Any 200 series owners considering a 2017 Ford Raptor?
- Thread starter Canyonero
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Yes, right behind as in ranked ahead of every other manufacturer or brand plate. Isolate the full size trucks out of GMC and the gap is much closer - click into the data.
Here's the full size trucks with the GMC Sierra 3 points behind the Tundra, and the Silverado 6 points behind. The new gen Colorado doesn't have any data in this dataset. The GMC brand gets dragged down by crapboxes like the Terrain, which have nothing to do with their truck line, and the Acadia, which I have to think by volume sees more trade-ins than anything other than the full size trucks, thus affecting the data.
The Tacoma comes in at a highly respectable 82, but I'd bet money this trends downward over the next 5 years as the post-2010 trucks start showing up in the data.
Chocolate: elaborate? Those two pics don't indicate anything to me.
Lovely.
You post said "Check out GMC as the 4th ranked manufacturer right behind the Toyota trio." Not differentiating models. Your previous claim is of Toyota having a rash of quality issues in recent years, Toyota as a whole. GMC is 17 points below Toyota, 17 points below GMC would equate well below industry average. So GMC is to Toyota, as BMW is to GMC. GM has 3 of their 5 (5 of 7 if you count Saab and Saturn) nameplates well below the industry average. Toyota has all three if theirs in the top three.
I compared the 2013 Escalade ESV and 2013 Land Cruiser on Autotrader.
Cadillac Escalade ESV for Sale in Ketchikan, AK 99950 - Autotrader
Toyota Land Cruiser for Sale in Ketchikan, AK 99950 - Autotrader
The Land Cruiser is still worth 40,000+ dollars with 100,000 miles.
Not so with the Escalade ESV.
Cadillac Escalade ESV for Sale in Ketchikan, AK 99950 - Autotrader
Toyota Land Cruiser for Sale in Ketchikan, AK 99950 - Autotrader
The Land Cruiser is still worth 40,000+ dollars with 100,000 miles.
Not so with the Escalade ESV.
Nothing in your post diminishes the GM truck stable being regarded as reliable in that data. Keep in mind that second only to the F-series' sales are the Chevy Silverado; this isn't some obscure point being made, there's a ton of volume on GM's trucks and ~20 years of data shows they're good.
Re: resale - funny thing in that while the Tacoma has the highest historical resale value at 60% of MSRP after 5 years, the Colorado and Canyon (based on the old first gen truck, which was Not Good, mind you) are in slots #4 and #5 at 58.3% and 57.5% respectively.
Re: resale - funny thing in that while the Tacoma has the highest historical resale value at 60% of MSRP after 5 years, the Colorado and Canyon (based on the old first gen truck, which was Not Good, mind you) are in slots #4 and #5 at 58.3% and 57.5% respectively.
Let me get in on that Eggnog you're swilling.
OK, let's actually look at real-world numbers.
Cars.com data, filters are 2008-2012 (2012 is the last year of the old Colorado/Canyon, so like for like) - 4WD, under 100k miles, sorted by least expensive, first page of results:
Tacomas:
http://i.imgur.com/yUDIaGM.jpg
Canyons:
http://i.imgur.com/PIlURqe.jpg
I don't see the story you're trying to portray in these results. Instead I see 1st gen Canyons (which, again, are Not Good trucks) holding their value ridiculously well, and more or less at parity with the Tacoma.
The entire small truck segment looks like this, btw. Go be scandalized and look at what the end of Ranger production is still going for, or what a Hummer H3T commands. The Tacoma is not a special snowflake in this regard. Blind religion on brand-specific forums does no one any good.
The above's written with sarcasm, no doubt, and yet that's exactly what's happening. Sleeping manufacturers often get a march stolen on them - remember that cheeky upstart nobody brand Lexus that blew away the established European and American brands? - and complacency on the part of Toyota has allowed the gap to be narrowed significantly.
Don't forget how Motor Trend called the Colorado their Truck of the Year the same year as the refreshed Tacoma hit, and how the Colorado also beat a Tacoma in a Car & Driver comparison test. To acknowledge that Toyota needs to step it up is not an unreasonable line of thinking if you're not drinking a manufacturer's Kool-aid. I know it may come as a shock, but today there are many good vehicles out there not made only by Toyota.
It would be a shame to not keep an eye out for how the ZR2 fares against the Tacoma TRD Pro, as it's possible it might stack up very favorably.
Don't forget how Motor Trend called the Colorado their Truck of the Year the same year as the refreshed Tacoma hit, and how the Colorado also beat a Tacoma in a Car & Driver comparison test. To acknowledge that Toyota needs to step it up is not an unreasonable line of thinking if you're not drinking a manufacturer's Kool-aid. I know it may come as a shock, but today there are many good vehicles out there not made only by Toyota.
It would be a shame to not keep an eye out for how the ZR2 fares against the Tacoma TRD Pro, as it's possible it might stack up very favorably.
i've never heard of
I wouldn't be too proud of Motor Trend or Car & Driver's "_____ of the Year" awards or head to heads. My impression of both magazines for MAAAAANY moons has been that they toss around "awards" about as carefully as carnivores toss salads.
I wouldn't be too proud of Motor Trend or Car & Driver's "_____ of the Year" awards or head to heads. My impression of both magazines for MAAAAANY moons has been that they toss around "awards" about as carefully as carnivores toss salads.
I agree that there's not as much difference with 8 year old work trucks closer to the end of their depreciation curve. However, the difference is more noticeable with newer and more expensive trucks. You can compare 2013 F-150s with 2013 Tundras and see the Tundras commanding 25-30+% more.
I think the fallacy is in western thinking that they need to compete on those levels. They don't, and they're not going to, and they're doing very well. I'm not knocking anyone else's things, but Toyota has never been at the head of the pack for a reason and that reason makes them $$$$.
A little recommended light reading for this group:
http://nuovoeutile.it/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/BIASED-ASSIMILATION-AND-ATTITUDE-POLARIZATION.pdf
http://nuovoeutile.it/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/BIASED-ASSIMILATION-AND-ATTITUDE-POLARIZATION.pdf
- Thread starter
- #114
Not sure how this thread spiraled into an argument?
But as to your link - the paper to which you linked is from 1979 (which does not discount it's validity out of hand, but seriously, a psychology paper from almost 40 years ago?) and the paper is essentially a series of (fairly obvious) conclusions regarding confirmation bias on "complex social issues." The problem as I see it, is we are not discussing complex social issues. Far from it. We're discussing trucks. And as we find ourselves discussing automotive brands here on a Land Cruiser forum and members seem to be pointing out empirical data points, I have no idea how you intended to enlighten anyone with that link.
I get it, you think the GM twins are good (great?) trucks. You might be right! All I can tell you is I do a lot of reading and a lot of researching and I have concluded that as of today, GM does not produce products nearly on par with Toyota when it comes to QDR (quality, durability, reliability.) I think GM is great at producing vehicles that look good on paper, but the data I've sampled indicates their products simply don't hold up.
I honestly don't think many people on this LC 200 forum have a "blind religious faith" or whatever you called it, in Toyota as a brand. I think that to even be in the 200 series Land Cruiser demographic you have demonstrated a level of critical thinking skills above the average vehicle buyer. $80k buys a lot of neat and shiny things, but an LC aint one of them.
The bottom line for me is this: Toyota is in the business of making and selling widgets. Turns out, they sell a lot of widgets. This, despite being regularly accused of making soulless transportation appliances, and despite vehicle purchases so often being emotional/impulse/irrational purchases. Toyota moves its widgets primarily because of a constantly reinforced reputation for QDR and not because they have the "new shiny thing" like a lot of auto manufacturers promote.
Hell, look at this thread alone - I was considering a 2017 Raptor for a truck. Talk about a new shiny widget! It's chock full of shiny widget s*** - suspension this, new engine that, 10 speed transmission here, loaded with features there, it ran baja, etc. But at the end of the day, after a lot of research and plenty of anecdotes here and on the Raptor forums, I decided I was not ready to roll the dice on an unproven platform with a brand that has a weaker record on QDR with my $65k. Is that blind loyalty to Toyota? I really don't think so, but maybe you do.
No one is saying Toyota is perfect or infallible. They make plenty of mistakes and their vehicles have problems, too. But they've earned their reputation for making tough 4x4's. No one gave them that reputation, they've spent 50 years without missing a beat on vehicles like the Land Cruiser, 4Runners, Tacomas, their line of pickup trucks, etc. And it's not limited to their 4x4's, either. You'd be hard-pressed to hear people tell you what year of a Toyota NOT to buy. You're not going to hear that "oh, the 2nd gen 4runner was a lemon...", or "my 1st gen Prius was so unreliable..." - it's just not going to happen. That history of exceeding expectations and making a durable product is why the consensus is that for every problem a Toyota vehicle might have, a competitor vehicle will have more problems.
Maybe a Tacoma competitor -like the new GMC Canyon, lets say - would have zero problems under the same use as the Tacoma I'm getting. MAYBE. But for me to believe that would be to take the exact leap of faith you are decrying. To believe the GMC Canyon would be as trouble-free as a Tacoma would be to ignore every GM data point I've seen my entire life. GM couldn't (or didn't care to) get it right the first time around with their Chevy Colorado - you have said yourself that was NOT a good truck - and yet you think I should trust GM now? Why? They've earned nothing.
There are myriad ways to measure QDR, and countless organizations that purport to do so (JD Power, Consumer Reports, every auto magazine that does long-term testing, etc. etc.) - but even with all the different ways to measure QDR, you'd be extremely hard-pressed to actually prove GM makes a superior product in terms of QDR. In fact, I will state that you cannot do it.
I'm not sure where you're going with your arguments against Toyota or against the Tacoma. Honestly, I don't get it.
Canyonero's OP here is living, breathing PROOF that he is not some Toyota worshiper. If he were? -This thread would not exist.
For some reason, one poster has selected this thread to rant that we are closed minded or brainwashed...when this very thread came about from what is clearly the opposite of that assertion/assumption.
For some reason, one poster has selected this thread to rant that we are closed minded or brainwashed...when this very thread came about from what is clearly the opposite of that assertion/assumption.
Last edited:
Here's an example of why I completely IGNORE "_____ of the Year" awards from magazines like Car and Driver:
The 2002 "Thunderbird" had "thunder" in name ONLY. What a sad thing to name a Thunderbird.
The PT Cruiser was good at exactly ONE thing: Looking Retro.
...And yet... BOOM! Car and Driver hands them cars of the year?
Like I say... Don't put too much stock in ANY award handed out by C&D.
You guys are funny. Claims were made that weren't true, and as I post data indicating otherwise folks then discount actual numbers I provided as unreliable sources because it's convenient to ignore them and confirm your biases. This sort of thing is why brand-specific forums get a terrible rap.
It's now about this group? Nice.
Dude. Look. You cited a consumer-level car rag's choice of one truck over another as some sort of evidence and I called crap on that. No objective person could argue the PT Cruiser was selected based on quality, performance, or engineering excellence. My point was simply that those mags clearly have other criteria in mind when they shower their advertisers with "awards" here and there. Using those awards as a basis for *anything* is iffy at best.
As to the "terrible rap" you seem prepared to stick on this forum...
This 200 forum is inhabited by people who own all manner of vehicles from all manner of brands...including the "competition," and we routinely point out flaws in our own trucks.
If you can't figure out the value of this group, then please feel free to find a better one.
Last edited:
.
This graph doesn't make mathematical sense: since Toyota, GMC, Chevy, Ford and Dodge are the vast majority of the full sized truck market, how can they ALL be above industry average?
Quality may have a subjective component to its definition, but "average" does not.
It
I think the problem is your argument is grounded on you being right and you see any response as a claim that you're wrong. Why don't you just say what your actual argument is in 100 words or less, that may help everyone understand what you're actually trying to convey vs. you telling people they're wrong over and over.