Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: BHopkins
Some of the car companies with the best reputations have made some bad cars. Honda put a lousy tranny in the Odyssey. Toyota did a lousy job launching the Tundra.
I agree with you, but not sure why a lousy launch would make for a bad vehicle...?
The only problem I know of in the original Tundra(other than excessive rust in rust-belt markets) is that it was a 7/8ths size truck at a full size truck price.
The 3.4 5VZ V6 made as much horsepower as an SCPI 4.3 Chevrolet and as much torque (albeit @ about 500 rpm more) as a 3.9 Dodge. The 4.7 2UZ was far more powerful and more refined than a similar year 4.6 Ford Modular and right up there with the GM Vortec 4800.
It was just small...ish. Basically Dakota size truck at Ram price.
I still regularly see T-100s and lots of 1g Tundras here in the south. They are decent trucks if they don't rust in half.
Originally Posted By: BHopkins
Some of the car companies with the best reputations have made some bad cars. Honda put a lousy tranny in the Odyssey. Toyota did a lousy job launching the Tundra.
I agree with you, but not sure why a lousy launch would make for a bad vehicle...?
The only problem I know of in the original Tundra(other than excessive rust in rust-belt markets) is that it was a 7/8ths size truck at a full size truck price.
The 3.4 5VZ V6 made as much horsepower as an SCPI 4.3 Chevrolet and as much torque (albeit @ about 500 rpm more) as a 3.9 Dodge. The 4.7 2UZ was far more powerful and more refined than a similar year 4.6 Ford Modular and right up there with the GM Vortec 4800.
It was just small...ish. Basically Dakota size truck at Ram price.
I still regularly see T-100s and lots of 1g Tundras here in the south. They are decent trucks if they don't rust in half.