Automotive News / March 28, 2007 - 8:56 pm
LOS ANGELES -- Facing pricing pressure from domestic automakers willing to place cash incentives on their full-sized pickups, Toyota Division has added a nationwide $1,000 spiff on the just-launched 2007 Tundra.
The new incentive can only be applied to help a customer with a vehicle trade-in allowance, said Denise Morrissey of Toyota. Dealers do not have to spend the entire $1,000; they can offer it how they see fit, Morrissey said.
Toyota already has incentives of up to $2,000 cash back on the Tundra, which vary by model and region. The standard cab Tundra has as much as $2,000 cash back, depending on the region. The extended cab model has up to a $1,000 spiff. The Crew Max model has no incentives, and the trade-in assistance is not applicable on that model, Morrissey said.
Toyota Financial Services also has special APR and lease rates for customers with Tier 1 or Tier 2 credit ratings.
The trade-in incentive is effective through the end of April. The other incentives are expected to stay in force next month as well.
This is the first time I've seen "spiff" used in such a manner.
I think Toyota finds this to be a spiffy idea. They must not be selling as well as originally anticipated.
That's unfortunate. I haven't seen a single Tundra out on the road.
I haven't seen one either. I've seen a few on lots, but none on the road.
The one and only problem with the Tundra is this: It does absolutely nothing better then the domestics...unless drag racing is important to you in a 6000 lbs truck. It is as good in every department as any of the domestics and the domestics cost less and they have not given their customers any reason to leave. The Tundra needed to be special, but it's not. It's just like all the other trucks. Styling wasn't even a breakthrough of any kind except that it makes the Ram look bland in comparison. There's nothing special about it. That's the problem. Maybe if they had put a trunk in the bed......
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 31, 2007, 11:28:25 PM
The one and only problem with the Tundra is this: It does absolutely nothing better then the domestics...unless drag racing is important to you in a 6000 lbs truck. It is as good in every department as any of the domestics and the domestics cost less and they have not given their customers any reason to leave. The Tundra needed to be special, but it's not. It's just like all the other trucks. Styling wasn't even a breakthrough of any kind except that it makes the Ram look bland in comparison. There's nothing special about it. That's the problem. Maybe if they had put a trunk in the bed......
I don't know about that. The Tundra has a big motor, big brakes, 6 speed trans, big differential, big cab, etc. I'd definately say they've distinguished it from the rest of the pack. Whether or not any of that makes it better than the rest, I don't know. I'd still rather have a GMC Sierra if I was shopping for a 1/2 ton, but that's just me.
I'd rank them:
GMC/Chevy
Ford
Toyota
Nissan
Dodge
Seems as if they've tried the Dodge strategy with the new Tundra: Make it look like a semi, drop a big V8 in it, and market it as being super tough.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on April 01, 2007, 12:17:14 AM
I'd still rather have a GMC Sierra if I was shopping for a 1/2 ton, but that's just me.
Same here.
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 31, 2007, 11:28:25 PM
The one and only problem with the Tundra is this: It does absolutely nothing better then the domestics...unless drag racing is important to you in a 6000 lbs truck. It is as good in every department as any of the domestics and the domestics cost less and they have not given their customers any reason to leave. The Tundra needed to be special, but it's not. It's just like all the other trucks. Styling wasn't even a breakthrough of any kind except that it makes the Ram look bland in comparison. There's nothing special about it. That's the problem. Maybe if they had put a trunk in the bed......
What about Sooooooooper Handling AWD?
Quote from: HEMI666 on March 31, 2007, 11:28:25 PM
The one and only problem with the Tundra is this: It does absolutely nothing better then the domestics...unless drag racing is important to you in a 6000 lbs truck. It is as good in every department as any of the domestics and the domestics cost less and they have not given their customers any reason to leave. The Tundra needed to be special, but it's not. It's just like all the other trucks. Styling wasn't even a breakthrough of any kind except that it makes the Ram look bland in comparison. There's nothing special about it. That's the problem. Maybe if they had put a trunk in the bed......
Out of all large trucks it's probably the most different. Since when is a bigger engine not better? The Tundra can tow 10,000 pounds! And even with the longer wheelbase the front end is designed to make a really impressive turning radius. That's another real world adavantage that could definately come in handy on a construction site or something.
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.
What are the sales numbers like?
They sold 9,669 in February (March sales are still unavailable), which is a decrease of 9% from Feb 06.
Quote from: ifcar on April 01, 2007, 08:36:04 AM
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 think it's more of a long-term plan, one that could take some time to pay off or may not pay off at all. Either way, there are more truck people than Toyota people who might need a truck. Their NASCAR success might win over some truck people too.
Quote from: ifcar on April 01, 2007, 08:36:04 AM
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.
This is pretty much how I feel about the new Tundra.
If the Tundra is consistently out front, then the tide will eventually change (somewhat), but it won't happen overnight (read: in a year) especially with gas prices staying high.
They should have stuck with the muted styling that appeals to the "Toyota-faithful" as found in the first generation Tundra.
Quote from: ifcar on April 01, 2007, 08:36:04 AM
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 liked the old Tundra better. It was a little smaller than the rest with a lower beltline and a more car like appearance, inside and out.
I'm not sure if it's reached here yet, but Toyota really likes to trick us with their tundra ads. When they say, on the see-saw ad, it's hard to pull 11,000 pounds up a whatever% grade, they are ACTUALLY referring to the weight of the truck AND the weight of the trailer, when they say its hard to stop it - the trailer also has brakes equipped. The tundra is a decent truck, it's all a truck needs to be, and more, but at the end of the day - its a toyota. And who wants a toyota pick-up truck? Leave that segment to the domestics, please. It's all they've got.
Quote from: Sir_CARzy on April 01, 2007, 05:28:22 PM
And who wants a toyota pick-up truck? Leave that segment to the domestics, please. It's all they've got.
Apparently a lot of people do. Have you seen the resale value on old Toyota 4x4s?
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on April 01, 2007, 05:45:37 PM
Apparently a lot of people do. Have you seen the resale value on old Toyota 4x4s?
Yes, a very short-sighted rhetorical question.
Between the Tundra and Tacoma, Americans bought more than 300,000 Toyota pickups in 2006.
Quote from: Sir_CARzy on April 01, 2007, 05:28:22 PM
I'm not sure if it's reached here yet, but Toyota really likes to trick us with their tundra ads. When they say, on the see-saw ad, it's hard to pull 11,000 pounds up a whatever% grade, they are ACTUALLY referring to the weight of the truck AND the weight of the trailer, when they say its hard to stop it - the trailer also has brakes equipped. The tundra is a decent truck, it's all a truck needs to be, and more, but at the end of the day - its a toyota. And who wants a toyota pick-up truck? Leave that segment to the domestics, please. It's all they've got.
Everyone lies. I despise those sales tactics too, but it's still a good truck.
i see quite a few new toyota trucks (i.e. tundra, tacoma) in the college town i live in. i forgot the name of their recently introduced rugged two door jeep-like (imo) suv, but they are everywhere!
tundra rebate? well, that goes to show one that toyota is becoming far more americanized every day? :cry:!
the current major "american" truck rebates are as follows
dodge ram 1500: $3000.00-$5,000.00 (2007 models)
ford f-150: Up to $3,000.00 ($2007 models)
ford f-150: $3,500.00-$4,500.00 (2006 models)
ford f-super duty: $2,000.00-$3,000.00 (2007 models)
ford f-super duty: $3,500.00 (2006 models)
chevrolet silverado classic: $1,750-$3,000 (2007 models)
chevrolet silverado: Up to $5,000.00 (2006 models)
note: similar rebates on gmc trucks
i addition to the above information, i have included an article on march 2007 truck sales. read below:
GM, Ford Sales Seen Down in March as Trucks Falter
From: Automotive News, March 30, 2007
?
DETROIT (Reuters) -- U.S. sales for General Motors and Ford Motor Co. were stuck in the slow lane in March as a weakening housing market dampened pickup sales, even as Japanese rival Toyota Motor Corp. raced ahead, analysts said.
Toyota and other Asian automakers have been relentlessly stealing U.S. market share from Ford and GM on the strength of their sedans and crossovers.
The slowdown in the U.S. housing market prompted many contractors, who typically buy pickups, to delay purchases, hurting U.S. automakers, analysts.
"Modest headwinds for the month could be a deterioration of consumer confidence and continued housing weakness," Bear Stearns analyst Peter Nesvold said in a research note.
Another area of concern for automakers is the implosion in the subprime lending market, which analysts say has caused banks to rethink their lending practices, not just for mortgages but autos as well.
"Interest rates on new car loans in January rose to 6.45 percent, a rate not seen in seven years," according to IRN Inc., which tracks the market.
But Nesvold said despite the housing weakness and subprime mortgage fears, the economy remains strong enough to support sales in the low- to mid-16 million-unit range this year.
New U.S. vehicle sales are expected to come in at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of between 16.2 million and 16.6 million vehicles for March, according to analysts.
That would be slightly down to flat compared with last March's 16.6 million-unit rate.
Automakers will release March sales results on Tuesday, April 3.
Most analysts expected GM's sales to be down between 3 percent and 5 percent in March, while Ford sales were forecast to fall by as much as 17 percent.
Ford's chief sales analyst George Pipas told Reuters that sales likely fell by a double-digit-percentage range, hurt by lower sales of its best-selling F-series pickup.
"I can say with some confidence that we'll be down in the double digits," Pipas said. "It's about comparison. The F series did much better last year."
Sales for the Chrysler group are expected to be down between 5 percent and 7 percent.
Toyota, on the other hand, is expected to post a sales increase of up to 9 percent.
"Sales of passenger cars seem to continue to be very strong, particularly the new Toyota Camry, the Yaris, as well as the Lexus LS and ES," Lehman Brothers analyst Brian Johnson said in a note to clients.
Toyota just added a $1,000 trade-in incentive nationwide on its new Tundra pickup truck, which is competing against GM's new Chevrolet Silverado and Ford's popular F series.
"We view this move as a negative development for the category," Johnson said, adding that Toyota's move could lead to a price war in the hypercompetitive pickup segment.
A price war could be damaging for Ford's and Chrysler's profitability, and could hurt GM as "its 2007 turnaround depends greatly on increased contribution margins from its new pickups," Johnson said.
GM, Ford and Chrysler are all losing money, cutting jobs and reducing production. All three are in the midst of executing a restructuring plan to return their North American operations to profit.
Also, potential bidders have begun to size up Chrysler for a potential acquisition after Daimler said in February it was leaving all options open for the unit.
All of those trucks are old models, some of which already have redesigned versions out.
Tundra sales are down compared to last year, that makes me freaking laugh. I think it is a good truck, but Toyota tried to out truck the domestics when the market is transitioning the other way. Frankly, the original Tundra was weak and small, but towards the end they started to get it right with more power and the double cab. Now they've gone too far.
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.
Quote from: SaltyDog on April 01, 2007, 08:28:50 AM
Out of all large trucks it's probably the most different.? Since when is a bigger engine not better??
When all the other 1/2 tons have enough power to do whatever anyone needs it to.? Nobody is looking for that kind of power since everyone has over 300 hp now.? My truck has 345 hp and it's almost overkill.? I have had 3000 lbs in the box of my truck and I had to be really careful with the throttle because the truck still wanted to take off.? There is no way I would seek out more power unless I was buying a 3/4 or 1 ton truck.? Who needs a 6000 lbs pickup to do 0-60 mph in 6 seconds?
QuoteThe Tundra can tow 10,000 pounds!?
Only an idiot would tow that much with a 1/2 ton.? If you are going to tow that much weight, then you should be buying a 3/4 ton. Minimum.
QuoteAnd even with the longer wheelbase the front end is designed to make a really impressive turning radius.? That's another real world adavantage that could definately come in handy on a construction site or something.
Nobody is going to buy a Toyota because it turns sharper then a Ford. :rolleyes:
Quote from: SaltyDog on April 01, 2007, 08:28:50 AM
Out of all large trucks it's probably the most different.? Since when is a bigger engine not better? The Tundra can tow 10,000 pounds!? And even with the longer wheelbase the front end is designed to make a really impressive turning radius.? That's another real world adavantage that could definately come in handy on a construction site or something.
When it's in a Toyota...
Quote from: HEMI666 on April 02, 2007, 11:05:45 AM
When all the other 1/2 tons have enough power to do whatever anyone needs it to. Nobody is looking for that kind of power since everyone has over 300 hp now. My truck has 345 hp and it's almost overkill. I have had 3000 lbs in the box of my truck and I had to be really careful with the throttle because the truck still wanted to take off. There is no way I would seek out more power unless I was buying a 3/4 or 1 ton truck. Who needs a 6000 lbs pickup to do 0-60 mph in 6 seconds?
Only an idiot would tow that much with a 1/2 ton. If you are going to tow that much weight, then you should be buying a 3/4 ton. Minimum.
Nobody is going to buy a Toyota because it turns sharper then a Ford. :rolleyes:
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.
I stand by what I said. There is nothing "special" about the Tundra that would sway anyone from buying a Ford, GM, or Dodge. Especially when the vast majority of full size truck buyers already have experience with and like the domestic offerings. The domestics haven't given their customers any reason to switch, like they did with cars in the 80s.
Quote from: SaltyDog on April 02, 2007, 01:07:22 PM
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.
Which would you choose: the '06 Camry with 210hp V6 and 20/28 mpg or the '07 Camry with 268hp and 22/31 mpg?
If that extra power doesn't cost any more, and gets better mileage than competitors' less powerful engines, what's the downside?
It's simply a competitive advantage that's illiciting sour grapes.
Quote from: GoCougs on April 02, 2007, 01:23:39 PM
It's simply a competitive advantage that's illiciting sour grapes.
Not at all. I've been saying my Ram's Hemi is almost overkill in a half-ton truck since I bought it. The standard 4.7L V8 was very underrated and got the same mileage as my Hemi.
I said it from the beginning, there was nothing wrong with the 7/8th size of the last Tundra. Instead of an alternative all Toyota did was create a "me too" truck. Toyota should have kept the truck the same size as it was. No it's the same as everyone elses stuff.
The Double Cab version of the 1st-gen Tundra was just as big as its competitors. It just looked small.
Quote from: ifcar on April 02, 2007, 02:14:17 PM
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.
Quote from: ifcar on April 01, 2007, 08:36:04 AM
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.
Quote from: the Teuton on April 01, 2007, 09:39:03 PM
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 ( :zzz:) does right now ;) !!!
Quote from: afty on April 02, 2007, 02:58:25 PM
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?
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 :praise:!
Quote from: Atomic on April 02, 2007, 07:09:04 PM
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
Quote from: ifcar on April 02, 2007, 08:24:58 PM
Right, except for the $1,500 on the 4Runner, Highlander, and Sequoia.
HA HA!
Quote from: Atomic on April 02, 2007, 07:09:04 PM
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.
Quote from: Atomic on April 02, 2007, 07:09:04 PM
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 :praise:!
Sounds like your neighbor got screwed, you can get probably get a deal like that on a 2007 if you try hard enough.
Quote from: SaltyDog on April 02, 2007, 01:07:22 PM
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?
Quote from: TBR on April 03, 2007, 09:06:00 AM
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.
In the recent M/T Tundra/Silverado face-off, the 5.7L Tundra got better as-tested mileage than the 5.3L Silverado.
Quote from: GoCougs on April 03, 2007, 06:04:46 PM
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.
great thread, iffy :ohyeah:! 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?
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.
Quote from: sandertheshark on April 03, 2007, 06:06:45 PM
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?
Tundra sales update: March 07 sales are up 7% over March 06 sales, at 13k.
Quote from: GoCougs on April 03, 2007, 11:51:09 PM
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.
Quote from: TBR on April 03, 2007, 09:25:20 PM
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.
Quote from: sandertheshark on April 04, 2007, 05:06:00 PM
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.
:rolleyes:
Once again I am reminded that you can't spell bias without bs.
Quote from: Atomic on April 04, 2007, 05:17:36 PM
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
The Sierra is definitely much better looking than the Silverado.
Quote from: sandertheshark on April 04, 2007, 06:37:52 PM
:rolleyes:
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.
Quote from: GoCougs on April 05, 2007, 11:44:30 AM
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.
Quote2.) 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.
Quote3.) 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.
Quote4.) 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?
Quote
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.
Quote from: sandertheshark on April 05, 2007, 08:03:23 PM
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.
Quote from: HEMI666 on April 06, 2007, 07:58:11 AM
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).