/Hyundai start with a 147hp engine, not significantly different. And the domestics have given up completely in this space. (The Corolla also features a CVT but I haven’t heard anything bad about it and actually enjoyed it when I drove the last two generations of Corolla). With over 300k sales in the US in most recent years it seems to satisfy many buyers.
“I think he is referring to electric drivetrains and battery technology? Compared to Tesla, Ford, or even Nissan and GM, Toyota is far behind in EVs. The closest thing they have in the US market is the plug in Prius Prime, which is a decade behind Tesla and the others in range and battery technology.”
There’s the RAV4 Prime, one of the most compelling entries in the segment. Toyota has stated that they believe the plug in hybrid to be a better use of battery resources (i.e the ability to build ten of them vs one competitive full EV) and from my time with it that’s a valid point. It would seem to provide enough all-electric range for the vast majority of owners’ daily needs with the gas engine there to eliminate any range anxiety.
While Toyota may not have yet fielded a full EV in current times, they did have two generation of Rav4 EV already, used to own part of Tesla, lead in hybrids worldwide, and I have no doubt that when they eventually join the full EV party they will handily succeed as they likely have tons of data to draw on. Everyone here bags on the Leaf for some good reasons (viewed as low tech battery mgmt) but it does manage to satisfy most of its buyers, Tesla is clearly in the lead (and don’t have anything to fall back on so need to do what they can to remain there), Ford has one very good EV (Mach-E) that they aren’t fully committing to by capping it at a piddly 50k global sales, the electric F150 isn’t actually available yet but looks promising, and GM has a history of knee-capping itself with their EV by producing stuff that while technologically capable isn’t desirable or somehow now with the upcoming EV Hummer being so big and heavy and resource-intensive that they will manage to come across as having an EV that’s viewed as being environmentally unfriendly, no mean feat. Toyota doesn’t tend to hype their upcoming products for half a decade or more before finally delivering, instead they come up with something good and put it out there, there’s likely a lot going on internally that nobody is aware of.
I think the Hummer EV is good technology, poorly implemented. I think you are right about GM kneecapping itself, in this case GM’s marketing dept knee capping GM’s engineering dept. On the other hand when the original Hummer and neo-retro FJ Cruiser came out, I thought they would fail, but they only ended up dying when fuel prices went to $5 a gallon and bloatmobiles just like them just keep coming back.
When Toyota finally does come out with a full EV, they will most likely outsource to someone else, like they did with the Supra and 86. A few years ago they had a deal with Tesla to supply drivetrains for Rav4 Primes, but the deal has apparently fallen apart.
My guess is they will partner with someone like Ford, since they had a cross licencing deal with them before involving Hybrid tech.
The RAV-4 Prime drivetrain is far more technologically advanced than any EV.
Way more complicated to blend an ICE and 3 motors virtually seamlessly than it is to run a couple of motors on their own.
Don, Toyota has been providing leading tech in vehicles. They currently offer a car called the Marai. It’s a Hydrogen fuel cell battery* that supplies electricity to the electric motors. Problem is, while it is available in the USA, there are only 3 areas where you can refuel a Hydrogen vehicle, and those areas are Los Angeles, New York City, and western Connecticut.
I’m told that other countries have made Hydrogen vehicle fuel availability a priority, and places like Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia and other Pacific rim locations have made substantial inroads in the technology, while the USA as a whole has made no effort in this direction. I suspect “big oil” may have something to do with that situation.
* A Hydrogen fuel cell battery is different from cars like certain Hondas, that uses Hydrogen to power an ICE instead of petroleum fuels.
Honda has been developing fuel cell vehicles since the late 90s. Toyota came a little later. Fuel cell tech is interesting but it has several problems like the need for expensive metal like platinum and as you mentioned the lack of hydrogen infrastructure. There’s also the stigma of hydrogen being associated with the Hindenburg disaster, perhaps unfairly so.
I think Tesla has made in clear which direction the “green” car industry is going, and its not hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. Honda and to a lesser degree Toyota spent their resources on fuel cell vehicles at the cost of EV development. This is the reason they are so far behind in EV tech.
Hybrid tech is more complex than pure EV, but that does not make it better. Hybrid tech was primarily used to cover short comings in battery technology.
Hybrids like the old style Prius had nickel metal hydride batteries, I am not familiar what the newer Prius Prime uses, so hopefully someone on CC can fill me in. Teslas used more advanced Lithium ion cells.
It’s not as easy as saying Li-Ion is “better” or “more advanced” just because it is newer. My understanding is that Li-Ion lighter and more energy dense by about 20% by weight and volume but does not perform as well in cold temps as NiMh for example and is more expensive, which are reasons that Toyota uses both kinds depending on vehicle and application. For example the current AWD Prius uses NiMh, the extra volume and weight can easily be absorbed in a smaller pack (it’d be harder in a Tesla with a huge pack to begin with) and the cold weather performance was deemed important in an AWD version as opposed to the standard FWD one which uses Li-Ion. To me that shows forethought and engineering prowess rather than just insisting that newer is better.
Toyota started using Li-Ion back in 2012 for some applications, actually prior to Tesla’s Model S going on sale if I recall correctly. Yes the old Tesla Roadster used Li-Ion as well and while a production car, was extremely limited in scope/volume and more of a hand-built custom.
Tesla is perhaps the leader in battery tech as far as programming for efficiency from a given volume and producing their own (with assistance from Panasonic etc,) but Toyota likely has just as much if not more experience than most anyone else in the field when it comes to battery tech. To think that they are simply behind and not capable of producing a full EV just because they don’t currently offer one is, I believe, a mistake, Toyota often waits to introduce their version of technology until it has matured in the marketplace and then usually arrives with an excellent product that isn’t subject to endless recalls and bad publicity.
The bZ4X concept was just shown a month ago and is slated to go on sale in mid-2022, spearheading the push to have fifteen full BEVs on sale by 2025 along with 55 “electrified” i.e. hybrid models, worldwide. If you were to visit Japan you’d be astounded to see that most everything Toyota currently builds is available in hybrid form and seems to form the bulk of what is on the roads there currently, far more so than what we see over here although Toyota is clearly the leader in that aspect here as well.
To say that Toyota is the most advanced automaker because they don’t EVs but could if they wanted to.
Thats like saying GM is the best automaker because while they don’t make reliable cars they could if they wanted to but they don’t feel like it right now. Which makes them the best automaker evaaar!
I’m not sure what you are trying to say, it seems like you left a few words out. It seems like you are trying to imply that I or someone else said Toyota is the most advanced automaker overall (?)
My points were that they certainly do lead in hybrid tech. They also assuredly have plenty of battery knowledge. And just because they offer some vehicles with older or more mature technology doesn’t make them out of touch or behind the times either, there’s usually a good reason for it, be it cost or proven reliability, both factors that their buyers tend to value. Who drives a base Corolla sedan hard enough that rear disc brakes would be an absolute necessity, it’s more an instance of using the wrong tool for the job.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/7/26/22594235/toyota-lobbying-dc-ev-congress-biden-donation
“Toyota is quietly pushing Congress to slow the shift to electric vehicles. The company was an early adopter of electrified vehicles but has since fallen behind.”
I’m quite aware of that. Toyota is the laggard when it comes to building EVs.
My original comment was not in regard to EVs, but to the many other technological features in their cars. Toyota isn’t lacking the technology to build EVs; the build them in China, because the have to there. It’s a deliberate choice because they prefer not if they don’t have to, as the costs are higher and the profit margins lower, at least for the time being.
It’s a business decision much ore than a technological one.
Toyota is lacking? Are you kidding me?
Gimmicks for the sake of gimmickry mean nothing. Is a 9-speed automatic 50% better that 6-speed?
Toyota is well-run company run by intelligent people. They are the company that comes closest to matching GM in the 1960s.
They make boring cars because that’s what the public wants. The do it well. They use there excellent engineering to make their cars better, and people appreciate that.
Over the years, I have often criticized their boring cars. Well, guess what? Now, ALL cars are boring. But not all boring cars are equally competent.
But Toyota’s seem to be very well-built, and very free of annoyance. Before the pandemic, I travelled often for work and had to rent a car a week at a time. I got a Camry one time–it was not exciting, but it was RELENTLESSLY COMPETENT. It reminded me, in a good way, of my old 2011 Malibu, only with more power and better A/C, and probably better fuel consumption. I also rented a few Malibus of 2017-2019 vintage. They seemed cheaper and looser than my old car (which was a BASE cheap as can be Malibu), engines felt weak (but gotta concede the fuel economy was superb) except for the one premier–that one felt firm and nice, and quick–but it was a Premier, much pricier car.
Toyota may not be fielding “politically correct” EVs. However, it one is really interested in minimizing their footprint on our fragile planet, Toyota’s hybrids excel at doing that. They have proven to reliable. And they are price competitive WITHOUT SUBSIDIES.
Chip shortage or no, if present trends continue, Toyota will be the top selling automaker in the US by 2025. If there is any kind of economic setback, or if fuel prices spike, that day will come sooner.
I bought a 2008 Camry LE 4 cyl new, $16k, paid cash. Just this year I had to do major repairs, now that it’s approaching 250,000 miles showing. Did the brake hydraulics, 4 new calipers & M/Cyl, new rotors. Replaced all 4 struts & hub assemblies as well. A few minor front suspension pieces as well. Still running on the original drive train, it burns very little oil.
Only serious complaint I have on the car: the rear brake pads had to be replaced at 38,000 miles. Seems there was a recall for the rear pads, the supplier had used the wrong epoxy to glue the pads to the backing plates, so the glue expanded under the heat of braking. wore the pads out quickly.
However because my car was out of the warranty by 2,000 miles, and the pads were normally not covered because they are a wear item, Toyota refused to cover the repair. Dealer wanted $350 to do the repair [said they needed calipers & rotors]. I told them to put the car together and I would pick it up. They claimed they couldn’t put it back together and allow a “dangerous car” to leave the place. I called the local police and said they were holding my car hostage, and I wanted to report it as a theft. As it had been brought in as a warranty situation and no repairs were done except to R & R the tires, Nothing was owed for repairs. [It helps that I’m a former member of law enforcement.]
Cop asked who was in charge and asked if the service manager if he would release the car. He was also advised that if he refused, the service manager would be arrested. He did release the car. Drove it home after advising the service manager that should he report the car as a dangerous vehicle, I would sue them.
Put it in my shop and raised it off the ground, Pulled the tires & popped the pads out, cleaned up the rotor surfaces, installed a new set of $12 pads. Put tires back on. Less than 15 minutes, without using air tools.
That was the last time I visited the Toyota dealership for anything.
Tried and true would be a better analogy.
Sitting here in a rural part of Hawaii “big island”, all you see personally owned are Toyota and Ram trucks, with a few old Nissan mixed in. GM and Ford seem to win only the government fleet bids. Granted, this is a very small market.
My current rental is a Korean built Buick Encore, which has taken me on dirt roads to semi-remote beaches with no trouble. Shiny new rental Jeeps are everywhere, but jacked up Toyota 4×4’s are king with the locals.
I looked into downsizing from the 2500 Chevy to a new Tacoma. I see a lot of fleet models with black bumpers. It turns out that the extended cab has a “utility” option that deletes the backseat and painted bumpers for a $1600 credit.
The SR5 I think is likely an ’82 because of those faux vents just after the door handles on each side. I had one for 14 years and eventually done in by rust and dried out rubber seals (the penalty of living 13 of those years in states that used road salt generously; the R-22 engine was unbreakable; it always started on the second turn of the key, no matter how cold it was). Standard cab, same color, vents and it had the California mirrors, too. Mine was a long bed and this looks more like a short, and the featured one has more tie downs than mine (only two on each side). The difference between ’81 and ’82 is just look at the front grill: ’81 was the last year of round headlights, ’82 were square/rectangular. 1984 trucks had a slight fender flair on the bed. This one has some package upgrade as mine did not have a slide back window, and for the life of me, I can’t remember seeing vent windows on them either (I thought slide windows were available only for extended cabs, but I’m likely wrong here). My truck went from Georgia to Maine and all the way to California and back. I cried the day I handed the key and title to a friend of mine who helped me pack my life’s remains for my move back home to mom’s in 1998 because I knew it wouldn’t make the 1000 mile trip from NY to GA. Damn good vehicle, but admittedly not a chick magnet (except on moving day).
Nice comparison .
I’m sad that Toyota doesn’t make a regular single cab anymore, not every one wants / needs a space cab .
-Nate
Nate, Toyota make single cabs, just not for every market.
That figures, god knows how much Americans suffer these days (sarc.)
Go to any third world country and be amazed at the tiny pickup trucks they get .
-Nate
I have a pair of Red Wing forester boots that I bought in 1977. They have been resoled 3 times and I still wear them because they are in good shape. I believe in buying good quality and taking care of what you buy. The old Toyota mini-trucks will just about last forever if you take care of them. You have to be indifferent to any criticism about driving an old vehicle and therefore resist trading it for something newer just because.
how did those old Toyota pickups finesse truck campers?
were there different standards then?
They made 3/4 and one ton chassis cabs for frame mounted campers and U-haul box trucks.
Disappointing news. Not a Toyota fan.
My brother had one of those Toyotas. I had a ranger and an
S10. If someone gave me a Toyota today would sell it and buy another S10.
Not really surprising to me Toyota is selling well. What is surprising is GM has managed to hold on to the number one sales spot for so long despite all the bad press they get.
Seeing that old Toyota next to the new one is disappointing. Kind of like seeing the high school prom queen that quadrupled in size 40 years later. The Toyota used to be slim and and young looking, now it’s just bloated plastic monster.
To me all this proves is there is a market for compact trucks like the Ford Maverick and Hyundai Santa Cruz
ever watch Scotty Kilmer?
several videos a week telling people to avoid GM products saying they are now essentially bottom of the barrel – especially the pickups
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Fc_IARDCqU&t=290s
extols Toyota & Honda, Lexus and Acura and tells people why – like 10 times a week
Yes, I like the way he makes boring topics fun, but his ideal car is a 30 year old Celica. I disagree how he says old 90’s-00s era GM trucks were good. I don’t think they are any better than modern GM, other than having less “techy” stuff to break on them like touch screens.
GM is in the same boat as Toyota as far as compact trucks in that they don’t have any. The Colorado is the closest they have and it’s only slightly less bloated than the Tacoma.
Your video does answer the question of how gm has managed to hold on to the number #1 sales slot for so long. If anything it makes me me wonder more. How can a bottom of the barrel maker sell the most trucks?
Love the “Custom fit Harbor Freight tonneau cover”. Available to cover any size loads.
Take that you young hard shell whippersnappers!
I saw a Toyota Mirai just the other day, in Victoria BC. Have no idea where it could be fueled.
CrystalEyes, Chances are the Mirai is owned by a local company or government agency that has their own fueling station, and the car likely doesn’t leave the greater Victoria area. If that’s the case, they probably already have a fleet of trucks running on Hydrogen fuel.
CrytasEyes, here you go –
The first fueling station in Victoria is under construction at an Esso station at 4001 Quadra St. That station should be ready for use in November. B.C. has the largest hydrogen fuelling network in Canada.11 Sept 2020
Just saw this reply. Thanks for the info, I didn’t realise that about BC. Most of our power comes from hydro, but there have been several attempts to promote CNG in the province; most of it concerning the possibility of building a port for CNG tankers. I assume the hydrogen is being produced from natural gas, I wonder how it all fits together? Seems a foolish path to take considering the province has substantial and almost completely untapped wind and tidal potential.