re: Tundra or F-150

I'm sure the tundra lasts longer but I prefer the drive and look of the F-150.

Why the attitude? Im not your homeboy, and yes I work for a local dealer, regardless dows not matter as we buy the vehicles from same distributor (gst), now TX can beat our prices because of volume and price $2-2.5k below over internet to sell more vehicles. Costco does $500 above cost, that is not $500 below cost, granted Costco just sends the lead in and dealership sends 'the Costco price', which in this case is still around $2-2.5k below cost after rebate.

quote:

---

I'm talking more about the longevity. No one seems to have any thing to back that up.

---

Do you seriously not think resale value of a non-luxury brand is highly correlated to value/longevity/quality of a vehicle?

quote:

---

As long as it ain't a Dodge, Honda, or Nissan you are doing just fine. My viewpoint (which is worth a shite ton): GM - looks Ford - most fun to drive Toyota - durability/resale Can't go wrong with those 3. I'm shallow as hell so I went with the GM.

---

This is my Top 3 as well

quote:

---

No you didnt. There is no $7k discount on Platinum/1794 models (only tundra that goes up to $49k) without dealership being around $3k below cost, so I would need to see what dealership took a $3k lower without hassle or haggle.

---

You tried to call me out on 2 different things in my post and requested proof. I provided the proof and I will never buy another vehicle in Louisiana simply for the fact that every dealership in the state tries to pound the consumer in the arse. I would much rather buy local but dealers won't deal in this state for whatever reason. I searched high and low in the state at every toyota dealership in the state and NONE would even come close to 6K off MSRP. First Texas dealership i call they are willing to deal, I guess they teach better math and economics in Texas, lower cost=more volume.

quote:

---

I 100% think reliability of the Tundra is related to the MSRP and resale.

---

The qualitative aspects of the vehicle contribute to the demand side of the equation. Not the supply side.

If Toyota were to sell a lot of Tundras to fleets and huge amount of Tundras entered the used truck market every year, the supply would increase and the inflection point of the supply/demand curve would move down....meaning a reduced price for used Tundras despite no decrease in quality.

Ford sells a lot of trucks to fleets, which means a lot of very similarly equipped trucks enter the used truck market with approximately the same mileage every year. Even if Ford did build a reliable truck (they don't), their resale would not be as good as competitors that don't market to fleet buyers unless the demand for them used climbed.

quote:

---

I agree that does have an affect, but the Nissan Titan kind of discredits that thought. Small production numbers and sales, moderate MSRP, sub-par resale.

---

Limited supply, but also limited demand.

I promise that the Nissan Titan does not break the laws of supply and demand anymore than any other item ever bought or sold. The truck has good or average marks for reliability, but there could be other qualitative aspects of the vehicle that reduces demand. There could also supply side issues, such sales practices by Nissan that increases the number of Titans on the market relative to demand (such as sales to fleets).

Just speculating: Nissan, Kia, Suzuki, and Mitsubishi are known for pushing vehicles to buyers with poor credit. That usually (not always) means buyers with a very poor philosophy on maintenance, more repos, etc. Too many of those on the market would impact the reputation of those vehicles as used and could hurt the average value of a particular model.

Tundra. I drive a 2011 4wd w/ 130k. Damn thing drives like the day I bought it and not one, not even a minor thing, has broke yet. I love my truck.

quote:

---

GM - looks

---

I can see that. The Sierra does look very nice in the sense that it appears to be a clean design without too many exaggerated features that most of the competitors seem to have.

They are all kind of "meh" to me though, and I used to be a little bit of a car guy. Modern automobile look particularly contrived and artificial these days to me. Trucks especially look like they are designed by people who don't own trucks but distinguish their products by creating the biggest caricature of a pickup as they can. The design effort seems to incorporate fuel efficiency gains that go above and beyond what buyer want, and include costly features that they don't really need.

Styling is subjective, but I think the Ram is probably the best looking out of the trucks at the moment. The Sierra and the bigger Silverado HD are okay. Probably because those are the older, more traditional designs. The Ford F Series, half ton Silverado, Tundra, and Titan seem to get weirder looking with every redesign.

And I know it's not really a pickup, but I think the European marques like Volvo, Audi, and Mercedes are doing solid work. Cadillac is trying. Buick and Lincoln are doing okay. Everyone else is just sort of phoning it in when it comes to styling and design. The Japanese seem to only make bland vehicles (Camry, most Subarus) or incredibly ugly ones (Prius and the new Lexus products are particularly horrible).

quote:

---

Truth is that 'Costco' price is incorrect if they price you like they should, $500 above cost

---

just curious, what is costco's relationship to Toyota?


ETA: I'm in the market for a new truck soon. Been driving an '07 F-150 Lariat and it's kicked arse save for the plugs going out at 100k (replaced) and theyre actin up on me again at 140k. dont wanna pay to fix em again for it just to happen again

Tundra and F-150 seem like the Big Two. The platinums for each are fricking sickkkkk. i loved this thread, lunchbox is the man

going to keep researching


ETAA: nvm, the 1974 Tundra shits on the others. god that thing is awesome