Toyota Tundra Superbowl Ad: And It Burns, Burns, Burns

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago
Join the conversation
4 of 49 comments
  • PeteMoran PeteMoran on Feb 03, 2009

    As I understand it, the original design goal was to cost effectively create something purely from Land Cruiser hence the drive train. I don't believe Land Cruiser sales hit the mark they needed to create a combined Tundra/Land Cruiser plant, nor did the conditions require it eventually. Toyota will keep refining it for sure, it will gain market share. When fuel prices rise, they're ready with a superb 24mpg 479ft/pd 4.5L V8 twin turbo diesel.

  • Peoplewatching04 Peoplewatching04 on Feb 03, 2009

    Like it or hate it, I'm really curious to see if the 2010 model addresses the issues of the current model. Toyota's been known for fixing known problems for new model years... let's see if they've still got it.

  • Psarhjinian Psarhjinian on Feb 03, 2009
    Toyota is not perceived as a serious truck because it play only in the “half ton” arena. Chevy, Ford and Dodge play theri (and dominate) as well. But they also offer heavy duty alternatives with products like Allison, Duramax, Cummins,Dana, Arvin Meritor etc. Toyota does not. You do know that Hino is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Toyota, right?

  • Psarhjinian Psarhjinian on Feb 03, 2009
    Someone correct me if I’m wrong on this, but this is how it was explained to me: I think you're right. My point, originally, was that these talking points ("not a fully boxed frame" and so forth) are just that: talking points. What you've done---and it's good and important that you did---is qualify why, rather than just discount the truck based on the frame design. That's like laughing off the Corvette because it's a pushrod with a leaf spring: uninformed (or to be impolite: stupid). I don't think the Tundra's the best entry in the segment, but I've seen some pretty juvenile points that I think either need to be expanded on, or written off altogether. Is this an actual observed phenomenon in the Tundra, or is it a theoretical extrapolation from the fact that it has a C-frame? Given that Toyota makes smaller pickups of legendary durability, I find it hard to believe that they’d be unaware of this sort of issue. Again, what someone defines are durable depends on their point of view. Since I don't do anything that would require a fully-boxed frame, my concept of "durable" is "starts every time, doesn't break, doesn't eat brake discs/headlamps/oil/etc excessively". Someone hauling trailers or bedfulls of bricks might not care about power window regulators as much as whether or not the frame will warp or the engine/transmission won't overheat. The guys driving chain-gun-equipped HiLuxes through deserts in Chad have a somewhat different definition than either of the above: it's ok if the windows don't roll down, the frame flexes or it can't tow a horse trailer, but the truck can't leave them stranded in the Sahara at noon or fail to move when you're on the losing side of a gun battle.