I'll take that as a compliment.

Thanks!

 

Hate to pee on your parade, but this is the internet, so it wasn't based on looks. But...Your welcome!!!

 

So what's your excuse?

 

Now - remember we are the friendly kindergarten - the one without personal attacks

 

Darn it chaparro you got to it before i did lol. But seriously toyota is better than ford, i mean we are at a toyota truck forum right????

 

FORD VS THE COMPETITION


not:


FORD IS BETTER BECAUSE SOMEBODY WHO LIVES TOO CLOSE TO 3 MILE ISLAND WHEN THERE WAS A NUCLEAR LEAK SAYS SO.



[do you still glow???]

 

I will rather to die before being a yotis fan.
Also I posted once "I like the way DOHC explains point by point the lack of improvment on ford products". Now I will add I respect him because he demonstrate lots of knowledge when he writes about a topic. What I see is his favoritism on yotis brand. Intresting, no comments on these two new gaps finded on the new "SUPER DUPER" TUNDRAS.
1.- Engines
2.-Frame inestability
3.-Not yet discovered.
Finally, I am a ford fan and I will always be. This does not means I don't recognize ford's mistakes. I feel real disapointed when other brand surpases the blue ovals on power, m/gallon, haul cap, etc. But I know the blue oval will get out of the hole and will be #1 again in all aspects. Now lets get back to topic.

 

[QUOTE=DOHCmarauder]
FORD VS THE COMPETITION


not:

do you still glow
FORD IS BETTER BECAUSE SOMEBODY WHO LIVES TOO CLOSE TO 3 MILE ISLAND WHEN THERE WAS A NUCLEAR LEAK SAYS SO.
Now do you see what I mean. (Ford vs the competition)? or the competition better vs crapy ford.

 

I'm not understanding the "no comments" statement.


I did make a comment. Would you like me to repeat it???


Here it goes:

It appears from THAT video that the 150 is more stable over THAT surface than the Toy AND the GM.....Kudos to Ford.

I went on to say I'd like to see a Super Duty run that course....if it flexed, would the Super Duty be a horrible truck???

I also said that the Ford still lacks in optional power availability compared to Toy (and the rest of the competition for that matter)

I commented on what I think is a Ford weakness across its ENTIRE car line; their brakes.

I commented on not having the 6 speed out (even though Ford has one in the parts bin they use for the Expidition)

I've also said add that trans, add 80 horsepower and I'll be bragging on Ford from the top of the mountain.

You will never find me saying Ford is crappy.....cheese & rice, I currently own 5 of 'em!!!


Did you not read that response after the FIRST time you posted?

Or are you really that bored and love to read my posts???

 

As far as the cam issue goes.....Toy fugged up, plain and simple.

BUT, they were very pro-active in their response.....are you learning Ford/GM???

Want classy???

When Ford has issues...like the PSD fiasco.....they jumped all over Navistar, the supplier. Does Firestone ring a bell???

When the cams on the Toys came apart.....Toy would NOT name the supplier.

Wanna lay odds it's an American company they are protecting???

 

Wow, I think you should go find a Tundra with one of these "suspect" cams and buy it just so you can go back to the almighty Toyota for the "Royal" treatment they are giving their customers, and get a FREE engine to boot. What a crock. Bottom line is they HAD NO OTHER CHOICE to do anything less they are doing about it. They hit the panic button and are trying to save the biggest new launch they have ever had. If I were one of these customers, a new engine simply would NOT suffice, why would I want a brand new truck with less than a few thousand miles on it that has already been torn into by a mechanic that Lord knows if he was a good one or a "hack"? Either way you are driving a "tainted" truck that is sure to have much less value. Would you buy a used Tundra that had it's engine replaced for the same money as one with an original engine that never had the cam issue? I would settle for nothing less than a total buyback and a new truck, period.

As for your repeated argument about the SD's and non-boxed frames, you are either uninformed about frame technology, or twisting in the wind like usual.

let me expalin one more time, try to comprehend, read slowly if you have to...ready?

SD trucks (like commercial HD trucks) use c-channel frames because they NEED to flex and have lots of beam strength due to the heavy loads they are capable of. Torsional rigidity would actually be a bad thing for trucks such as these. With this much weight, they must flex. Yet they also must have the beam strength sufficient to handle the weight. C-channels provide ALOT of beam strength and allow for torsional flex. These HD C-Channel frames are, therefore, very heavy with a lot of steel in them. Not an issue in a HD truck, right? FBF frames are ideal in 1/2 tons because they have a high strength/weight ratio and provide tremendous torsional rigidity which allows for better ride and handling, higher mfg tolerances due to less welding (hydroformed vs welded boxes). Why do you think of ALL the mfrs using FBF technology, none use it in HD truck frames? Your c-channel in your SD is a very strong, well built frame, no doubt about it, but that doesn't mean it's best suited for EVERY application.

 

So what more would you want? I'm sure if it was GMC/Ford you would settle for a pattle on the bum but since it's the "evil" Toyota, replacing a motor for free isn't enough.


You're right, they had no choice and they are taking the proper steps to rectify the situation. If you were a Tundra owner that was affected by this,
( I know hell would have to freeze over first ) you would have every right to fight for a new truck. Good luck with that by the way.

Tainted truck, that's a new one. As soon as you drive a new vehicle off a lot it becomes tainted.

If you whinned about getting a new vehicle everytime there was some sort of recall on it, let me be your lawyer because I could probably retire once you were done. And you would probably be driving the same new vehicle you bought in the first place.

Your frame argument is your ONLY crutch here. And like you have stated numerous times the issue has been beat to death.

So please, just let it go already.

 

Funny, I read on another forum where a new GMT900 owner got a bad one (yes, they all make bad ones once in awhile) that had numerous minor issues (minor meaning no engine replacement, just PIA stuff). After dealing with these minor issues and not being able to resolve some of them, the guy spoke with the local GM regional manager and they BOUGHT HIS TRUCK BACK!!! and he ordered another one. In the forum, someone questioned whether this was qualified as a "lemon" under Minnesota's lemon law (he is also from MN) and he stated that this was not a lemon law case. The dealer was not obligated to buy the truck back under the lemon law, they did it to keep him happy as a loyal GM customer. It's on GM-trucks forum if you want to go see the thread for yourself. He lost no money on the sale, he only had to pay mileage for SOME of the miles he had because he had more than the avaerage mileage on it. Which is understandable. I think he had about 5000 miles on it and he had to pay .30 cents/mile for like 1/2 of the miles. He was very happy with GM and how they treated him and handled the case.

I am sure if I were a Tundra Camsnapper customer, I would need alot more than LUCK to get a new truck, so you are right there.

When I said "tainted" I meant more than just "used", I think you know that and as usual are just twisting in the wind again.

I think the cam issue is a little more than just a typical little recall, maybe not for you and toyoyo, but based on my recall experiences it is. (My last recall on my old 2000 was for replacement tailgate straps, and that is a good example of all of the recalls I have experienced with GM).

 

Toyota is making you beleive there is a secret supplier, i won't buy that crap,,,you said it first....TOYOTA FUGGED UP, theres no secret supplier. It's a decoy. I bet you it's a company that is partnered with Toyota. They probably own most of the shares. I guarantee it.

 

Sigh......

Even when I come right out and agree it is a screwed up deal, you still want to argue.

Your current GM story is a touching one but it wasn't/isn't the norm concerning American manufacturers.....I don't know how many vehicles you've owned but you seem quite naive concerning the rep. domestics have.

Just visit a PSD thread and see how many parts a dealer wants to change trying to get out of the obvious.


FACT: my 8800 pound GVW crew cab has aprox the same payload capacity as your GMC. So if my truck can live nearly 7 years, If there are millions of C-channel 1/2 tons on the road (like last years GM's) than it is not THAT big of a deal.

FACT: Trucks have gotten by for years, and still do, without the boxed frame.

FACT: OBJECTIVE TESTs have shown little to no difference in skip pad and handling numbers between ALL the trucks.....with a complaint about Toy's stability control being intrusive.....so stop reading sales brochures touting the one perceived advantage you think you have

THANK YOU for dropping the absurd fuel economy advantage that a boxed frame gives....I guess you realized that even if it did come from a sales brochure it sounded ignorant.

FACT: The TRD equipped Tundra I drove rode firmer and as quiet as my sister's Lincoln LT.....and the TOY was waaay more responsive. (MUCH more responsive than the last 6.0 GM I drove also.....which was not a current year)

FACT: Even though I've conceded the frame issue to you maybe 10 times, (If I had a choice I'd pick the boxed frame) you STILL have to bring it up....making you not only a liar (you said you were done but OCD in a bad way)

To me, at the moment, the drivetrain, brakes, total package out weighs any advantage the frame would have concerning Ford Vs. Toy......If you can't accept this, tough crap. If Ford responds to the comp. I'll be a happy camper.

Now try to be true to your word and drop it......enjoy your truck, and try to get over the anger you have towards other makes; it's not healthy.