I just turned 90K miles on my 2006 Tacoma Xtra Cab 4X4 with a 4 cyl. the only thing ever replaced on this truck was a new clutch, brake pads, front rotors (guy driving it does not know how to drive) and tires.

It is a fleet truck and we use it heavily, it gets 23MPG like clockwork.

I love my Tacoma and FJ, both have high miles for their age (60K on the 2007 FJ) and neither give me a single problem.

Good luck with your Taco your good to go now for another 200K miles.

Nice pics. If that were my truck I'd replace or repaint or powder coat a few of the rusty things that they didn't replace (shocks, exhaust, etc) just to get that all-new truck look. You are so close already.

Or just spray them with that clear stuff that converts rust to that blackish whatever... primer? Primable surface?

I don't remember what it's called, but I've got some of it. :D

good tip. thanks.

never heard of it. if you find out what it's called, let me know. i'm all about making things look better with minimal amount of, time, effort and money. after-all, i have a 1 and a 2.5 yr old. :)

I'm pretty sure this is what I have (probably got it at Autozone or Advance Auto)...

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1254428635.jpg

The way I remember the directions, it tells you to hit the rusty areas with a wire brush briefly to knock off the high spots, then blow or wipe off the area to remove the excess, then spray on. It goes on clear and starts to turn the rust black fairly quickly.

Wait a certain amount of time (24 hrs., I think) then paint. Or not.

It is available in a bottle so you can brush it on, too.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0015DMJZA/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lp o-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B001QGKFPM&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX 0DER&pf_rd_r=0H4BHH5873X8NA69SVW4

Depending on how much you need to do, that might be better... otherwise you might get high under there with all the overspray and fumes.
:eek:

That's basically like gun bluing in a can i think. It does work, my cousin has used it in the past.

Yeah, but it ain't as purty as gun bluing. :D

YouTube - Metal RustCon 71709

The frames were provided by Dana and made.........in America. They were not built to Toyota specs, that's where this entire issue came from.

There's MANY American cars that have systemic issues that aren't ever admitted to or repaired by the makers. Toyota really stepped up by replacing entire trucks in some cases, or fixing the problem. I'd love to get all new bushings, mounts, etc for free.

My '91 Land Cruiser has 193k. Records since new. The two most expensive repairs were a fuel pump at 150k and a water pump yesterday.

Tacomas are made in the USA, about 5 miles from here.

I bought a new Toyota 4x4 SR5 in 1985 and within about 6 months the chrome was peeling off the rear bumper...and that was in Southern California. They replaced the whole rear bumper with no issue.

I think they are great trucks and thought they would of had the whole rust issue fixed by now.

I have 5 American full size trucks with no issues of frame rust.

so how much snow and winter salt are in Kentucky these days?

Proof please

well as a person who works for a company that does work for Toyota, I can tell you that they (toyota) design and specify what the job is done with, however it is up to us to procure said items and make the component to that spec....Dana blew it, they cheaped out on inferior metal(corrosion protection wise) OR their sub blew it.....whatever you think, THAT is what happened.
We had a similar experience with Toyota recently with the TRD exhausts we make, the tip was specified as a certain material, it turned out that the material we used was below par and it "browned " with heat....not something a polkished stainless tip should do. end result? we recalled and replaced the effected systems (at GREAT expense) and had to cover the actual wararnty costs for replacement systems to be installed on the kits in the field....

We get some snow and a few salt days. The snow isn't too bad around here like the people further north get.

go drive a tacoma of any year (had an '01 myself).

there is NO BETTER SMALL TRUCK ON THE PLANET. none that even compare. none.

ditto earlier style Tundras (just change 'small' to 'not quite full size').

I just turned 50K on my '06 Taco and while there is some rust on the frame it is not an issue in any way.

Long term, I would trust a Toyota truck any day over anything from the big three. That said, if I needed a FULL SIZE truck for work every day to beat the hell out of in contruction type work, I would probably buy a Chevy or Ford and just fix anything that breaks. I can't imagine getting in a high dollar new Toyota Tundra with greasy or muddy clothes and throwing busted up concrete into the bed. Chevy and Ford build a pretty decent full size truck but IMO, Toyota has them beat in the smaller trucks when it comes to minimal maintenance required and long term reliability.

There is incoming QA that should catch this stuff. Toyota blew it too.

George

I would be in the market for a newer Toyota Tacoma, if it had not become a full size truck that's not available with 4cyl in a 4x4. The way they went, I might as well keep driving my old beater full size. No gas savings there ...

George

My '99 4 cylinder 4X4 Tacoma got about the same gas mileage as a 6 cylinder Tacoma 4x4 of the same vintage..... around 20 mpg..... less if I beat on it. The 4 cyl did everything I needed it to, but the 6 cyl would have probably been a tad smoother and had a bit more power for passing all while getting the same mileage.

Tim,

Good point. Size of the new Tacoma still remains an issue. Smaller and lighter will give you better fuel economy. Also, a smaller truck will go better off road and clear brush better in the woods. You want the full size guys to beat back the bushes, so you can clear it without scratches in the compact truck. ;)

George

Looking at the pictures, maybe spraying the entire underside, box sections and seams with a wax-type anti-corrosion treatment might help?

Wurth make some for internal box-section, inner doors etc. and one for external frame, suspenion use.

Toyota Investigation Underway For 2000-01 Tundra Rust Issues - Auto News - Truck Trend

From Tim's thread on his Tacoma replacement:
This was pulled from a Toyota Blog:
March 07, 2008

Living Up to Our Committment

Rust, as they say, never sleeps. It certainly never sleeps in the states where road salt is in heavy use, and we’ve recently become aware of additional evidence of that fact.

We’ve received reports that on a small number of model-year 1995 to 2000 Tacomas, excessive corrosion of the frame has caused perforation of the metal. The reason for this, it appears, is that the frames of some of the 813,000 vehicles built during this time-frame may not have adequate corrosion protection.

As a result, when they’re exposed to severe environmental conditions, especially in states where salt is used for the de-icing of roads, these frames may develop corrosion that goes beyond the normal surface rust that’s commonly found on metal after years of exposure – and in this case, these trucks are from eight to 13 years old.

Because of our oft-stated commitment to standing behind our products, we’re extending the rust-perforation warranty covering these trucks for a period of 15 years from each vehicle’s original date of purchase, with no mileage limitation, for corrosion damage that results in perforation of the vehicle’s frame material. Owners of these Tacomas need not be the original owners. Even if you bought your Tacoma second- or third-hand, it’s covered by this extended warranty.

Here’s how this will work: Starting in the middle of March and continuing over a period of time, owners of 1995-2000 Tacomas will be sent letters informing them about this issue. If you find rust perforation on your vehicle, have your truck inspected by a Toyota dealer.

If frame corrosion damage is confirmed by an inspection at a Toyota dealership, at Toyota's option, we will either repair the vehicle or repurchase it. No matter the vehicle’s actual condition, it will be valued as a vehicle in excellent condition. If the inspection reveals no rust perforation, the 15-year warranty will remain in force.

This is worth underscoring: This is not a recall. Rather, it’s an example of our commitment to the durability of our products and to our owners. These are older trucks and rust is a fact of life, especially where road salt is used, but that’s not what’s important. What’s important is that we take care of our owners. We just thought you should know that.


- Mike Michels, Corporate Communications


There's a few more out there if you Google. The only frames being replaced were Dana built frames on the Tundra and Tacoma. The 4Runner, which is made in Japan, was not recalled.

Built by Dana. But sounds like the problem is failed ecoat? Ecoat (even within the manufacturing plant) is rarely operated by the plant owner, they are contracted out to the paint companies now.

GM now ecoats and then wax dips their truck frames.

GM has been wax dipping their full-size truck frames for several years, about a decade. It's pretty thick, can't scrape it off with your fingernail.

So, Matt, you're saying that this isn't Toyota's fault, but Dana's fault. I didn't gather that from Toyota's official PR statement you quoted. But you've researched it.

Toyota doesn't make mistakes, rather, when someone else screws up their product they humbly apologize without placing blame, and then make things right. Correct?

did my first pig hunt a few days ago in my new truck...the crossbow guys cleaned house..i was "hiking" again. i did make multiple stalks. truck did great.

to the OP. how is the frame working out? any new rattles and squeaks? truck looks great! i would rhino line the wheel wells...

I have done my share of armed hiking in A-31 / D-11 archery already. Just this morning again ... ;)

I have no doubt the new Tacoma is a great vehicle. I'll be happy to ride shotgun on your next insider pigorama. ;)

George

165k miles on my '02 silverado

20k+ towing a 22'x8'7' trailer from Los Angeles to Vegas, Los Angeles to Butt'n willo'

I burnt the paint off of the diff' housing pulling it up the grapevine 80 mph with the trailer!

Things that have failed. Parking brake release cable, The tailgate relase housing, the tailgate limit straps (made in china, covered under recall)
Radio knob fell off, And the fuel pump at 147k miles.

I towed a load so heavy once that the bed was loaded down to the bump stops plus it was towing a trailer that was bowing under the weight of the load. I drove it from LAX area to the orange county line. I was so concerned about the weight of the load that I made sure not to drive over any of the freeway overpasses thinking that I couldn't stop at the bottom!

The truck still has it's oe brake pads and rotors!

And my 1999 Explorer needed extensive transmission work after 80,000 miles without any towing while my first Toyota, a 1980 SR5 ran for 200,000 miles without any failures while being used to haul firewood. I think the point here is that Toyota is making good after a serious screw up somewhere along their manufacturing chain. Ford never offered me any good faith repairs.

I'm reading between the lines of the published information. It appears they still buy frames from Dana, perhaps they resisted the temptation to throw them under the bus?

As an engineer in a manufacturing environment that utilizes outsourcing, it's nearly a daily event. A supplier provides us with a disclosure stating that they failed to meet our specs in some way. It keeps our QA department very busy. It appears that the rustproofing was not up to Toyota standards, as other Toyota body-on-frame products do not have these issues. I'd be willing to bet that the rust treatment is Dana applied prior to leaving their factory, I doubt they ship raw steel frames to Toyota.

My bias my be showing, but yours is as well. In this case we know that someone made a mistake contributing to issues with a Toyota product. They are 100% making it right. I seriously doubt if you would get that kind of coverage from an out of warranty 8 year old domestic truck. My experience is that the domestics poorly support their products when they nearly new and under warranty.

So for FIVE years their QA department must have been sleeping.....

I have anti-bias. It is a pet peeve of mine when people think Toyota can do no wrong, but the Americans are all crap.

Toyota produced their highest quality cars from 1986-1996. Since then they have been spotty (for Toyota).

As long as we're quoting Toyota PR, here is what Toyota's CEO said October 2, 2009:

“We are grasping for salvation,” Toyoda said, “Toyota has become too big and distant from its customers.”

I believe they started with the GMT-800 hydro-formed frames.

Fair enough. But there's very good reason why one company is doing well, while the other was just saved by the government. Our 2004 4Runner was the best car I've ever owned, with absolutely zero mechanical issues over 65k. The Pelican that bought it is well past 100k with zero issues. I sold our 2004 SRX at 65k after multiple problems, as well as other growing issues such as leaks. Each company has earned a reputation for a perfectly good reason.

As for the QA issue, if there was a process breakdown at the supplier Toyota very well may have not had any idea. With an established supplier, after establishing processes and working through first article inspections, most of the QA inspection is done at the supplier. This is how we do it in the aerospace industry, where we are required by the FAA to maintain a high degree of control over our parts and suppliers. I'm sure the auto industry has much lighter requirements. So yes, it's very possible that Toyota had no idea until they started seeing rusty frames.

I used to buy american made, actually still have a few, but in 95 i bought a 4-runner (best rig i've ever owned) and ever since it's been Toyota's for me. I've had 2 4-runners (still have the 95) and a Tacoma. All i've ever done is change the oil and grease,gas and air filters, none of them have ever been back to the dealer for anything.

Yes, it's called currency manipulation

But seriously, Toyota is not doing so well right now. They've asked for help here and in Japan. They started with a bigger pile of cash, and without the albatross of UAW legacy.

And I will be the first to admit that the early/mid-nineties engineered Toyotas have world-class quality and deserve their reputation.

nope. so far so good. i've driven it maybe 300 miles so far. no rattles at all. no squeaks at all, which i am very happy about. the only difference i notice is the sound i mentioned earlier. i hear a little more engine noise, and it appears to be coming from the area where the shifter is. i'm not talking a great deal of noise. if i put the radio on, i wouldn't notice it at all. i don't know why it's different, but it is. my wife drove the truck one day to work and I asked her about it, and she agreed, it did seem a little louder.
toyota asked that I bring it back for another quick inspection after a few hundred miles just to make sure everything still looks good. i need to make that appointment now... i'll be sure to pick their brains on the increased engine noise and see what they think about it. it's not a big deal at all...i'm just curious.

They did the same thing in the 90s. The 3.0L V6 truck engines had an issue with the head gaskets. The 1988 (first year) were fine, but somewhere in 1989 the company that supplied the gaskets changed formulas, without telling Toyota. Those gaskets failed at an alarmingly high rate after about 60K miles. So, years later, suddenly, Toyota ha a rash of blown engines coming in, all from head gasket failure (the engines were otherwise bulletproof). They proceeded to contact every owner they could find, and tell them to come in. They then did whatever it took to give those owners working trucks, going so far as to completely replace the engine. FREE.
Even to this day, you can call them with your vin to see if the work was done, and in some extreme cases, they will still do the engine replacement.