25th Jan 2007, 12:13

In reading comment 19:46 I'm reminded of an incident from 2002 that happened to me. My wife and I had been to a dinner party and were driving home late at night. We were in separate vehicles, as she had met me there from her work. She was very tired and dozed off as we were approaching a red light near our home. Her 2001 Explorer hit the back of my 2001 Dakota so hard it knocked me about 8 feet into the intersection. Amazingly, when we looked there was not so much as a SCRATCH on either vehicle's bumper!! It didn't even knock either bumper out of alignment. After reading (and watching the film) about the Tundra, I'm sure if I'd been in one of those it would have knocked the bed thru the cab and decapitated me!!

25th Jan 2007, 13:13

Hey people the last 8 or so comments have drifted pretty far off topic. Now its SUV's vs. cars. Lets get back to the facts of proving reliability and such, since that seems to be the most passionate topic.

25th Jan 2007, 13:41

Well, it looks as if Toyota has finally woken up to the fact that their previous Tundra wasn't gonna cut it when it comes to the needs of a real truck user. Has anyone seen the new Tundra? It's actually pretty impressive, I'll give them that. The engine/transmission combination is the real winner, and it's got a lot of useful features. Now, I guess it's down to just personal preference.

25th Jan 2007, 15:51

To 06:02; why in the world would you have any concerns about Honda? They make UNQUESTIONABLY the best 4 cylinder motors anywhere in the world, and probably the best 6 cylinder also. If you're reading a publication that claims otherwise about the 4 cylinder, then it is not a credible publication.

As far as the rest of the car, look how many "fast and furious" kids beat the crap out of these things, and they still run. Surely most of these little kids don't know how to work on their own stuff, yet they still run them at 8 grand everywhere and they still hold together.

25th Jan 2007, 16:04

24th Jan 2007, 14:40, we are still waiting for the supporting evidence of your claim.

Please post soon as I am eager to see what you come up with.

25th Jan 2007, 16:37

Some things are self evident. But, hey, it's your money so if you want to support your mechanic and rental car agencies, feel free to indulge in the wonderful American offerings.

The funny thing is, I've heard this malarky about how great and reliable American cars are since the 1970's, yet here we are where Toyota has a valuation greater than all three American companies combined and other companies like Honda and BMW have been growing like mad.

Fact is, until recently US auto companies were run by accountants, not car people or even quality engineers. Even Ford's current CEO fully admits this and is trying to change things.

So, guess which priority an accountant has when designing/building a car?

25th Jan 2007, 21:15

To 16:04; I'm still waiting to hear one good reason why anyone alive should buy a Ford, and why they're not the worst automaker in the United States. Anyone?

25th Jan 2007, 21:25

Hey, all you Ford fans writing in; go visit the '99 Ford Windstar site, look for a guy named Fred who USED to work at Ford, says he can't believe how bad they are, and he's embarrassed by it. He even gives his last name, which I won't repeat. That's pretty funny! But, instead of buying a real truck like a Tundra, you guys can still drive that soup can on wheels F-150 if you like.

25th Jan 2007, 22:11

21:25: You did NOT just call the Tundra a REAL TRUCK COMPARED TO THE F-150! You're joking right? Haven't we already established the fact that it isn't compared to the domestics? Why, I believe we have! I'm sorry, but that comment was just plain silly. LOL. And as far as the Windstar goes, yes, it isn't all that good. Every company builds a rotten one or two, even Toyota. The Windstar and Taurus are Ford's, the Tundra and Sequoia are Toyota's.

25th Jan 2007, 22:18

21:15: What on earth are you talking about? Ford may not be the best manufacturer in the US, but I will tell you that they aren't the worst. Saying something as ridiculous as that is just 3rd grade hyperbole. In fact, it's hard to put a finger on the worst manufacturer, because all brands offer an array of models, some better than others. It would be fairly hard to find one that is exceedingly worse than the others; I would say instead that the auto manufacturers range from average to excellent.

Now if you are looking for a brand that is closer to "the worst" I would suggest looking at Isuzu or the already axed Daewoo and other such underachievers. But by no means is Ford the worst. If you disagree with that, you're either being unreasonable or you're being paid off by a rival company... in which case, could you e-mail me their contact information? I'd love to get on that gravy train myself!

26th Jan 2007, 05:17

I agree. I own the 2007 Silverado SS. Toyota had nothing to offer me... why are so few Tundras being sold 115,000 or so last year in America? I test drove everything really liked the Silverado the best. Great ride, performance, handling and styling.

26th Jan 2007, 06:03

21:15...if Ford is #1 and so lousy why is Camry #3 then in the U.S.A. If you can select a Tundra or an F Series... people buy more F Series becauce they cost less to own and drive per mile than a Tundra, The F Series has a bigger engine, more towing power, can carry one add'l person, is heavier yet gets identical mileage on the interstate. Maybe Americans just see what is the best value and buy several more times as many as Tundra. This was read by everyone earlier, but bears repeating...

26th Jan 2007, 08:48

<<I thought it was a pretty good review, though they did seem to be biased towards the Toyota. For one, they didn't mention the Silverado's bed tie-downs, or it's on star emergency system. I also wondered why they tested a fully loaded Tundra and only a fairly base-line Silverado. They also added off-road packeges to the others as well... hmmm I wonder why they didn't compare more alike trucks. AND WHY THE HELL DIDN'T THEY ADD FORD AND DODGE!?

I don't see why they couldn't have compared all the full size trucks, instead of 2 imports and a domestic.>.

Auto reviews such as this one are usually set up by the marketing people at the manufacturer, meaning the manufacturer, not the reviewer, is the one who provides the vehicle. If Chevy didn't feel it necessary to provide the appropriate vehicle that's Chevy's fault, not Edmunds.

26th Jan 2007, 08:51

This is just a naive comment. Ford is in the worst financial situation it has ever been in, and when companies are like that quality suffers. There was an article recently about the huge flight of talent from the Big Three, mainly from Ford.

So you have low moral, no talent, no funds for proper cars, and mediocre quality.

Sets the stage for the worst American manufacturer.