Last post on Oct 25, 1998 at 11:59 PM
You are in the Pickups - Archived Discussions
Sep 30, 1998 (7:05 pm)
Actually, I think that the main reason that the T100 didn't do well is that they always compared it directly to the F150, etc, rather than the Dakota. It was /not/ a full size truck. IMO it filled a very important slot that Dakota is now marketing the heck out of, but it was not full size.
Sep 30, 1998 (8:50 pm)
I'll agree with that, the dakota also showed that a poor build quality reputation could be overcome with fantastic styling. This, of course, contradicts my earlier note "the styling is secondary to the mechanicals"
I guess there is always an exception to the rule.
Oct 01, 1998 (7:54 pm)
One (of many) important areas the T-100 had over the Dakota, is that it offered more than 48" between the rear wheel wells. One could fit a sheet of plywood flat on the pickup bed. Not so with the Dakota.
Oct 12, 1998 (6:01 pm)
When I went looking for a truck last year, I targeted the Dakota cause of the looks and the price. I didn't want to pay the bucks for a f150 and wanted better gas mileage as well. The best I could do on a Club Cab Dakota with the SLT package was around 19,400 using Edmunds data as a guide. My wife pushed me to looking at Toyotas (took one look at the inside of the Tacoma and said no dice) and then saw a t100 which I never even considered. To make a long story short, I got the t100 for an even 20k with all the goodies that I wanted in the Dakota. For the extra 600 or so that I spent, I got the reliablility of a Toyota, not the unreliability of a Dodge. Yep, I can slide a 4x8 sheet between the wheel wells. But thats not what is important to me. The reliability is and I think that Toyota lost out when it failed to change its marketing strategy for this truck when it became appearant early on that it wouldn't compete against full size american trucks.
Give em time, Toyota might surpise everyone if they do the Tundra right.
#15 of 20 wesl
Oct 13, 1998 (1:36 am)
So far it looks like Toyota is going to louse things up again. You can't get an extended bed with the extended cab. What a pity. One V-8, one V-6, no other options. I hope this one-flavor policy appeals to the Toyota crowd.
#16 of 20 kpt
Oct 13, 1998 (5:10 pm)
My husband is in the process of looking for a new truck. He would like more info on the Tundra. The dealer says there isn't any info right now. Does anybody have suggestions on where to look to get specs, price, etc.?
#17 of 20 wesl
Oct 14, 1998 (3:58 am)
Toyota is not releasing the Tundra until May of 99. As for information, I believe the current copies of Automobile and Car and Driver have small blurbs on the Tundra.
Oct 14, 1998 (4:19 pm)
From the preliminary info that I've read on the new Tundra, it appears to be still slightly smaller than the domestic full-size models. About half way between a full-size and a Dakota in size. To me I think that is a plus. While I like the domestic full-size pickups, they're all HUGE.
I think the Tundra, because of its' slightly smaller size makes better sense as a personal use vehicle. You still get the ability to carry 4'x8's flat within the bed, get around a 2000 lb payload, plus Toyota's great relability. Sounds like winner - if they can keep the price within reason. Still don't like the looks though.
Oct 25, 1998 (4:45 pm)
Just picked up a 'teaser" brochure on the Tundra from a local dealer. It has some info, but mainly, better photos. The dealer said they should be getting the first Tundras in February.
#20 of 20 wesl
Oct 25, 1998 (11:59 pm)
Just saw the Tundra up close at a local auto show. Looks like Ford still makes the best full size. I hope that the production version has better plastics on the inside, because the Tundra I saw was nasty and poorly finished.