Americans Say US Cars Top Asian Autos

[FenwickHockey65]

And American consumers have responded, which is why Tundra sales are a constant joke every single month compared to the GMT-900s, F-series, and Ram. Same goes for Sequoia.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by future2010camaroowner

I'm sorry but can you explain your reasoning to me about the Tundra and Ridgeline?

Well, one has a frame that'll rust out and the other doesn't even have one to start with.

[future2010camaroowner]

Do you mean the c-channel frame? I thought most heavy duty trucks use the c-channel instead of the fully boxed frame?

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by future2010camaroowner

Do you mean the c-channel frame? I thought most heavy duty trucks use the c-channel instead of the fully boxed frame?

I'm talking about the unibody Ridgeline.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

I'm talking about the unibody Ridgeline.

can you explain the drawbacks of having a unibody construction?

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

can you explain the drawbacks of having a unibody construction?

weaker

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

weaker

it comes with a 3.5 V6 making 250hp. The truck was designed for how most people use trucks (more like city-truck), NOT heavy duty work-mobiles.

It has a towing capacity of 5000lbs., most people dont even tow that much, and even if they were capable of towing more, how hard do you think a 250hp v6 will have to work to move that much weight?

They were designed for the AVERAGE truck owner. I need to read the facts again but i remember reading something like, the average truck owner never tows more than 2000lbs and doesnt drive off road (IRS for the ridgeline) and uses it more for home depot-type errands. Ridgeline fits the bill for those people, whoever or wherever they may be.

[DGthe3]

The average person doesn't need more than 80 hp in their car either. But consumers love to buy more than they need.

Anyway, if the justification for making it car-like is because most use their trucks as a car instead of a truck, the obvious question becomes, why not just buy a car?

[Wesman]

Originally Posted by future2010camaroowner

Do you mean the c-channel frame? I thought most heavy duty trucks use the c-channel instead of the fully boxed frame?

Fully boxed frame is stronger and more heavy-dity than open C-channel. The F-Series, GMT-900's, and Ram all use fully boxed frames. Most are also hydroformed, which makes them even stronger in critical areas.

The Tundra uses an open C-channel frame, which is much weaker and prone to flexing. When driven on washboard surfaces, the Tundra's bed has been known to make contact with the cab due to the flex in the chassis. Its a pile of shit.

[Wesman]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

this flies completely in the face of the other thread about how buying american made products are too hard to find. In that thread, theyre complaining that american companies are shipping jobs overseas, while in this thread its being praised since the company is "american based".....whats more important? americans having jobs or and american company shipping those jobs to other countries like canada and mexico, but those companies reaping profit from it??? I think the asian companies should be commended for how large of a percentage of their cars they sell here, are actually built here. That is a commitment to this country and they shouldnt be bashed for it!

We need American companies for this country to survive. If all Americans are employed by foreign entities, our economy will crash and burn, and there will be no jobs for anyone because nobody will be able to afford to buy anything.

The first step is to support American businesses, the second step is for those businesses to grow and create job opportunities for US workers.

Employing Americans at plants building japanese vehicles is a temporary solution to a trend that is shifting US jobs overseas. The japs only build their vehicles here because it is cheaper for them, since they can avoid import tariffs. As soon as it becomes cheaper to build their vehicles somewhere else, they'll be out of here in the blink of an eye, and we'll have a bunch of empty assembly plant eye sores to stare at.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Hylton

Let's just hope they start buying them.

Indeed. Put your money where your mouth is, America!!!

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

it comes with a 3.5 V6 making 250hp. The truck was designed for how most people use trucks (more like city-truck), NOT heavy duty work-mobiles.

But Heavy-Duty work-mobiles IS how MOST people use full-size pickups. The Ridgeline (fugly, imo, btw) appeals to the rest who have no need for such a vehicle in the first place.

Originally Posted by Wesman

The Tundra uses an open C-channel frame, which is much weaker and prone to flexing. When driven on washboard surfaces, the Tundra's bed has been known to make contact with the cab due to the flex in the chassis. Its a pile of shit.

I remember seeing a video of bed-flex testing done by an Independent company... From best to worst it was F-150 and Silverado performing nearly identical, the Ram with a bit of extra bounce and flex, and the tundra came in DEAD last....the darn thing looked like it was about to break its welds and come off its bolts. Flying all over, and twisting, and bouncing....

[Wesman]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

I remember seeing a video of bed-flex testing done by an Independent company... From best to worst it was F-150 and Silverado performing nearly identical, the Ram with a bit of extra bounce and flex, and the tundra came in DEAD last....the darn thing looked like it was about to break its welds and come off its bolts. Flying all over, and twisting, and bouncing....

Same video I saw. Its a pile of junk. Add "frame made from jello" to the list of other problems with those piece of shit trucks, including engines blowing up (snapping cams), transmissions failing, tailgates falling off, severe rust, throttle pedals sticking, brake problems (rotors not true, caliper corrosion), poor paint quality, and a slew of other problems.

As I said, anyone who pays good money to buy one of those pieces of shit when 3 of the world's best pickups are produced by manufacturers right here in this country must be a complete moron.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Wesman

Same video I saw. Its a pile of junk. Add "frame made from jello" to the list of other problems with those piece of shit trucks, including engines blowing up (snapping cams), transmissions failing, tailgates falling off, severe rust, throttle pedals sticking, brake problems (rotors not true, caliper corrosion), poor paint quality, and a slew of other problems.

Don't forget worse fuel economy with a V6 than the other two with 8s.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

....But Heavy-Duty work-mobiles IS how MOST people use full-size pickups. The Ridgeline (fugly, imo, btw) appeals to the rest who have no need for such a vehicle in the first place....

MOST people who have trucks dont even need one. The Ridgeline IMO is closer to being mid sized and competes with the Ford Exploder Sport Trac and other SUT's. Almost every full size truck i see over here in San Jose has a rediculous lift on it, with 20 inch rims and huge tires and never anything in the truck bed and never towing anything. Funny, most trucks ive seen pulling real work duty has been the smaller ones!

im not a big ridgeline fan btw.