[Shop-talk] Toyota Tacoma rust

[Phil Nase]

No I don't think they left off the anti-corrosion on purpose.  But I  
am disappointed none the less because I am not entirely confident in a  
repair that is not a routinely performed repair and that in some way  
this is going to impact my selling or trade value.  I've seen some  
miraculous restorations of British cars but in my opinion those guys  
are as much craftsmen as mechanics and a totally different type of  
operation.

I am unwilling to sell it and not disclose the issue privately.  I  
wonder what the dealer will give me for it as is.  I don't know yet  
but I'd be willing to bet it won't be blue book.

Not to mention I'm not ready right now to trade and buy a new  
vehicle.  I wanted to keep this for at least another 2 years before  
spending more money.  They seem to be making the effort as this is not  
a "recall"  but a customer satisfaction issue. At least that's their  
story.  As a confirmed skeptic I would be more willing to believe they  
are covering their legal ass.

I guess I will find out later this week.

Phil Nase
Quakertown, PA
http://home.comcast.net/~philnasecpa/



On Jun 24, 2009, at 7:23 PM, Randall wrote:

>> I wonder whether the local guys have the experience needed to do this
>> "factory" work.
>
> I don't see why it would be any worse on a pickup truck than on a  
> Triumph;
> and the Triumph guys seem to get through it.  Just unbolt everything
> including the body, then bolt it all back onto the new frame.  But  
> according
> to a newspaper article I found, they expect less than 2% of all  
> trucks to
> exhibit the problem (which apparently is a lack of undercoating).
> http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/07/toyota-offers-to-buy-back-rusty-t
> acomas/
> So chances are only 1 in 50 that your truck will need a new frame.
>
> I also don't understand why you are "disappointed" with Toyota ...  
> do you
> think they left off the coating on purpose?  Seems to me that they  
> are going
> overboard to ensure that the problem is rectified.
>
> Ironically, the defective trucks were made at the plant in Fremont,  
> CA,
> which was a joint venture between Toyota and GM (according to the  
> article
> above).
>
> -- Randall