Reports of aggressively rusting Toyota pickup frames piling up

Some Toyota Tundra owners are reportedly experiencing inordinately heavy amounts of premature rust, and they want the Japanese automaker to take action to address the problem. WCVB TV in Boston has been investigating the Toyota rust situation for about a year, and they're reporting that at least two dozen 2000-2001 Tundra owners have complained to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Owners of 1995-2001 Toyota pickups say their vehicles had inadequate corrosion protection, and many feel that the automaker should recall the vehicles.
When we mention excessive rust, we're not talking about some corroded quarter panels or a little dusting around the wheel wells. Drivers have complained of trucks so rusty that the frames are cracking, panels are falling off, and, in some cases, the trucks are too unsafe to drive. One owner is reportedly dealing with a power steering rack in need of repair, but the rust is so bad a new rack can't be bolted to the frame. The Boston TV station also investigated the smaller Tacoma for rust issues last year and found several frames that were disintegrating due to excessive corrosion.
For Toyota's part, the station reports that the automaker is buying back select models at 1.5 times their Blue Book value, but there are other truck owners who are still clamoring for resolution. The Japanese automaker says it is investing every case individually and that it's using lessons learned from the Tacoma incident to proactively investigate vehicles made with similar production techniques. Toyota won't comment on how many rust problem complaints it has received. Hat tip to Chris!
[Source: The Boston Channel]







Get a WordPress.com Blog




Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
thomas 11:33AM (4/29/2009)
"Owners of 1995-2001 Tundras say their vehicles had inadequate corrosion protection"
didn't the Tundra go on sale like in 2000????
o.O?
Reply
1337 11:46AM (4/29/2009)
Yeah, WTF? Not only was there no Tundra until 2000, Toyota didn't even sell a full-size truck before 2000! (unless you count the T100...which really isn't in the same category).
Coolio 12:37PM (4/29/2009)
This is Toyota. Therefore, this is the only place that anyone can read about it.
(Heaven forbid if it was GM - it would be on CNN for a week).
why not the LS2LS7? 12:41PM (4/29/2009)
You misread the article and then mistyped your quote.
Or else AB edited the article.
[Guido-Anchovy] 12:52PM (4/29/2009)
"Or else AB edited the article."
The original article did say 1995-2001 Tundras. I had to google it to make sure they didn't have them in 1995. :P
dukeisduke 3:18PM (4/29/2009)
They're probably lumping T100s in with the Tundras.
DreamTheater 3:45PM (4/29/2009)
The article states "Owners of 1995-2001 Toyota pickups" - no mention of Tundras... Can only be the HiLux, although not sure if that was sold in the US.
thomas 5:45PM (4/29/2009)
i copy/pasted directly from the article. they must have edited it since.
Jakesnake1294 11:36AM (4/29/2009)
That looks like it came off of the wreck of the Titanic.
Reply
Sektor 12:31PM (4/29/2009)
It shouldn't happen.
knapps 11:38AM (4/29/2009)
Wow. That rust makes my MGB look like it just came off the showroom floor.
Reply
Ray 10:18PM (4/29/2009)
Yours actually runs? Where did you get your parts! Liar! My 76 runs like a top, but has Fred Flintstone brakes. Love that car! Baby sh*t yellow and everything!
Mr.Oak 11:38AM (4/29/2009)
Nothing new here, my wife's '82 Corolla SR5 was rusted through before 80K. As did my 87 Celica GTS. Rust & crappy gearbox. Oh What A Feeling!! TOYOTA!!!
Reply
Serge 11:42AM (4/29/2009)
Yeah... sounds like the worlds most reliable car to me :)
Unbelievable what general stupidity and marketing can do for a company!!!
Shiftright 12:39PM (4/29/2009)
@Serge, Reliability and corrosion resistance are two very separate things. They may have rusted prematurely, but I bet they needed very little if any mechanical repairs or ever failed to start. Easy with the knee jerk Japan hatin'.
Nightcrawler 1:16PM (4/29/2009)
In fairness, now you are talking about cars from the 1980s Mr. Oak. There was no shortage of cars that rotted away in those days from any manufacturer.
Well, maybe stainless steel DeLoreans didn't rust.
why not the LS2LS7? 1:55PM (4/29/2009)
GM did wonders for corrosion reduction to going to double-sided galvanized steel in the 80s.
Our 79 Chevette rusted right out like you'd expect, but my 82 Cavalier only showed bubbling at the bottom of the door frames (10 years later! A long stretch in Michigan).
Whereas a Toyota made in the early 80s was still a complete rust bucket, although they were better than Mazdas. I never saw enough Hondas in Michigan during that timeframe to get a gauge.
I'm not trying to say GM was some kind of shining star in this period, but they did respond to corrosion problems significantly faster than the imports. The imports also had no idea that a rear window defroster was expected to handle frost at times and not just fog. The imports corrected these problems a bit later. Continuous refinement like that is why the imports were killing the domestics on quality by the late 80s.
PJ 2:29PM (4/29/2009)
Japanese cars were horrendous rusters from their NA-market introduction in the '60s all the way to the mid-'80s. They caught up, (more or less) in the '90s, but they've always prioritized light weight and efficient engineering over "toughness."
Fine by me, as the trade-off is a car that's better to drive while it lasts. People put a lot of weight on long-term (as in 25-30 years) durability as a measure of overall quality, but the fact is, most people only keep their cars about 5 years anyway, and they're in the scrapyard by 4x that. It's mostly a symbolic argument.
cpwallen 11:41AM (4/29/2009)
Oh what a feeling!! Or is it moving backwards??
Reply
Zach 11:44AM (4/29/2009)
Rust is always the worst part about Toyotas. I've got a 90 Camry, and I'm gonna be driving around in a 70k mile panelless dune buggy in a couple years. It will be a dune buggy, but it'll have a perfectly working transmission and engine!
Reply