Another Toyota Tundra Recall, This Time Driveshafts.

Bloomberg News

Toyota Motor Corp. is recalling 15,600 of its new Tundra pickup trucks to fix a rear driveshaft that could separate, causing the wheels to stop turning.

The recall covers four-wheel-drive versions of the 2007 Tundra, Toyota's Torrance, California-based U.S. sales unit said Friday in an e-mailed statement.

There has been one occurrence of the problem, with no accidents or injuries, the company said.

"The rear propeller shaft in some of the vehicles may not have been sufficiently heat-treated by the supplier," said Bill Kwong, a Toyota spokesman. "If it separates, it would be like the vehicle went into neutral, with a lot of noise."

The recall follows an earlier announcement by Toyota that it would replace V-8 engines in 20 of the 2007 trucks because of defective camshafts.

The large pickup, which went on sale in February, also failed to win top safety scores for all model types in National Highway Traffic Safety Administration tests.

The revised Tundra is Toyota's challenge to the dominance of General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC in U.S. sales of large pickups.

Toyota is second, behind GM, in total U.S. and worldwide sales of cars and trucks.

Notification of owners starts late this month. Toyota said.



They just keep on coming.........Toyota quality :rolleyes:

Just when you thought it couldn't get ANY worse for this truck. Wow. They really dropped the ball on this one... I guess that's what you get for rushing into a market that you have zero experience in. They should have done a little bit better homework.

I smell another T100 fiasco on the way. Tundra is becoming a tainted name.

Could it be, Toyota's reached its limit, on growing market share? Its growing quality problems sure seem to indicate this.

It's obvious Toyota quality is not at all what it once was. Not just with the Tundra but some of their other models, too.

The question, now, is - will they take 15-20 years to fix those problems like GM did, or will they recover more quickly before too many people in the general public start to notice and their hard earned reputation is permanently damaged?

Whats been wrong with GM trucks in 15-20 years??

Whats been wrong with GM trucks in 15-20 years??

I didn't say trucks. I said GM.

I was really just picking at your blanket statement. :p

So what, thats like 10% of the Tundras sold this recall effects?

So what, thats like 10% of the Tundras sold this recall effects?
If they've sold 150,000 of the 4WD model this year.

If they've sold 150,000 of the 4WD model this year.

Ops, missed that. Wow, that makes it even worse. So this would probably be equal in percentage of vehicles cover as some of the GM/Ford/Chrysler recalls?

Like people who know anyhting about a car besides how to drive know how limited this really is, they'll see recall and then stay away, even if it doesn't concern that model.

Also, notice how the article states Toyota blames the issue on a supplier...

Like people who know anything about a car besides how to drive know how limited this really is, they'll see recall and then stay away, even if it doesn't concern that model.

Also, notice how the article states Toyota blames the issue on a supplier...

I just find it interest that, even though the recall is a relative low number, it represents the same percentage of so called problems that are alleged recalls in domestics. Its just the Toyota hasn't built million of these trucks. If they had, we would be see a recall in the millions. Then it would be all over the news....maybe.

You should be unbiased. Toyota didn't build this. A supplier did. Who is this supplier? They could be American.

You should be unbiased. Toyota didn't build this. A supplier did. Who is this supplier? They could be American.

I'm not a Toyota basher. I admire how the company has challenged others to improve the overall quality their products.

BUT, to lay the blame on the suppliers is really a swipe at the Toyota 'System' because in order to be a Toyota supplier, that company must pass stringent Toyota company standards/methodologies.

Let me ask you this, if GM were in the news for a recall, does John Doe out there blame the supplier or GM? I'd say that GM would get the negative publicity. Ditto Toyota... so you can't really split hairs.

The supplier shouldn't get any of the blame. Toyota designed the part, they spec-ed out the part, they selected the supplier, they should have tested the part, and quality control should have cought any problems with the part. It is easy to see where the blame lies.

You should be unbiased. Toyota didn't build this. A supplier did. Who is this supplier? They could be American.

Ehhh, a manufacturer is responsible for the suppliers they use. We outsource products and do strict testing on them before putting them on. It may have been the supplier who made it, but it was TOYOTA that decided to use it; be it saving pennies or whatever.

Put it this way, do you blame all the dash parts suppliers for the ****ty dashes of the 80s/90s GM vehicles? Or do you blame the GM Bean Counters for deciding to cheap out and use those suppliers.

One of the bodymen at work just bought one. 2WD version though. I guess he is safe.....for now.

Put it this way, do you blame all the dash parts suppliers for the ****ty dashes of the 80s/90s GM vehicles? Or do you blame the GM Bean Counters for deciding to cheap out and use those suppliers.

QFTMFT


Now its Toyotas turn..and maybe with all this turnaround and UNBIAS look at Toyota the U.S. makers that we need to survive as a world leader will make a fair run at being the best in the world again...;)

One of the bodymen at work just bought one. 2WD version though. I guess he is safe.....for now.

did you show him the issues this truck is having..and ask him if the commercials had any thing to do with his buying the truck??

Changing it all ,all right.

Ehhh, a manufacturer is responsible for the suppliers they use. We outsource products and do strict testing on them before putting them on. It may have been the supplier who made it, but it was TOYOTA that decided to use it; be it saving pennies or whatever.

Put it this way, do you blame all the dash parts suppliers for the ****ty dashes of the 80s/90s GM vehicles? Or do you blame the GM Bean Counters for deciding to cheap out and use those suppliers.

That's a little bit different scenario ... the ****ty dashes in GM cars were because GM designed them that way, and the suppliers simply built them to spec. The driveshaft failures in the Tundras are because the supplier didn't make them to print. Although either way, I agree the responsibility stops at the automaker.

Also, notice how the article states Toyota blames the issue on a supplier...

While I'm not usually one to defend the Big 3 for the way they do recalls, I will say that the OEM usually takes the blame and doesn't pass the buck onto the proverbal "supplier".

I do see a lot of people in this thread who think that suppliers just build parts to print - that's not the way it works. Suppliers are usually handed a specification, and are asked to meet that spec for the lowest price. In this case, it's unknown to me if the supplier failed to meet the spec (due either to a design flaw or manufacturing defect), or if Toyota generated a spec that is inadequate for the usage of the part.

OEMs do precious little true design and engineering nowadays.

It's obvious Toyota quality is not at all what it once was. Not just with the Tundra but some of their other models, too.

The question, now, is - will they take 15-20 years to fix those problems like GM did, or will they recover more quickly before too many people in the general public start to notice and their hard earned reputation is permanently damaged?

The previous generation Tundra was bad (maybe not this bad) but no one cares.

A guy I work with was shocked nearly to the point of violence when I brought up the tail gate issues- he would hear nothing negative about his new truck. I understand the defense of a major purchase, but it was as if it was a personal attack. He begrudgingly looked it up and was VERY surprised by what he found.

As long as it carries that bloated "T" on the hood, it will sell. The sheep know no better.....

I do see a lot of people in this thread who think that suppliers just build parts to print - that's not the way it works. Suppliers are usually handed a specification, and are asked to meet that spec for the lowest price. In this case, it's unknown to me if the supplier failed to meet the spec (due either to a design flaw or manufacturing defect), or if Toyota generated a spec that is inadequate for the usage of the part.

For something as critical as a driveshaft, I think we can be fairly certain that heat treating is specified by the OEM and not left up to the supplier to figure out. It's a very common process for this type of part. And even if the supplier was just asked to meet a performance spec, if heat treating was not part of the supplier's process I'm sure Toyota would have questioned it during the first article.

The previous generation Tundra was bad (maybe not this bad) but no one cares.

A guy I work with was shocked nearly to the point of violence when I brought up the tail gate issues- he would hear nothing negative about his new truck. I understand the defense of a major purchase, but it was as if it was a personal attack. He begrudgingly looked it up and was VERY surprised by what he found.

As long as it carries that bloated "T" on the hood, it will sell. The sheep know no better.....

The truth hurts sometimes for some people..

I'm not a Toyota basher. I admire how the company has challenged others to improve the overall quality their products.

BUT, to lay the blame on the suppliers is really a swipe at the Toyota 'System' because in order to be a Toyota supplier, that company must pass stringent Toyota company standards/methodologies.

Let me ask you this, if GM were in the news for a recall, does John Doe out there blame the supplier or GM? I'd say that GM would get the negative publicity. Ditto Toyota... so you can't really split hairs.
I'm not talking to "John Doe" I'm talking to people aware of the situation. Most Toyota bashing is based on it being foreign. Based on it not being American. If an American company, and thus American workers are at fault, it sounds as though some are refusing to admit the problem may not have been those foreigners' fault.

Ehhh, a manufacturer is responsible for the suppliers they use. We outsource products and do strict testing on them before putting them on. It may have been the supplier who made it, but it was TOYOTA that decided to use it; be it saving pennies or whatever.

Put it this way, do you blame all the dash parts suppliers for the ****ty dashes of the 80s/90s GM vehicles? Or do you blame the GM Bean Counters for deciding to cheap out and use those suppliers.

....Do you blame Ford for the faulty tires on the Explorers?.....:p

We have to keep our opinion humble.

I'm quite sure those that lost loved ones do.

what a messed up world.

As long as it carries that bloated "T" on the hood, it will sell. The sheep know no better.....
In a real depressing, reality-sucks sort of way, that's beautiful:bow:

Toyota should have performed something we like to call "lot sampling" right along on these (and all) parts.
And they should have been sending SQEs to their suppliers on a regular basis.
It goes without saying that Toyota better check this particular supplier's control plans, capability studies, DFMEAs, PFMEAs.
They also need to go back and check their PPAP part against a current production piece, too. See if anything changed.

But no matter, this is Toyota's fault. They should have been on top of their supplier's quality. If there's one thing I learned over the past years it would be to only trust your suppliers as far as you could throw them.

The supplier shouldn't get any of the blame. Toyota designed the part, they spec-ed out the part, they selected the supplier, they should have tested the part, and quality control should have cought any problems with the part. It is easy to see where the blame lies.

Have you ever worked as an engineer for a tier one supply company? I seriously doubt it from the words you have typed into the keyboard. First off, the customer (that being Toyota) does not spec out everything on the part. They merely give constraints to fit their applications, then leave it to the engineers at the suppier to design the product, process, manufacturing and delivery of the part.

Also, just because your design looks good on paper does not neccesary mean every part that comes out of the machine or heat treat will be to print. What if someone at the supply company selected the wrong temperature or duration that day in heat treat? Or maybe they forgot to run that batch of parts through heat treat all together? Either of these can significantly impact the parts strength.

Regardless of the failure mode of the part, whenever a supplier ships parts to the customer it is assumed the part is to spec. Toyota or Gm should not have to inspect the parts they've purchased.

From what I've heard from a Toyota parts employee, Toyota usually pay their suppliers more [than others] for the purpose of better quality control. This might mean that more parts are 'rejected' by the supplier at production that do not meet Toyota's strict quality standards. These parts are not shipped to Toyota whereas the same part might meet the specifications of other auto makers...

It's a policy that's kind of like 'The fish that John West reject...".

....Do you blame Ford for the faulty tires on the Explorers?.....:p

We have to keep our opinion humble.

An interesting one.

Ford had tyre problems whereas a similar spec tyre for the GM Tahoe was problem free. Claims were that the brand of tyre on Explorer was slightly under-specced by Ford (as a form of cost cutting). GM probably chose a slightly heavier duty tyre?

What would you do for your car, buy a cheap Chinese made tyre or buy a more expensive brand of same spec? And how much 'quality' would you say is built into each tyre? Well the auto maker has the same choice as you do.

tyre?

....Do you blame Ford for the faulty tires on the Explorers?.....:p

We have to keep our opinion humble.

Yes.

And I blame GM for their faulty parts.

And I blame Toyota for their faulty parts.

An OEM DECIDES which supplier to use. If they cheap out with a Chinese Supplier, a Supplier that has a bad reputation to save costs, I'm sorry that's their fault.

There's all different types of suppliers. Good ones have higher prices (typically), ****ty ones are cheap (typically). The OEM decides which one to go with and if they can get away with the "cheaper" quality or not. And sometimes it bites them in the ass.

tyre?


Yes, as a result of the revolutionary war, there are 2 forms of english on the planet. Ameriglish and what everybody else speaks and writes. Did you also know cars come equipped with wings, bonnets and boots?


Reading the snipet from the article suggests to me, that the drive shaft met toyota's spec, but the supplier had a problem with thier manufacturing technique.

::shrugs:: the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Did you also know cars come equipped with wings, bonnets and boots?


Nope, and don't care. :p

How's that for American attitude. :lol:

....Do you blame Ford for the faulty tires on the Explorers?.....:p

We have to keep our opinion humble.

I work in Fords Powertrain Purchasing dept and I personally consider it our fault if a part on the vehicle fails. Toyota can blame the supplier all they want to pass the buck, But it was Toyota who chose to put the faulty part on the vehicle and hence, becomes their problem to deal with

Nope, and don't care. :p

How's that for American attitude. :lol:

lol

Have you ever worked as an engineer for a tier one supply company? I seriously doubt it from the words you have typed into the keyboard. First off, the customer (that being Toyota) does not spec out everything on the part. They merely give constraints to fit their applications, then leave it to the engineers at the suppier to design the product, process, manufacturing and delivery of the part.

Also, just because your design looks good on paper does not neccesary mean every part that comes out of the machine or heat treat will be to print. What if someone at the supply company selected the wrong temperature or duration that day in heat treat? Or maybe they forgot to run that batch of parts through heat treat all together? Either of these can significantly impact the parts strength.

Regardless of the failure mode of the part, whenever a supplier ships parts to the customer it is assumed the part is to spec. Toyota or Gm should not have to inspect the parts they've purchased.

mat,
I disagree with you. As a quality engineer in the automotive industry, it is of utmost importance that manufacturers check their incoming goods. Most, if not all, plants have an incoming inspection lab. This is where incoming parts are measured to make sure they meet the print, maybe run thru a Met lab to make sure they materials meet the properties that the design engineers spec'ed. These labs look at size, relationships, surface finish, roundness, on and on. They'll even look at a part AND it's mating part to make sure the fits are correct and to spec.

You can NEVER assume that incoming parts are good. It will come back and bite you on the ass. Every time.

That why manufacturers rely on lot sampling. Lot sampling is simply taking a sample of incoming material and laying it out completely AND checking it's metallurgical properties. It's the only way manufacturers can protect themselves.

For example: we make transfer cases. GM asks us on a regular basis to send sample t-cases from our line to Milford, where, you guesed it, they test it. Why? To make sure it meets (and keeps meeting) THEIR specifications. And we're a Tier 1 supplier.

They HAVE to check their parts. Plain & simple. And they ARE responsible for their supplier's parts, because, when it's all said and done, they're putting their name on that product, not the suppliers.

You can NEVER assume that incoming parts are good. It will come back and bite you on the ass. Every time.


OEMs do it all the time. And each supplier depends on bringing in stock from lower-tier suppliers without checks.

For example: we make transfer cases. GM asks us on a regular basis to send sample t-cases from our line to Milford, where, you guesed it, they test it. Why? To make sure it meets (and keeps meeting) THEIR specifications. And we're a Tier 1 supplier.


What you describe here is a bit unusual, as most parts that go into auto plants never get any sort of spot-check or additional testing unless there's a problem. My guess is that your products are subject to that sort of testing because the component has historically been a problem for GM.


And they ARE responsible for their supplier's parts, because, when it's all said and done, they're putting their name on that product, not the suppliers.

I agree with this statement 100% - as soon as the OEM purchases the product, it's their problem to live with if a failure occurs. I don't particularly care for Toyota's habit of blaming suppliers.

To me, it's fair enough... in company's never ending quests to drive down supplier costs, this is just what they can expect...companies aren't going to take a bath and reject product that could squeak by, especially when they're being forced to keep overhead down.

Ummm.... check the parts. And require such from your supplier too.
SPC sheets are available on-demand if said supplier is ISO-certified.

Now, back to reality.
Did NOBODY catch the snibbit about ""The rear propeller shaft in some of the vehicles may not have been sufficiently heat-treated by the supplier," said Bill Kwong, a Toyota spokesman. "If it separates, it would be like the vehicle went into neutral, with a lot of noise." "
OMG!!!

1) If a driveshaft separates in ANY way, there is HUGE potential for damage and injury.
2) I can ASSURE you it will make "a lot of noise"! And dents.
3) Never knew land-based vehicles had "propeller shafts". Toyota is always breaking new ground.
4) It would be like neutral alright. And it would probably happen while the owner was pulling a 10,000 lb load up the incline of a teeter-totter, or accelerating out of the way of an on-coming I-beam swinging from a pendulum.

The most significant slap in the face for this issue is that they specifically named the driveshaft and u-joints in one of their earliest commercials as being "bigger than other 1/2-ton trucks". Ditto the brake rotors, and some other parts. TOTALLY embarassing to have your "bigger" part outperformed by smaller ones from GM and Ford, huh? :o

I'm waiting for frame issues to start showing up soon. Or body cracks.

You know I am loving this. :cool:

3) Never knew land-based vehicles had "propeller shafts". Toyota is always breaking new ground.


Proud,
Good post.

Yeah, the technical term for a drive shaft is a propeller shaft or "prop shaft", for short. At least in the automotive driveline business. That's what we call them at NPG and that's what GM's engineers and managers refer to them as.
And in my factory repair manual for my '73 GP, GM refers to the drive shaft as the propeller shaft.

And the yoke on the rear axle; GM refers to it as the "companion flange".

Where they come up with this stuff I have no idea.

I wonder if those trucks have any kind of driveshaft loop?

Luckily for those who may be affected by this issue, it may only be limited to 4WD models. So, when the driveshaft breaks, a smart driver could engage 4WD to get off the road instead of being stuck in traffic.

Does Toyota have anything similar to OnStar? I have a feeling that LOTS of new truck buyers may want that...

Have you ever worked as an engineer for a tier one supply company? I seriously doubt it from the words you have typed into the keyboard. First off, the customer (that being Toyota) does not spec out everything on the part. They merely give constraints to fit their applications, then leave it to the engineers at the suppier to design the product, process, manufacturing and delivery of the part.

Also, just because your design looks good on paper does not neccesary mean every part that comes out of the machine or heat treat will be to print. What if someone at the supply company selected the wrong temperature or duration that day in heat treat? Or maybe they forgot to run that batch of parts through heat treat all together? Either of these can significantly impact the parts strength.

Regardless of the failure mode of the part, whenever a supplier ships parts to the customer it is assumed the part is to spec. Toyota or Gm should not have to inspect the parts they've purchased.

I work at a Tier 1 supplier.

First, powertrain parts are almost universally spec'd by the OEM - NOT THE SUPPLIERS.

You'll find that other parts (body interior, etc...) tend to be spec'd in some part by the supplier, but powertrain stuff invariably is engineered by the OEM.

Heat treatment on a part is spec'd in a number of ways, generally with lot testing up front and then sampling later on. The article is unclear as to whether the heat treatment was improperly SPECIFIED, or if it was improperly PERFORMED. There's a significant difference.

Either way, quality is ultimately the OEM's responsibility. The OEM specifies the required testing and controls criteria, approves the DFMEA, the PFMEA, the PPAP, the DVP&R, the Run at Rate and all of the associated documentation.

Supplier issue or not, it's Toyota's responsiblity to catch it just like it is for GM or Ford.

Thats a good point about the driveshaft commercial....I forgot all about that.

Changing it all :lol:

What next? Is the cab going to fall off?

From what I've heard from a Toyota parts employee, Toyota usually pay their suppliers more [than others] for the purpose of better quality control. This might mean that more parts are 'rejected' by the supplier at production that do not meet Toyota's strict quality standards. These parts are not shipped to Toyota whereas the same part might meet the specifications of other auto makers...

It's a policy that's kind of like 'The fish that John West reject...".

B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T.

Toyota doesn't pay any significant amount more for their parts than anyone else does.

We sell to them all.

I work in Fords Powertrain Purchasing dept and I personally consider it our fault if a part on the vehicle fails. Toyota can blame the supplier all they want to pass the buck, But it was Toyota who chose to put the faulty part on the vehicle and hence, becomes their problem to deal with

AMEN.

BTW - if I may comment... The word on the street is that Ford is the best purchasing department around where steel is concerned - they've got the best feel for the market, and do the most extensive homework.

Kudos to you guys.

OEMs do it all the time. And each supplier depends on bringing in stock from lower-tier suppliers without checks.



What you describe here is a bit unusual, as most parts that go into auto plants never get any sort of spot-check or additional testing unless there's a problem. My guess is that your products are subject to that sort of testing because the component has historically been a problem for GM.



I agree with this statement 100% - as soon as the OEM purchases the product, it's their problem to live with if a failure occurs. I don't particularly care for Toyota's habit of blaming suppliers.

Well, first...

Control plans dictate a given interval and amount of parts for testing.

The OEMs dictate what's on the control plans.

At a minimum, you'll have to recertify fully every year.


Toyota is 100% fully invested in the idea that if you can't blame the customers, blame the suppliers.

Toyota is 100% fully invested in the idea that if you can't blame the customers, blame the suppliers.

You said it all right there brother!

Owner doesn't know how to use a floormat properly.
Owner does not know how to put correct oil in crankcase.
Owner doesn't know difference between gas pedal and brake pedal.
Supplier did not heat treat parts.
Supplier did not inspect camshafts.
Supplier did not weld tailgates, but used puty instead... NO WAIT - that press release has not gone out yet. Sorry.

Guess we should never throw the BS flag on Toy because they never loaded an ATV into their truck during millions of miles of "testing".

<Giggles, and walks back out into plant to "inspect" parts going to carmakers...>

Supplier did not weld tailgates, but used puty instead... NO WAIT - that press release has not gone out yet. Sorry.


I'd copyright that one if I were you.

You could make some cashola when Toyota tries to use it.

Owner doesn't know difference between gas pedal and brake pedal.


I have an 05 Tacoma with that problem, annoys the hell out of me! (I do know the difference between the gas and brake pedals :p )

The tailgate issue hasn't come up on it because it's basically my fiance's truck, nothing more than a mall cruiser. I think the heaviest load it's had in it's tiny, plastic lined bed was a TV.

Maybe those monumental brakes are overworking the shafts, lol.

I work at a Tier 1 supplier.

First, powertrain parts are almost universally spec'd by the OEM - NOT THE SUPPLIERS.

You'll find that other parts (body interior, etc...) tend to be spec'd in some part by the supplier, but powertrain stuff invariably is engineered by the OEM.


This is the way that things historically have been done, but a lot has changed with the increased amount of outsourcing to suppliers.


The article is unclear as to whether the heat treatment was improperly SPECIFIED, or if it was improperly PERFORMED. There's a significant difference.

Agreed completely.


Either way, quality is ultimately the OEM's responsibility. The OEM specifies the required testing and controls criteria, approves the DFMEA, the PFMEA, the PPAP, the DVP&R, the Run at Rate and all of the associated documentation.

Once again, I agree (and I think I've stated this explictly a couple of times in this thread). Blaming an unnamed supplier is a cowardly act, and Toyota seems to have an adversion to self-criticism that's unrivaled among automakers.

The customer went to a Toyota dealer, not a ASC, Delphi, BASF, or insert your import suppler here dealer. No matter where the parts and components are sourced or manufactured, Toyota should have and exhibit ultimate responsibility for their customer's vehicle issues. Or at least they should.

Though in today's society, we can't take ownership of any wrong doing or mishap, thus it must be someone else's fault.

...Though in today's society, we can't take ownership of any wrong doing or mishap, thus it must be someone else's fault.

THAT'S how Toyota moves forward.....

:rolleyes:

Though in today's society, we can't take ownership of any wrong doing or mishap, thus it must be someone else's fault.

If that isn't true i don't know what is. Taking responsibility for one's actions is a thing of the past. Just hire an attorney or blame the other guy. What happened to the lesson we are taught as youngsters about George Washington and the Apple tree. A myth true, but a valuable lesson.

THAT'S how Toyota moves forward.....

:rolleyes:

Apparently, for Toyota, moving forward means pole-vaulting over your competition - courtesy of a driveshaft failure.

^^^
:lol:
It's why we install safety loops on ours...
All of our (International) propshafts come in on skids, pre-painted and line set numbered to corresponding vehicles.( I used to install them.)
And I see, and flag down, shafts that are damaged, even balance weights loose or falling off...and we do get them, even from DANA, well, their sub contractors probably.
I don't believe we have a way to test them at assembly plants, for weld strength, or heat treatment, just visual weld inspection etc..
And if we pull one and send it off, that vehicle must sit in limbo.

Where was ISO? or QC?

Apparently, for Toyota, moving forward means pole-vaulting over your competition - courtesy of a driveshaft failure.

:lol:

I would pay damn good money to see that

could be thier next commercial...

" How do you make a 1/2 ton pickup vault 20 feet in the air..."

"oooohhhhhh...S#!T"

B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T.

Toyota doesn't pay any significant amount more for their parts than anyone else does.

We sell to them all.

Thank you for confirming that... I'll be more cautious when I speak to my Toyota friend next time. He is biased (a little) but working within spare parts I thought he might be telling the truth.

But haven't suppliers indicated that it's easier to deal with the Asian brands than with the domestics? Why would that be the case?

But haven't suppliers indicated that it's easier to deal with the Asian brands than with the domestics? Why would that be the case?

In general, and I'm only stating it like it is, they are easier to deal with in some respects. In others, they aren't.

Good points:
1) They're generally reasonable about accounting for increases in raw material prices not due to the fault of the supplier.

2) They understand the value equation a little differently, and don't tend to re-engineer everything every product development cycle.

3) Once you have a relationship with them, it's relatively easy to maintain that relationship - they want stability in their supply base.

4) You are not always having your components sent worldwide for market test activities with other suppliers who most likely cannot build the component in question - meaning that you aren't fighting off bull**** quotes from knuckleheads who couldn't build the parts in the first place.


Bad Points:
1) They don't engineer ANYTHING in the US. Everything goes back to Japan for approval, which takes forever.

2) They won't make changes in their own best interest. Meaning that if we come up with a product improvement or cost improvement, you can't get them to pull the trigger - mostly because they don't engineer things in the US and approval from Japan never comes.

3) In our commodities, they universally source the cheapest piece of **** design in the industry. It's literally awful - it's dirt cheap and you can tell. Surprisingly enough, Chrysler will spend $.50 for an improved twidget in our commodity that yields a benefit for their customer.



IMHO, in order, the best customers to deal with right now are:

1) Ford
2) Any German OEM
3) Chrysler
4) Nissan
5) Toyota
6) Honda
...
...
...


The above is my personal opinion, and only my personal opinion.

I work at a Tier 1 supplier.

First, powertrain parts are almost universally spec'd by the OEM - NOT THE SUPPLIERS.

You'll find that other parts (body interior, etc...) tend to be spec'd in some part by the supplier, but powertrain stuff invariably is engineered by the OEM.

Either way, quality is ultimately the OEM's responsibility. The OEM specifies the required testing and controls criteria, approves the DFMEA, the PFMEA, the PPAP, the DVP&R, the Run at Rate and all of the associated documentation.

I dunno how it works at TOYOTA, but at Ford, we will generally have a design competition, where the suppliers are told the necessary requirements needed for the part and are then given the ability to provide their most cost effective design. To me it sounds like someone at Toyota found a cheap supplier and thought the part would work, apparently not. its just another part of this car that is underbuilt, first the cams, then the tailgates, now the driveshafts

You know...The Tundra is new territory for Toyota. I.e. Pickup trucks. And with all the issues they're having - it seems as though they just put "truck-parts" together, slapped a badge on(which, obviously solves and/or prevents all problems:p), and sold it..........

****, GM specs the cardboard they want it shipped in, lol. (which is what I sell to a local accumulator plant) And I know so because any good cardboard salesman knows the dinosaurs have moved away from bursting strength to edge crush...... Cept the General :D

But if its what the 'engineers' want...

You know...The Tundra is new territory for Toyota. I.e. Pickup trucks. And with all the issues they're having - it seems as though they just put "truck-parts" together, slapped a badge on(which, obviously solves and/or prevents all problems:p), and sold it..........

I have to disagree in that 'Yota SMALL trucks were the bench mark for a long time. The old 4cyl R22 powered trucks were great "little" trucks (if you could get past the rust).

The new "full-size" Tundra was an attempt to penetrate a market that the domestics have owned. I can fully appreciate the desire to enter new markets and be competitive, but sell a product on it's merits not the perceived reputation.

Due to the domestics myopic view for years, Toyota has the resources at hand to develop an excellent product, plain and simple.

They produced a near-miss POS.

With that said, I hope the domestics are taking note because Japan Inc. doesn't take a back-seat for long in most things if given the chance.

I don't like Toyota :p Good luck to them in now being in the public eye. It's not as easy as it looks.

I found out that it was the supplier's problem....I know where the parts were made.

I found out that it was the supplier's problem....I know where the parts were made.

Does not matter to me if its the ginger bread maker..its still Toyota and the Tundra thats failing..