GM Dealer Challenges the Toyota Tundra's Ads... AS BULL

Borrowed off the Internet....I am just the messenger, although I agree that the new Tundra ads are deliberately misleading....

Lou Kaltenstein President Gene Norris Buick-GMC Trucks Inc./Norris Auto Group

18170 Bagley Rd Middleburg Hts., Ohio 44130

There has been a lot of talk about Toyota Tundra's new ads and how impressive they are. Here are some myths about their spots that I have found and that should be refuted. Also, they are offering a "IVC" type program on Tundra to help with sales.

I would guess all of you have seen the ad where the Tundra pulls a trailer up a steep grade (a 'see-saw'), and then barrels down hill and locks the brakes up just before the end of the ramp. Many of you have commented on how well done the spot is visually. However, here are the actual facts to share with people:

  1. The V.O. at the beginning of the spot says...."It's tough pushing
10,000 lbs up a steep grade". Myth: Toyota would like the audience to believe the trailer is 10,000 lbs. Fact: It's a 5,000 lb truck pulling a 5,000 lb trailer. A little slight of hand? You bet.

  1. Then, on the way down the grade, the camera zooms in on the brakes as the vehicles comes to a screeching halt just prior to the end of ramp. Next time you see the ad....look for the 'mice type'. It indicates the trailer is equipped with electric brakes. Fact....the electric brakes stop the trailer -- not the truck. A little slight of hand? You bet.

  2. And why does Toyota have bigger brake pads? They need them....their truck is heavier. Stopping distance between our truck and theirs is virtually identical. And why does Toyota have a 6 speed transmission? To improve their fuel economy....which is still 2 mpg less than ours.

  1. And don't forget....their big V8 has one axle ratio -- a 4.3. Suck fuel much? Our trucks offer several axle options to optimize towing and fuel economy.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White
Loading thread data ...

Time will tell what the Tundra can do. Sounds like the GM people are nervous about somebody coming up with competition. He forgets to mention taht also with the 4.3 axle ratio the Tndra has a 6 speed auto which probably about equals their higher ratios with the 4 speed auto that they have. Scott

Reply to
zonie

[chop]

Oh My God! An ad that's actually a dramatization! You could knock me over with a feather!

Lou's just jealous. In this article, note the SPD (sales per dealer) figures:

formatting link
(towards the bottom of the article proper) Buick gets a mention that explains Lou's jealousy.

Reply to
dh

Right... because GM ads have never been misleading.

Don't present yourself as someone who's just a messenger. You obviously enjoy presenting acrimonious data (information would be an inaccurate term). Just because a GM dealer is losing sales and makes a claim, doesn't make it so.

Reply to
Viperkiller

I persoanlly think the Tundra ads passed over the line form less than honest to down right misleading. The adds for the "old" Tundra were merely misleading. Some of the ads for the new Tundra might not be outright lies, but they are so close as to be indistingishable from lies. Like othes have pointed out, ads often venture into gray areas as far as truthfulness. However the two "dramatic" ads for the new Tundra are among the least honest ads for a vechile I have seen in a long time. Hiding the tether on the drag race ad (while claiming it is an "actual demonstartion") and the faults with the seesaw ad pointed out above indicate to me that Toyota is tryng to mislead Consumers about the capabilities of the new Tundra. Maybe that is OK with you. I think it is disgusting. I think the Tacoma ads are merely silly (although funny) since they show capabilities that no one believes are true (meteor strike survial, falling off a cliff without damage, tougher than a sea monster, etc.). However, the new Tundra ads are at attempt to lead you to believe that the new Tundra has characteristics that they may not actually have.

Ed

Reply to
Ed White

You're right. All lies. On the other hand, I saw an ad last night with a GM pickup pulling a train. I'm sure that's 100% accurate.

About that tether in the Tundra ad: Are you talking about the ad where they demonstrate the braking and the truck stops right at the edge of the long platform that sticks out over the edge of a cliff? If that's the one, I have something educational to share with you. Anyone who would drive that truck without a safety device is a pathetically stupid sack of crap whose favorite saying is "Hey Bubba! Watch th.......uh oh".

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

That would not be his or her favorite saying. (S)he would get to say it exactly once.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

I stand corrected. :-)

Sudden left turn: My washing machine - yeah - it's got a hemi.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

It's tough pushing 10,000 lbs up a steep grade. I may not be a numbers cruncher by trade, but the last time I looked, 5000 lbs of truck plus 5000 lbs of trailer equals 10,000 lbs. Where's the deception? No 'sleight' of hand here.

I guess the 'mice type' was large enough for you to read, and to note the fact that the trailer has electric brakes. No deception here either.

You say "virtually" identical. What are the ACTUAL stopping distances of the two trucks????? A six speed transmission is inherently more versatile than a four speed. SO?

Mebbe, but the Toyota will still be driving like a new truck when the GMC is on its third owner, or in a boneyard.

Reply to
mack

messagenews:45f9b22b$1@kcnews01...

Why do you think that? Any proof, or just wild speculation.

Ed

Reply to
Ed White

Cars can require two general categories of service:

- Normal: Things everyone expects, like tires, oil/filter, fuel filter, belts, battery, and even things that don't necessarily have a scheduled replacement time, but which experienced drivers are aware of, like alternator, pumps.

- Outrageous repairs required because of hideous flaws in design & manufacturing:

Example - my sister's 1983 Buick, perfectly maintained, driven normally, transmission has meltdown at 60,000 miles.

Example - my 1992 Taurus. Fusible link located at bottom of engine compartment, completely unprotected from the elements. Link and its connectors corroded and turned to crumbs, preventing car from starting. Since it's common knowledge that electrical connections need to be thoroughly protected in engine compartments, we can safely conclude that the car's designer intended for this problem to occur, perhaps as a prank.

Example - Chrysler mini-vans. I can identify them blindfolded, just by the smell of their exhausts. One year old and they stink like an ancient Blazer. It's strange, because Chrysler owns some of the same CNC machining equipment used at Toyota factories. But, they choose to run them sloppy. Don't ask my source, I won't tell you, but I'm sure you'll dispute it. Enjoy.

Example - another Ford I owned, mid 1970s. Stick shift held onto tranny by a nylon (plastic) threaded ring. Exhaust located 4 inches from that spot. Nylon ring softens from heat, threads deteriorate, so one day, I downshift from 3rd to 2nd and end up holding a shifter that's attached to nothing, other than being held to the console by the boot. Wait. It gets better: The dealer claims they've never heard of this before. That didn't work, for reasons not important here. They fixed it for free. Six months later, same thing. I decide to fix it myself, since it was summertime and I was curious. Parts guy says "Oh yeah...we always keep that ring in stock. Lots of problems." Why didn't the shop want to fix it for free without being coerced? Because in order to fix it, you had to remove the front seats, remove all the carpet trim, lift the carpet, so you could finally get to the screws that held the console in place. Under the console were hidden the screws that held the shifter boot to the transmission hump. Actual time to replace the melted ring: two minutes.

You really need to stop mixing religion with your opinions about cars.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

Brand new 1971 Dodge Fury III, 360 cid, at 40000 miles valve job due to sticking valves. Owner (me) payed up.

New 1977 Dodge B200 van, hesitation, dealer couldn't find the problem, owner (me) with help from a watchmaker friend and jewelers eye loup found accelerator pump ports on carb body not drilled thru all the way. Broached holes and hesitation gone.

Then there was the brand new 1980 Dodge Omni, stick shift model, clutch shutter, dealer replaced clutch and still shuttered. Owner (me) replaced car.

1982 Olds Cutlass, transmission crapped out aprox 50000 miles, owner (me) pays up.

Used 1989 Toyota Camry, 27000 when purchased from Hertz, oil changes, replaced at 80000 miles, best car I ever owned, but I had to have a Dodge mini van.

Dodge mini van, I won't go there.

Brand new 2004 Toyota Sienna, oil changes and bliss. End of story.

Reply to
dbu.,

Those commercials are meant to influence Tacoma and Camry buyers that may want a full size truck. The fact is the standard pay load of the Tundra is only 10,000 LB. Real truck buyers know better. The Silverado standard pay load is 10,500 LB and the F150 is 11,000 LB, both of which cost less than the Tundra as well. ;)

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Get real. Ford is the Silverado competition not the Tundra. Ford sells 35% of the full-size trucks in the US. Chevy 30% and Toyota a measly 5%. The base engine in the Tundra is a only a V6. The F150 has a six speed and a V8 is standard as well. The Tundra is just beginning to catch up to the build quality of what GM, Ford and Dodge have been offering in their truck for years

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Mike,

Actually Ford and Chevrolet also have standard V-6s in their half ton pickup trucks. When I was shopping for a pickup last year it was much easier to find a V-6 F150 than a V-6 Tundra. There was not a single V-6 Tundra on any of the local lots for me to test drive. V-6 F150 were easy to fiind.

Ed

Reply to
Ed White

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There is no proof of course, because like anyone else, I cannot foretell the future, but based on three Toyotas and several GM and Ford products (Thank God I haven't owned a Chrysler product since 1958!) I'm just hazarding the guess that The Toys will be around long after the others go bye-bye. Speculation, but anything but wild. GM in particular makes cars that make themselves obsolete in a few years. If you really want to see a car self-destruct, get a Cadillac Catera, (the car that zigs....right into the wrecking yard.)

Reply to
mack

The base engine in the Silverado is a V6 as well.

Reply to
Pete Moss

You are of that opinion because you have a bias for Toyota and do not know much about trucks it appears. The fact is Toyotas newest truck is just starting to catch up to the build quality that has been the hallmark of those made by GM, Ford and Dodge for at least five years or more. When the commercials refer to what 'use to be' they are referring to what THE Tundra 'use to be.' Everything one sees in the Tundra commercials can be done and done much better by GM, Ford and Dodge trucks with a heaver load and for a lot less money.

mike

Just because a GM dealer is losing sales and makes

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Actually even the Tundra could likely pull that train as well, but the saying is "Hey Bubba, hold my beer and watch this.......LOL

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

I guess we can assume you do not go to many bone yards. As a percentage of the trucks sold in the US, there are a hell of a lot more rusted Toyota trucks in the bone yards ;)

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.