Toyota increases rebate on new Tundra

[ifcar]

The Double Cab version of the 1st-gen Tundra was just as big as its competitors. It just looked small.

[Catman]

The Double Cab version of the 1st-gen Tundra was just as big as its competitors. It just looked small.

I think it was a little narrower but not by much.  The new one is almost too big.

[afty]

Toyota made the mistake of trying to appeal to truck people instead of Toyota people. Toyotas are popular because they are easy to use, comfortable, and quiet, and have their reputation for reliability. The Tundra's target consumer should have been someone who loves his Camry or RAV4 who also needs a pickup truck, and focused on matching or besting everyone else's luxury and refinement, just with more power and capability than before.

Instead, Toyota made an un-Toyota truck to prove they could, and no one wants it.

I agree 100%.  There is definitely a market for people who want the Camry of full-sized pickups.  It's smaller than the market for something like an F-150 or Silverado, but it's there.  Toyota should have been happy to keep chipping away at that market rather than trying to be something they're not. 

Those Tundra ads with the Southern-accented narrator and "we're so tough" rhetoric really bother me.  They strike me as patronizing, as though Toyota is marketing to a stereotype of what they think Americans are really like.

[Atomic]

The advertising campaigns for the Chevy and the Toyota have been a lot like GWB and John Kerry's campaigns in 2004.? Kerry was always more sophisticated, a better speaker, and looked more presidential.? He had his flaws, but he looked and sounded like a better candidate.

Bush was bull-headed and kept driving home the message that he was steadfast, unwavering, and purely American.? He made no excuses and America found him to be a better choice.? Much the same is true for the Silverado.? It isn't as big, flashy, sophisticated, stylish, or (arguably) good as the Tundra in the numbers, but it is stong, reliable, a known-quantity and purely American.? When it comes to trucks, people like that kind of thing.

it's a good thing for chevy that the silverado has far better ratings than bush ( ) does right now  !!!

[sandertheshark]

Those Tundra ads with the Southern-accented narrator and "we're so tough" rhetoric really bother me.  They strike me as patronizing, as though Toyota is marketing to a stereotype of what they think Americans are really like.

Is there a Toyota ad that can't be seen as patronizing?

[Atomic]

the gist? give toyota a break, imo. they make great vehicles -- like it or not. do they offer a threat? obviously, judging from the many replies here. my thoughts? thank God we have choice. when it comes to cars, trucks and suv's, i'm PRO CHOICE and proud of it. that's what our contry is ALL about... freedom (a.k.a. choice, personal expression...)

if you like the all new tundra, take advantage of the $1,000 discount (!) -- which, by the way is a good move on the company's part. it's a nice marketing concept to bring attention to toyota's newest pick-up. being that american companies "own" the truck market (for now), toyota should be proud of each and every sale.

if you prefer an american make, take advantage of the huge discounts or very, very low or 0% interest rates.

by the way, my neighbor just purchased a new 2006 gmc yukon. he choose the staggering $6,000 rebate over the desperately low 0% finance rate. he selected the vehicle from a lot of 31 unsold '06 yukons -- in march 2007!!! toyota has absolutely no rebates on their top selling suv's, large, medium and small.

i'm pro american by the way, but i can see all sides, and i do  !

[ifcar]

toyota has absolutely no rebates on their top selling suv's, large, medium and small.

Right, except for the $1,500 on the 4Runner, Highlander, and Sequoia.

http://cars.com/go/advice/incentives/incentivesAll.jsp#Toyota

[SVT666]

Right, except for the $1,500 on the 4Runner, Highlander, and Sequoia.

HA HA!

[sandertheshark]

by the way, my neighbor just purchased a new 2006 gmc yukon. he choose the staggering $6,000 rebate over the desperately low 0% finance rate. he selected the vehicle from a lot of 31 unsold '06 yukons -- in march 2007!!! \

Those 2006 Yukons were unsold because the 2007 Yukons are 2/10ths better and they were available last September.

[TBR]

the gist? give toyota a break, imo. they make great vehicles -- like it or not. do they offer a threat? obviously, judging from the many replies here. my thoughts? thank God we have choice. when it comes to cars, trucks and suv's, i'm PRO CHOICE and proud of it. that's what our contry is ALL about... freedom (a.k.a. choice, personal expression...)

if you like the all new tundra, take advantage of the $1,000 discount (!) -- which, by the way is a good move on the company's part. it's a nice marketing concept to bring attention to toyota's newest pick-up. being that american companies "own" the truck market (for now), toyota should be proud of each and every sale.

if you prefer an american make, take advantage of the huge discounts or very, very low or 0% interest rates.

by the way, my neighbor just purchased a new 2006 gmc yukon. he choose the staggering $6,000 rebate over the desperately low 0% finance rate. he selected the vehicle from a lot of 31 unsold '06 yukons -- in march 2007!!! toyota has absolutely no rebates on their top selling suv's, large, medium and small.

i'm pro american by the way, but i can see all sides, and i do  !

Sounds like your neighbor got screwed, you can get probably get a deal like that on a 2007 if you try hard enough.

[TBR]

Good point regarding towing. 

I don't know about anyone else, but accelerating fast is fun regardless of what you're doing it in.  If I had a truck that could do 0-60 in 6 seconds I would definately do so and enjoy it.  Besides, they offer a smaller V8 and a 4.0 V6 as well.  They're not forcing their buyers into getting a 400hp engine.

Turning radius is just an example of how it sticks out from other trucks in it's class.  280Z hit most of what I was going to say so I didn't want to repeat it.

The 4.7l is too weak for a truck that size, they need an engine between the two.

And, FYI, don't GM's trucks get better gas mileage?

[sandertheshark]

The 4.7l is too weak for a truck that size, they need an engine between the two.

And, FYI, don't GM's trucks get better gas mileage?

The Vortec 5.3 gets better gas mileage than Toyota's V8s.  But the iForce 5.7 gets slightly better mileage than the Vortec Max.  Only slightly.

[GoCougs]

In the recent M/T Tundra/Silverado face-off, the  5.7L Tundra got better as-tested mileage than the 5.3L Silverado.

[sandertheshark]

In the recent M/T Tundra/Silverado face-off, the  5.7L Tundra got better as-tested mileage than the 5.3L Silverado.

That's because MT didn't hit the selective displacement switch in the Silverado.  And I'd like to know how repeatable those results are otherwise.

[Atomic]

great thread, iffy  ! in fact, i did some additional research. in doing so, i found the following article today by mark Rechtin from crain publications, dated April 2, 2007. note: i highlighted some interesting points. read on...

LOS ANGELES -- It's just two months into the launch of the full-sized Tundra pickup, and already Toyota is going toe-to-toe with the Detroit 3 on incentives.

Toyota never does that - not this early in the game. But rising above the fray won't be easy in the full-sized pickup wars. So Toyota is surrendering some of the sweet price premium it usually takes as a given.

Last week Toyota slapped a nationwide $1,000 spiff on the 2007 Tundra. The new incentive can be applied only as a vehicle trade-in allowance, said spokeswoman Denise Morrissey.

Toyota already has put up to $2,000 cash back on the Tundra, an incentive that varies by model and region. The standard-cab version has as much as $2,000 cash back, depending on the region. The spiff on the extended-cab Tundra tops out at $1,000.

The CrewMax model has no incentives, and the trade-in assistance is not applicable on that model.

Unusual turf for Toyota

"For Toyota to have a customer cash rebate this year strikes me as unusual," said Tom Libby, an analyst with Power Information Network. "If you look at the Yaris or the Camry or what have you, you didn't see rebates this early."

Toyota Financial Services also has special interest-rate and lease offers for customers with top credit ratings.

The trade-in incentive is effective through April. The other incentives also are expected to stay in force next month.

"Marketing efforts for Tundra have generated significant dealer traffic," Morrissey said in a release. "Unfortunately, many of these buyers are in a negative equity situation with their current (domestic) pickup. In addition, since the launch of the Tundra, competitors' incentive activity has increased."

The Tundra regular-cab and extended-cab versions went on sale in February. The CrewMax version is trickling into dealerships. Morrissey said Tundra sales are particularly strong in the Southeast and Gulf States areas.

Toyota expects to sell 200,000 units this year.

Domestics still far ahead in spiffs

Even though Toyota's incentive spending seems like a lot, it pales in comparison to what the Detroit automakers are putting on the hoods of their trucks.

On 2007 full-sized truck models, Dodge has as much as $5,000 factory-to-customer cash; Ford, up to $3,000 cash back; and Chevrolet, up to $3,000 cash back. The incentives are higher still for 2006 models lingering on dealer lots.

And those are just national incentives. Regional and factory-to-dealer spiffs can crank the discounts even further. Several Dodge dealers in Los Angeles are offering some 2007 Ram 1500 models for $10,000 to $13,000 below sticker price.

The new Tundra is priced from $22,935 for the regular-cab model, including shipping, up to $42,495 for a loaded CrewMax 4x4 model. Some trim levels, especially the lower grades, are more than $1,000 above the domestic competition. Toyota counters that its trucks have more standard features and safety equipment than the domestics.

Dealers in farm and ranch country say they could use more stock, but accept the slow rollout in exchange for high quality.

New Tundra sales are up "three-fold" over the old model, says Leonard Northcutt, president of Toyota and Chevrolet dealerships in Enid, Okla. He has pulled in some Dodge and Ford trade-ins, but so far has very little cross-shopping with Chevrolet.

Not a 'town truck'

"The perception for years has been that Tundra was a smaller truck or a town truck," Northcutt said. "We have to get the people out to drive it. Once we demo the new truck, they are impressed."

Kirk Kneifl, general sales manager of Art Silva Toyota-Lincoln-Mercury in Sioux City, Iowa, usually sold six of the old Tundras each month. He projects sales of about 15 units of the new model. He says he has lost some orders because of limited supply.

Kneifl says about 80 percent of trade-ins are from domestic full-sized trucks. He says there may be a pricing issue with the regular-cab model, but customers feel pricing on the upper-level trims is appropriate for the content.

"We had some events to show the truck to farmers and businesses," said Kneifl, who sold Ford trucks for 15 years. "They can see that it's a truck truck."

any thoughts?

[TBR]

If this was GM you would be having a field day ridiculing them. Face it, the Tundra is brand new, radically improved product that is selling noticeably worse than its predecessor. You can't spin that.

By the way, the Crew Max does look a lot better in person than both the Mega Cab (its closest competitor) and the Double Cab.

[GoCougs]

That's because MT didn't hit the selective displacement switch in the Silverado.? And I'd like to know how repeatable those results are otherwise.

Since when did AFM have a manual button?

And if the AFM button is new for the Silverado, why didn't M/T mention the error in not using it in the article?

[ifcar]

Tundra sales update: March 07 sales are up 7% over March 06 sales, at 13k.

[sandertheshark]

Since when did AFM have a manual button?

And if the AFM button is new for the Silverado, why didn't M/T mention the error in not using it in the article?

I don't know how exactly it works, but there's now possible way a Silverado with a Vortec 5300 with AFM will consistently do worse on an MPG test than a heavier Tundra with an iForce.  That's why it does so much better on the EPA tests, because they don't just run it once a round a track and one quick road trip and call it a "test."  The whole point of a test is you produce repeatable results.  So tell MT, run that test again, and again and again and again, and make sure the AFM is working because that is one of the best features in the the entire GM product line and MT owes it to their readers to point that out.

Oh, and don't forget at the end of the day, even with worse "as-tested" mileage and a weaker engine, the Chevy did win that particular MT comparo.

[Atomic]

If this was GM you would be having a field day ridiculing them. Face it, the Tundra is brand new, radically improved product that is selling noticeably worse than its predecessor. You can't spin that.

By the way, the Crew Max does look a lot better in person than both the Mega Cab (its closest competitor) and the Double Cab.

good point! the crew max does indeed look much better in person; the chevrolet looks worse.

[GoCougs]

I don't know how exactly it works, but there's now possible way a Silverado with a Vortec 5300 with AFM will consistently do worse on an MPG test than a heavier Tundra with an iForce.? That's why it does so much better on the EPA tests, because they don't just run it once a round a track and one quick road trip and call it a "test."? The whole point of a test is you produce repeatable results.? So tell MT, run that test again, and again and again and again, and make sure the AFM is working because that is one of the best features in the the entire GM product line and MT owes it to their readers to point that out.

Oh, and don't forget at the end of the day, even with worse "as-tested" mileage and a weaker engine, the Chevy did win that particular MT comparo.

To date there's never been a vehicle available with a manual/auto button for its AFM that I'm aware of. To assume that there's a switch is a leap.

EPA estimates rarely correlate to real-world driving. AFM plays well to the EPA test procedure but has proven to be of very little value in every-day driving in heavy vehicles. So no, I am not surprised that it didn't fair as well for gas mileage. The primary difference is the Silverado's 4sp AT and perhaps a bit to the Tundra's superior VVT technology. (IMO, AFM exists to play to the EPA test procedure and is of virtually zero value outside of that).

At the end of the day M/T said that the Silverado won the comparo solely because it was cheaper by $4,500. Silly, really, considering that they tested the cheaper 5.3L Silverado against the top-end 5.7L Tundra.

[sandertheshark]

Once again I am reminded that you can't spell bias without bs.

[TBR]

good point! the crew max does indeed look much better in person; the chevrolet looks worse.

The Chevrolet looks just as ugly in pics as it does in person imho. And, the Crew Max is still ugly, it just has better porportions than the Double Cab. As far as looks are concerned: 1. Titan 1. Sierra 2. F-150 3. Ram 4. Tundra 5. Silverado

[sandertheshark]

The Sierra is definitely much better looking than the Silverado.

[GoCougs]

Once again I am reminded that you can't spell bias without bs.

I guess I'm trying to see what you claim to be bs:

1.) What's bs about stating that AFM vehicles has ever had a manual button for the feature?

2.) What's bs about stating that the fact Silverado has a 4sp AT or less sophisticated VVT?

3.) What's bs about repeating M/T's "value" reason (on dissimilarily equipped trucks, BTW) as to why they chose the Silverado?

4.) What's bs about stating that AFM has little real-world payback?

5.) What's bs about stating that EPA test procedure does not mimic real-world driving?

The only bs I see is the claim that M/T forgot to use the non-existent manual/auto button for AFM, and the claim that M/T owes it to its audience to devise a test that would yield as-tested MPG figures to match the Silverado's EPA rating.

[sandertheshark]

I guess I'm trying to see what you claim to be bs:

1.) What's bs about stating that AFM vehicles has ever had a manual button for the feature?

Whether AFM kicks in automatically or not isn't the issue here.  I wouldn't know if such a magic button exists, I've never owned one of these trucks.  I'd imagine though that you might want to have a manual override for that feature.  But again, it's not the issue.

2.) What's bs about stating that the fact Silverado has a 4sp AT or less sophisticated VVT?

How much does the Silverado's performance suffer for it?  A little, yes.  Not that much.  It can still do just about anything just about as well as the Tundra.  It might not be as fast, but if that's what you think matters in a truck, go Dodge's street racing team has something for you.

3.) What's bs about repeating M/T's "value" reason (on dissimilarily equipped trucks, BTW) as to why they chose the Silverado?

That wasn't the only reason.  And value isn't just a function of price.  It's the performance and features you get for the price.  And Chevy's got that cornered.  Claiming it only won because it's four-and-half-thousand dollars worse than a Tundra is ridiculous.

4.) What's bs about stating that AFM has little real-world payback?

That's a big steaming mound of buffalo chips.  If anything the real world gains are much greater than the EPA tests, because for maintained high speeds on highway driving (at 70-80mph instead of 55 in the EPA test) running on four cylinders instead of eight would be a much greater efficiency gain.

[qoute]5.) What's bs about stating that EPA test procedure does not mimic real-world driving?

I know that.  But there's no reason to think a totally non-scientific road test - by Motor Trend of all people - is any more accurate.

[SVT666]

That's a big steaming mound of buffalo chips.? If anything the real world gains are much greater than the EPA tests, because for maintained high speeds on highway driving (at 70-80mph instead of 55 in the EPA test) running on four cylinders instead of eight would be a much greater efficiency gain.

At 70-80 mph AFM is not active.  It's running on all 8 cylinders because the truck requires more power then 4 cylinder mode can provide just to keep the truck moving at that speed.  Remember the truck has the aerodynamics of a house.  AFM, MDS, whatever you want to call it only operates when you are driving at a constant speed where 8 cylinder power is not required or when you are decelerating.

[GoCougs]

At 70-80 mph AFM is not active.? It's running on all 8 cylinders because the truck requires more power then 4 cylinder mode can provide just to keep the truck moving at that speed.? Remember the truck has the aerodynamics of a house.? AFM, MDS, whatever you want to call it only operates when you are driving at a constant speed where 8 cylinder power is not required or when you are decelerating.

I was contemplating buying a 300C before I bought the Accord, and did a fair amount of research on the subject.

Even in that car (which is the only car - not truck/suv/van - I can think of that has the feature), which is both lighter and has better aero than a truck/suv/van, its MDS cuts out at about 60-62 mph.

The EPA test average highway test speed is 48 mph, with only short spurts up to 60 mph (maximum speed).