![]() From what I know it was one owner and the owner did all the recommended maintenance as did I. I purchase the vehicle about a year-and-a-half ago from a car lot in San Antonio and the tundra already had 133k. I have a 2016 Toyota tundra SR5 four-wheel-drive with a 5.7 flex and a whole lot of upgrades including 1794 interior,TRD dual exhaust, ditch lights ,lightbars etc. Know what you’re buying and don’t take it personally when someone else made different choices. But at the end of the day, caveat emptor. I think the folks that own Tundras are lots better at laying out the facts and talking about the strengths and weaknesses of the different brands. The price I paid and resale value of the Tundra are far better than the Big 3. which are all demonstrably better than the Big 3. I bought my 2017 CM Limited for the huge back seat, reliability and durability. The safety ratings of the big 3 are demonstrably better than the Tundra per NTHSA. Educated consumers value different things: IMO Ram has the nicest interior Ford has the next nicest and then GM. ![]() But there’s more to consumer decisions than pure data, and plenty of room on the market for all the auto makers to put out products. But, statistically, if you want to minimize the chance of break downs and maximize the chances of long-term trouble free durability, your best bet is to buy a Tundra. That’s not hating on Ford or GM or Ram, and there will be individual trucks from all the manufacturers that are great and trouble free (in fact, most are good trucks, we hear a lot of nightmares on Internet forums). But the failure rate of the 5.7 is lower than the failure rate of the Ford 3.5. This doesn’t mean there won’t be failures, and individuals here have obviously showed us that the 5.7 isn’t perfect, like anything mechanical, it has a failure rate. Toyota extended warranties are less expensive than other companies, especially their trucks. The other objective and large sample size decision made by actuaries are the prices charged for OEM extended warranties. When you look at lease rates, Tundras hold their value the best as evidenced by their residual values being consistently higher resulting in lower lease payments. Banks like Ally need to know how much each truck they lease will be worth after XX months and XXXXX miles. This isn’t based on opinion, it’s based on profit. There are actuaries working for banks/leasing companies who predict residual values of vehicles, trucks included. The problem is our experience isn’t generalizable. IMO everyone wants to take their own personal experience or even the experience of people on these forms and extrapolate that out to make generalizations.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |