DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ. biggest thing to know with ANY magazine is that they are ALWAYS biased. even i they say their not. i mean your "Consumer Reports" said that the 2005 4Runner was the worst yet and that the ford explorer was SO MUCH BETTER...bull tweat. Toyota is slipping, just hope that they get back on the high horse before it's to late.

 

Never saw that in the mag. They did say the 2003 V6 was not recommended because of problems that were fixed in 2004. The 4Runner has been recommended every year since. The Tacoma has always been recommended by them and every other mag. I have read. By the way, they do not recommend any Explorers.

 

I personally don't consult Consumer Reports before I buy a vehicle, although my dad gets Consumer Reports and I do read it sometimes.

I have seen them give lower ratings to a vehicle than the vehicle deserves, and they also tend to be biased against truck based SUVs and anything with any kind of off road ability. So when they talk bad about a vehicle, I don't necessarily believe it unless I have a reason to believe it's true.

However, on the flip side, if Consumer Reports gives a vehicle good ratings, and especially if they recommend a vehicle, there's a good chance it will be a good vehicle. Why? Because they tend to be tough on any vehicle while testing it, and any obvious defect or design flaw will likely be found.

However, since I tend to like truck based SUVs and vehicles with good off road ability (the vehicles they seem to not like), I probably wouldn't buy what they recommend.

 

Not if you want rear seat leg room. Before I bought my '05 DC I looked at/drove Frontiers, Colorados etc. I don't know why Nissan bothered to redesign the frontier with out addressing the lack of leg room in their DC.

As far as the rear spring TSB on the Tacoma let's face it, rear springs are something Toyota has screwed up on all their trucks from day one. My 86 4Runner sagged like an old lady, my '97 Taco was not far behind.

Bed Issues: I have beat the crap out of my '05's composite bed. People are griping about how it is not made out of metal...what about the notorious rust out issue of 84-88 trucks just above the wheel well? I bought my '84 X-cab in 91, 5 Year old truck and the metal was swiss cheese.

My major gripe with my '05 was the soft paint, if my truck sensed a rock with in 5 yards it seem chip.

I used and abused my '05 off road and towing heavy crap before I got my Trekker for a trail rig, I atribute the minor groans to a truck that had been used, not driven to the mall and back.

Has Toyota quality slipped, YES. Has the quality slipped to the point of General Motors, Ford and Dodge where they have to offer "employee pricing" and other gimmicks to move their stock, no. Daimler paid about $36 BILLION for Dodge and sold it recently for $7-9 billion....25% of the previous value, that shows a quality company....

Would I buy another Toyota, Yes. Do I wish they had turbo diesel trucks like they do in every other market, YES.

 

Totally agree with this comment. As bad as we all hate to admit we are the minority when it comes to what we expect from the new Tacoma’s and 4Runners. The majority wants a quite, cush riding, easy to operate vehicle. These trucks are no longer bought for the trail, their to haul the kids to the soccer field and pick up groceries. Most don't want a manual t-case, they want to push a button (and some are too lazy to do that). I myself wish they would build a bullet proof SA 4wd runner or a Tacoma but the reality is that it's not going to happen. Its going to take the creative minds of the people on yotatech to modify these vehicles to perform up to our expectations.

As for the comments on plastic parts and cable tailgate supports, these are areas where Toyota is having to reduce weight to meet the ever increasing CAFE ratings. They are also trying to offset R&D costs and labor costs to keep these trucks somewhat affordable. And like mentioned previously, technology in improving and Toyota no longer needs to have 14 body mounts. I mean even look at engine designs now. Toyota builds L4's today that out perform the old 3vz V6 and still gets ~25mpg.

I'm not dissing anyone's opinion. I guess I have just come to the realization.

Just my 2 cents.

 

Do you really think that the the fully boxed frame on my 93 Toyota Pickup is weaker than the frame on an '05 PLUS Tacoma? My truck is the last fully boxed framed compact/midsized truck that Toyota put in the North American market. After that they switched to a C-channel frame under the bed and part of the cab and a fully boxed subframe. Yet they continue to run fully boxed framed trucks around the rest of the world. I highly doubt the body mounts are "stronger." I am willing to be they just saw a way to save $$$ and said that American's don't use their trucks the way our trucks are used around the rest of the world and so they skimped a little bit. Because up until 1995, the Toyota truck in North America wasn't a catered to North America truck, it was built along the same parallels as the tough Toyota trucks built for the rest of the world.

There is no F'in way that modern plastics (such as those in the bed of the Tacoma, and in the tailgate handle) can compare to what they have in my bed. My buddy who has an American 93 Toyota Pickupjust like mine imported (built in the states at the Nummi plant) into CAnada replaced his tailgate handle a few years ago because it failed. My metal tailgate handle built in Japan is still going strong.

I have yet to hear one of one complaint for the the metal tailgate supports on my truck. It's just that tailgate cords are cheaper so that is what they use to save $$$. They skimp quality but charge the same price at your expense. No problem right?

If Toyota stopped worrying about what the competition was doing and just put out the best truck they knew how to do, there wouldn't be threads like this?

Now is the new Tacoma a complete failure? Well no. In all honesty is a much more well rounded truck than previous compact trucks because it has more people moving capability and more power which equals more towing capability. It also has better creature comforts. But it has lost SOME of the previous trucks toughness. That is a FACT. The reason is because Americans don't use their trucks like other Toyota trucks used around the rest of the world. And So Toyota has catered to the market. For guys like us, it is our loss I guess. But for the average consumer they don't know any better. They just like the looks of it.

 

Saving them money saves you money. A base model Tacoma 4x4 is $18225. Would you pay $25000 for that truck if is had metal tailgate and door handles, a manual t-case, and a SA under it. Probably not… The general consumer expectation is that if I spend this much money then this truck better be nice. Now nice is the key word. Nice to me and you is different than nice to Dr. John Doe. Toyota targets the masses and that’s why TMC will sell over 9 million cars in 2008. The numbers don’t lie and you can't argue that Toyota is not building to suite the market. Too bad thats a negative for the guys that like to crawl and get dirty.

 

I agree with you that Toyota is trying to appeal to the masses and produce something that makes the money, as well as not be the liability that their previous trucks were. Their previous compact trucks with really narrow stances and excellent ground clearance, STOCK, were a liablity in the beautiful country of America where people blame manufacturers despite natural attributes for rollovers and such.

And Toyota is doing what every good capitalist will do, and that is make money. The unfortunate thing is the little details that I am pointing out are things that they could have retained in their current truck and STILL appealed to the masses. They can build a nice comfortable good riding, powerful, versatile midsize truck and still appeal to the masses. They can build these trucks along the parallels of the ones they build around the rest of the world and still sell just as many as they do today. But they choose to now cut corners a little bit to make a bit here, make a bit there. People know that Toyota trucks ain't cheap. If you want quality, you gotta pay. But now they have lowered their standards to just get by quality and not exceptional quality like their previous trucks. There aren't as many parts of the current trucks that I could say are "overbuilt" like the previous generation of trucks where overbuilt was the norm and not the exception.

It's not just about crawling and getting dirty.

 

I don't base my truck purchases on CR for the fact that I will always buy Toyota trucks. End of that story. I'm not going to get into the merits of Consumer Reports but they have been around a long time and do tell some truth. Rockcrawlability and modability are not factored in unfortunately when it comes to ratings.

"Don't believe everything you read" - give me a break. I'd hope that I had better judgement than reading a thread like this and not buying a new Toyota because of it. To each their own.

http://ttora.com/forum/showthread.ph...ht=2009+tacoma

 

I totally know where you are coming from but I'm looking at it from a different view. Toyota (and every other manufacturer for that point) is constantly being backed into a corner. Design has to meet Toyota quality, manufacturing costs, CAFE requirements/government regulations, customer expectation, and finally market price point. As for not being over built anymore I agree. But being overbuilt is waste in the eyes of a design engineer. Overbuilt = more mass = poor "on road" performance = poor fuel eco = waisted money for Toyota and the Customer.

By the way, I find this thread very interesting.

 

bwhyit - but tell me something. The biggest issue as you said with being overbuilt is weight. Weight causing fuel economy & performance reductions, etc.

But tell me why my truck weighs 3850 pounds Curb weight with an iron block, metal bed and a fully boxed frame from bumper to bumper, yet the Access Cab V6 Tacoma 4x4 weighs 3930 pounds (I believe) with a plastic bed, an all aluminum engine block, and a frame that is only fully boxed under the engine and part of the cab. Yes, I realize the truck is slightly wider, has more bed depth, etc.....but somehow I wonder where all this weight is coming from.

 

Well, the weight would be from additional gadgets (4wd actuators, security systems, VSC systems, ecu's, wiring for all those electronics, airbags, more cab reinforcement to meet crash testing, etc. I could keep going on but I think you get the point. There are a lot of small “things” that the new trucks have that your's does not. Imagine what that new truck would weigh with the overbuilt systems that your truck has???

 

Not necessarily... If the plastic crap breaks(when it breaks) It's gonna cost $$$ to replace it, and the cheaper build quality certainly doesn't save us(the consumers) any money. If the truck only lasts half as long, or becomes high maintenance, then that does not justify spending half as much on the vehicle. Most people are gonna buy a car that will last after they have finished making their payments. If they came out with a new Toyota Truck( a real truck, like the ones they used to make) that was built just like the older ones, and even if it cost $22,000+, I'd pay that. In fact, I'd pay that with a smile on my face. The new Toyotas are a poor investment if you are looking for something that will outlast your loan, or your payments, and something that you don't have to take to the dealer every year(and some even go 5-10 years) and not have any problems. Add gas, change oil/filter, and airfilter, and it's fine for YEARS of dependable service.

 

Assuming the weights you gave are correct: Gee, that's only 80 pounds heavier. The truck is more than just a little wider. It looks to be quite a bit wider, and longer as well.

And like was said, there's a whole lot more gadgets, safety stuff, etc. And only 80 pounds more? That's no small feat to make the truck bigger, make it more complex, add more stuff, meet current emissions and safety requirements, and still have it gain only 80 pounds.

I looked at an older Toyota truck a few years back that I was interested in buying. There was a problem, however. The boxed frame was rusted completely through in spots. It seems that the frame had alot of dirt and such packed in it that wouldn't come out, which held moisture in the frame.

Right after that I looked at another one that also had a rusted frame.

One advantage of a C-channel frame is that not very much will collect in it, so it will be less likely to rust. Maybe the engineers took that into consideration when they decided to change to a C-channel frame??? And if it's made of thick enough metal with properly spaced and designed crossmembers, it can still be as strong. Just because it's not boxed doesn't mean it's weaker.

After all, the '05+ Tacoma is designed to tow so much more than the older Toyotas. The company lawyers wouldn't allow that much capacity for liability reasons if the engineers weren't sure that the frame was strong enough to tow that much.

I still don't see how having what appears to be plastic coated stainless cable tailgate supports is a disadvantage over the old style tailgate supports. Stainless cables are quite strong and rust free, and may ctually cost a little more. So what if they weigh less. That doesn't mean they are weaker.

And stormin94, just because something is made of plastic doesn't mean it will break. Modern plastics can certainly be quite strong.

I see absolutely no reason why my Tacoma won't last way longer than my loan payments. I love mine and if I were to total it tomorrow, I certainly would buy another one. That's the first vehicle I've ever owned (other than my first car, a '64 VW Bug) that I've ever said that about, and I've had a bunch.

 

I haven't checked but I don't know if the Access Cab 4x4 V6 is longer than a comparable Pickup or first gen Tacoma Xtra cab 4x4 V6. Wider yes - not a huge amount wider, I think it's something like 4" wider but you got big honkin fender flares on the Tacoma's but not on the Pickups.

I actually just checked - it's 3965 pounds for a 4x4 V6 Access Cab curb weight. So 115 pounds. But you would think that an aluminum block would mean a whole lot less weight compared to a cast iron blocked truck.

In area's like the "rust belt" and especially where guys don't take care of their undercarriage, any frame can rust. Sure the earlier Toyota trucks were more prone than others but just because it's fully boxed does not mean it is more prone to rust (there are drain holes and such). A lot of the new manufacturers are using fully boxed frames, and there are still fully boxed subframes on Toyota trucks which can accmulate dirt & moisture. The new Tacoma has a fully boxed subframe from the front bumper to the middle of the cab.

No one said the frame wasn't strong enough on the new Tacoma's to tow. But which truck would you rather run a small import camper on? Which truck could you run max payload or even overload the odd time and have confidence in it? Also consider that fully boxed frames due to their rigidity tend to have a more solid feeling ride and are naturally more balanced and not as front heavy. The rear suspension has more to push up against. The older boxed frames are better platforms for offroading becuase the stiffness of the frames allows the suspension to do the work. You're not going to have bed flex or issues with the bed rubbing up against the cab like my buddy experienced mildly offroading in his '03 Tacoma when he first got it (as an example).

No one said the new Tacoma won't last. LIke I said above, there isn't that feeling of "overbuiltedness" (if that's a word) as much with this truck as previous Toyota trucks. The new Tacoma is a very nice truck, and I'm happy Toyota has stepped up to the plate and beefed up the suspension on the things recently to something comparable to previous compact trucks they have produced.

But if Toyota is going the way of their "A-bat" concept in a future Toyota compact pickup, I may just keep my 93 Truck until it can run collectors plates.

 

You're right....Toyota's quality has significantly dropped against its competitors. I think JD Power had them in 5th below Hundai, Ford and others. I wonder if their arrogance has dropped any?

 

As mentioned before, time will tell. I will continue to wheel my truck, like every other Toyota I've owned and also use it as a D/D. I will admit to being a bit of a picky poo, when it comes to squeaks and rattles, but my real concern is the foundation of the truck. Will these "electro gizmos" fail me on some muddy jungle road in Guatemala, when the truck has 80k on the clock? With all my other Toyota's, I'd go out into the middle of nowhere several times a year, with no worries of breaking down. I just want that same piece of mind with this truck too, not that I'm worried about it now, just a tad concerned for the later years of it's life, 65k and beyond. I DO LIKE MY TRUCK, for any doubters. It was more capable in stock form than any other vehicle I've ever owned, despite it's added girth. It'll go anywhere our rear locked TJ will go, with a little finesse.

 

I'm still looking at buying one.

All the negative complaints I have read everywhere still haven't been big enough for me to change my mind.

 

So I know that AppleJack and myself can speak from personal experience....I am wondering how many other posters in this thread own an '05+ Tacoma?

There have been a lot of problems on previous generation Toyota trucks (3.0 headgaskets for instance) and there will be problems on whatever Toyota comes up with next...just like there will be problems with what other manufacturers come up with.
Companies like Demello make money on rear frame supports for previous generation trucks, it is always going to something...

You, the consumer, makes the ultimate choice when you purchase a vehicle. Don't like the Toyota, buy something like a Ford 500, or what ever you choose...

 

Me???