7th Aug 2008, 20:09

Go in your home, get a metal coat hangar, simply cut a hook instead of hanging it from your brake line. Big deal.

7th Aug 2008, 22:02

12:41 Well, I 'laugh all the way to the bank' too by NOT buying domestics. My imports always last longer, break down less... (read 'never'), and I get more money out of them when I finally decide to trade them or sell them outright.

Funny how all domestics described here on a Toyota site run forever, but if you go read the Ford and Chevy threads, you find out the truth: they're substandard, cheaply made, and break down often.

I guess it's only the people that can't stand the fact that Toyota has outclassed them since day 1 that claim that domestics run well and don't break down. Simply false.

8th Aug 2008, 11:08

I have no idea what kind of "domestics" 14:33 is referring to, but in the entire time since disc brakes came out, I've never seen ANY on ANY car that the "caliper was left hanging" on. Did it ever occur to the commenter to leave ONE of the bolts IN so the caliper could simply be rotated up??

8th Aug 2008, 15:19

Toyota does not outclass in full size trucks vs. domestics. Limited lineup, towing capability, load carrying, people carrying, ride, comfort and handling. Are we talking about empty or pulling and towing ever? And the warranty is weak.

Go to consumeraffairs.com and read on late model Toyotas/Hondas. The older ones (cars) were durable, but not newer ones we have owned.

8th Aug 2008, 17:47

I guess 22:02 hasn't read the CAMRY reviews!!

8th Aug 2008, 17:59

The truest measure of a car or truck is long term resale value.

Short term resale value is an unreliable indicator because of the whims and vagaries of the marketplace. Find an old car price guide (such as NADA) and compare prices of ANY American car from the 60's, and compare it to ANY Japanese car from the same era, and you will see that over time, American cars and trucks are a better value and investment than any of the Japanese rivals!!!

9th Aug 2008, 11:51

I agree the right classic domestic musclecars are better than chancing the stock market, real estate market, and are always there any time you want to drive on a nice day. And classic insurance is low. Other than a very few Toyotas, and keeping in mind their original sale price, what appreciates? Just the appliance picture comes to mind again. It's all just MPG. I liked the 70's Celicas and later Supras, but overpriced in my opinion.

9th Aug 2008, 13:25

As we've had pointed out before, the higher resale value of a car is pretty much offset by the much higher price paid up front to purchase it. Besides, the Chevy Silverado HAS a higher resale than the Tundra, so I really don't see the argument on that point on a Tundra review. It is pretty much an accepted fact that Tundra does not compete with domestic trucks, or that is as reliable.

10th Aug 2008, 09:18

Really? Well you better tell the EPA that they made a mistake on their new fuel economy ratings, because the V8 powered Corvette gets better mileage (26 vs. 23 respectively) than your beloved 4 cylinder compact Subaru Impreza.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSideBySide.jsp?Column=1&id=23469

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSideBySide.jsp?column=1&id=23151

I would say in response to your argument that anyone can arbitrarily put a turbo or supercharger on a small engine and have it make power, but it is much more of an engineering accomplishment to design a torquey V8 in a large performance car, and have it get better fuel economy than a 4 cylinder compact. Wouldn't you?

11th Aug 2008, 09:50

Comment 09:18 is correct. It takes much more in the way of efficient design and engineering to get a high powered V-8 to deliver the same mileage as the Subaru (or Camry) 4 than it does to just stick a basic, underpowered engine in a small car and call economical. The Corvette (whose sales have increased 300% in Europe since 2000) is a great example. However, since this is a Tundra review we might also point out that the Tundra mileage is not as good as its domestic competition either, so obviously someone dropped the ball on engineering its engine too.

11th Aug 2008, 21:07

A big V-8 does not get better mileage than any 4 cylinder compact car. Period. First, if you do anything other than baby it (which means NOT driving it like a V-8, and making any horsepower), it's going to suck gas just like all v-8's do.

Second, show me one that gets 38 mpg (or even CLOSE to that), under any driving conditions, like my 1.6 liter Hyundai does. You can't, because there aren't any. V-8's are a waste of money and material in a car. Period. If you NEED a truck with towing capacity, buy one if you must. Otherwise, exercise common sense and buy a 4-cylinder. It'll go anywhere a car with a V-8 will, and will get you close to if not double the gas mileage doing so.

Sure, I'd love 8 cylinders and 300 horsepower all the time too. I just don't think it's a good idea to buy one.

12th Aug 2008, 11:14

Even a mid-1990's Cadillac Northstar V-8 gets 28 mpg, and the variable displacement V-8 used by Chrysler gets up to 30 mpg.

12th Aug 2008, 12:03

Although it is possible with good engineering and very conservative driving to get pretty good mileage out of a V-8 (the Corvette being an excellent example), it is true that a basic 4-cylinder will generally get way better mileage under nearly all conditions.

If one drives aggressively with a 4-cylinder, however, their gas mileage will suffer just as much as an aggressively driven V-8. If I hot-dog my 4-cylinder compact my mileage quickly drops from 30 to about 21mpg.

With the ever-shrinking supply of oil and the massive damage to the environment, I've long advocated that people switch to more fuel-efficient 4 (or 6) cylinder cars. I have owned my last V-8, and it will be a great day when the last V-8 is built.

12th Aug 2008, 15:30

The comments regarding classic cars as a good investment are flawed. Classics are only worth their peak once the generation who had them when they were younger reach their peak earning years and yearn for the cars of their youth. Proof is the fact that from the 80's-mid 90's, cars of the 1950's demanded large prices. Since then, muscle cars, which were beforehand almost worthless - are now selling for ridiculous sums. Meanwhile, the cost of cars from the 50's has gone down... A LOT. I have a 55' Mercury Monterey that was worth over $10,000 when I bought it 10 years ago, and now worth maybe $4,500 MAX. So it has lost more than 50% of its value. Once the old people who like these muscle cars get too old to own them, they too will be worth less.

In regards to Japanese classics, they are just now getting old enough to be classics. Look for Datsun 210's. They used to be a $500 car. Now some are going for $10,000.

12th Aug 2008, 17:31

21:07 too vague... depends on the car. A 4 cylinder not properly maintained, tuned, oil burner due to neglect etc can choke us all with bad emissions. In addition a big repair can crop up (drivetrains) and suck up assumed savings.

Cheap rides can come back and haunt you when they fail. There's more than MPG when a big repair comes.

I love the people with long commutes during the week, justifying it with the purchase of a 4 cylinder. Why not move closer to work and drive a shorter distance?

I maintain I burn less fuel in my under 10 minutes commute. I could ride a bike, a scooter, take a bus if I was making a stronger statement. In reality my 20-28mpg V8 overmaintained tuned vehicle fuel consumption per week is quite low compared to those I work with driving out of state to our workplace.