While this is not the news that the owners of Tundras with frame rust were hoping for, Toyota seems to be moving in positive direction in regards to frame rust complaints on first-gen Tundras. Before, Toyota seemed to blame frame supplier Dana for this issue. Now, it seems that Toyota has determined Dana is not responsible for frame rust problems on the first-gen Tundra.

This is an interesting distinction that, when combined with other facts, could indicate Toyota will take action…but it’s still very early.

Tundra frame rust.

According to a story in the Automotive News, Toyota seems to believe that:

1. Frame supplier Dana is not the source of the rust problem.
2. NHTSA is likely to expand their investigation of Tundra frame rust to a full engineering analysis.

Much of this is based on statement by Toyota spokesman Brian Lyons, who is also the main point of contact at Toyota for the unintended acceleration issue.

Here are the statements made by Lyons to the Automotive News:

It is too early to speculate what we will do for Tundra…They’re [NHTSA] only looking at one specific portion of the frame — the cross member that supports the spare tire — not the entire frame. [Lyons confirmed that Dana built the Tundra frames but that no connection exists between the Tacoma and Tundra frame rust issues] The frames were built to a different design and at different plants…so this is not apples to apples. [Toyota does not blame Dana]. Ultimately, this is our vehicle and our responsibility.

There are two interesting notes here.

1. Note that Lyons says “what we will do” rather than “if we will do.” It’s a minor distinction to be sure, but hopefully it’s a positive indicator.
2. Combined with previous statements, it sounds as if Toyota has begun to determine the financial impact of a potential fix. Why else would they go out of their way to say that Dana is not responsible?

It could be that Lyons is simply trying to clear Dana’s name after Toyota made a couple of statements earlier in the year that all but said Dana was responsible. Here’s the first statement that indicated Dana was to blame, released nearly six months ago (see Toyota Indicates First-gen Tundra Frame Rust problem):

…using the information obtained from the Tacoma, we pro-actively investigate other vehicles of similar design and production elements. In doing so, our investigations have indicated that there are a small number of complaints for a similar condition on 2000 and 2001 Tundras.

This was Toyota’s very first statement on the frame rust issue, and it indicates Toyota knew they were going to have a problem because of Dana’s production mistakes on the Tacoma. This quote from a PickupTrucks.com article further supports this idea:

According to Lyons, 1995-2004 Tacoma pickups and 2000-01 Tundras shared the same frame supplier: Toledo, Ohio-based Dana Holding Corporation. In investigating the Tacoma’s rust complaints, Toyota discovered that Dana hadn’t properly prepped Tacoma frames to resist corrosion

Today, it seems clear that Toyota has made an about-face in regards to frame supplier Dana.

In addition, PickupTrucks.com reports today that

Toyota has been studying the [frame rust] issue for more than six months and has repurchased several Tundras from owners as part of its investigation process, though no formal repair program has been put in place

This information is supported by rumors of repairs and replacements found on popular Tundra forums (as well as reports that have been conveyed to us directly). It could very well be that these moves were for investigative purposes only, but our belief is that Toyota would not be buying back vehicles unless they were seriously contemplating a major fix. Here’s why:

1. Buying back vehicles is a good way to test the efficacy of warranty repairs as well as determining scrap value and potential liability.
2. Clearing Dana of financial responsibility might be corporate courtesy, but it could also be viewed as another indicator that Toyota is putting a price tag on a fix.
3. Toyota’s belief that NHTSA will expand their investigation is a sign that Toyota is not expecting this problem to go away on it’s own.

Let’s hope that these moves are indicators that Toyota is preparing to make a financial commitment to fix this problem.

Read user reviews of Tundra Accessories.

Here are 5 “best of Craigslist” posts that have at least something to do with cars. Some important points before we continue:

1. There will not be any apologies for offensive language. If you read from this point forward and click on the links, you WILL see something offensive. Such is the beast.
2. None of the holier-than-thou “I ride a bicycle and I’m better than you” rants that are so popular on Craigslist made it on our list. Sorry. (OK, not really sorry. Screw those people.)
3. Keep the conversation going. Feel free to post a link to a best of Craigslist post that’s automotive in nature in the comments

Best of Craigslist posts with an automotive flavor

Number 1: One BAD Personalized Plate

How can one person get 50 parking tickets, each one for a different car…the answer? They have a personalized plate that’s simply “NV.”

Number 2: Rant For Anyone Who Works In The Auto Business

If you work at a dealership, repair shop, or any sort of retail repair type business, this rant from an oven repairman will make you bust a gut. Best part:

We get 50 or more broken oven calls in the few days leading up to turkey day and santa day. We get one or two any other week. Ovens don’t collectively go on strike. Most people just admit their sh*t has been broken since the Clinton administration, but some of you think you can bullsh*t me.

Read it – seriously.

Number 3: Traffic Rants

There are dozens of rants about traffic, but a couple stand out. First, we have an introduction to rush hour traffic – “definitions and how to for beginners.” It’s profane, but it’s a nice warm up for the guide to driving in Phoenix (that’s FEE-NICKS).

Number 4: Cool Story About Redemption

Next time you think you’re having a bad day, read this story about a homeless guy getting back on his feet after a dealership took a chance on him and hired him to be a detailer.

Number 5: People Who Hate Annoying Car Ads

Craigslist is chock-full of classified ads for cars, and some of them are hilariously ridiculous. This list of the most irritating car ads hits a home run with this line:

3. The Detached-From-Reality Dipsh*t. “One owner 1986 Corolla. 234K miles. Needs a front bumper and headliner droops. Radiator leaks and needs alignment. $2300 FIRM.” Hey meatstick, one owner or 10 owners, your sh*t is old, worn-out, and worth $300.

Nice.

Finally, if you’re posting an ad on Craigslist trying to sell your car, give this list of classified car ad tips a gander (and remember a tacometer is a Mexican dish, not a gauge).

Any best of craigs ads we missed?

Read user reviews of Tundra Accessories.

Unfortunately for Toyota, rumors of rampant incidents of unintended acceleration have been irresponsibly perpetuated by news organizations more concerned about ratings than facts. The L.A. Times has been particularly aggressive in their efforts to slander Toyota and stoke public fears. Two “news stories” have printed un-substantiated opinions as fact and used incendiary imagery to stoke fear in the hearts of Toyota owners.

While the L.A. Times isn’t alone in this practice, they’ve been leading the charge. Here’s what Toyota owners need to know.

NOTE: It should be stated clearly for all to hear that our blog isn’t living up to any high journalism standards. We were completely and totally wrong about the 2009 Tundra diesel and the Tundra hybrid…embarrassingly so. When we accuse other journalists of being “sloppy,” it shouldn’t carry a lot of weight. Still, the truth must be told.

When Toyota announced their voluntary recall in September, two reporters (we’ll call them V and B) began gathering data to see if they could embarrass Toyota somehow. Two weeks later, they published this story with the headline “Toyota’s runaway-car worries may not stop at floor mats.” The article hints that Toyota’s electronic control systems might be faulty, a very scary prospect that probably got their article a lot of page views…yet 6 NHTSA investigations have determined unequivocally that there’s no problem with Toyota’s throttle control systems.

Yes, that’s 6 separate investigations that determined Toyota’s throttle control system is completely safe. Yet the L.A. Times asks “Might a vehicle’s complex electronic features make it hard for drivers to react quickly when accelerating out of control?”

Obviously V and B have not driven one of the vehicles in question, because there’s nothing complicated about the gearshift, start button, or the function of the pedals. The only complexity is in the system behind these things…which is where the slander comes in. “Complex electronic features” insinuates there’s some sort of bug in Toyota’s throttle control system. Not true.

Additionally, many of the accusations leveled at Toyota in this article advocate that a person in a panic situation might not be able to control their vehicle. No kidding?! Panicked people aren’t rational. There’s no way to “panic proof” an automobile, and it’s not a reasonable standard when it comes to assessing safety.

V and B didn’t stop with the “runaway” accusations. Two and a half weeks later they published this story, which claims that Toyota and NHTSA are irresponsibly ignoring “1,000’s” of cases of runaway Toyotas. While the reporters make some interesting points, it’s hard to give V & B a lot of credit for being objective when they lead with this image:

The lead image for the L.A. Times second "runaway Toyota" smear story (click the image to see the original).

Talk about a smear job! That picture and the headline “Runaway Toyota cases ignored” make it look like a Toyota will plunge off a nearby cliff at a moment’s notice. Ridiculous.

It’s true that NHTSA and Toyota systematically exclude complaints without investigation, and the process may need a review. However, accusing NHTSA and Toyota of negligence in their response is irresponsible and incendiary. Here’s why:

• NHTSA (and Toyota) HAVE to figure out a way to disqualify some complaints as a matter of practicality. With tens of thousands of claims filed with NHTSA every year for every make and model on the road, NHTSA can’t investigate each and every complaint.

• Not all complaints are equal. Some people file a complaint with NHTSA because they really have a problem to report, and others complain because they’re angry with the manufacturer, because they’re trying to secure some sort of financial benefit, or because they’re trying to avoid prosecution. After all, it’s much easier to say “my car accelerated on it’s own” that it is to say “I was negligent.”

Specifically, let’s look at what types of claims were thrown out:

• Cases of unintended acceleration sustained for more than 1 second. Why? Because, according to NHTSA and their decades of investigation experience, most of these cases are the result of driver panic.

• Cases of vehicles that couldn’t stop. Why? Because, according to a NHTSA study from 2004, most vehicle brake systems can stop an out-of-control vehicle with ease. If there’s a point to be made in the L.A. Times article, it’s here. The results of the study are (obviously) not correct.

• Cases where the complaint isn’t specific as to the “cause” of the problem, meaning the owner didn’t register a specific enough complaint. When owners aren’t specific about their problem, their complaints are ignored.

So what complaints does NHTSA listen to? Complaints from safety experts, police investigators, auto repair professionals, and specific complaints that match an existing pattern. Since the year 2000, NHTSA has investigated Toyotas for unintended acceleration 9 times…seems like NHTSA is doing their job.

V and B do make some valid points. NHTSA’s processes could probably stand some improvement and Toyota needs to upgrade their vehicle computer systems. However, there’s no disputing that these articles are designed to scare people, and for that we say BOO.

Read user reviews of Tundra Accessories.

According to a limited and (admittedly) flawed NHTSA study, hybrid cars seem to hit twice as many pedestrians as non-hybrids in certain low-speed maneuvers. The reason? Hybrids are nearly silent when operating in electric-only mode.

Are hybrid cars REALLY stalking pedestrians? NHTSA says "probably"

Specifically, the study states that:

…[when] a vehicle is slowing or stopping, backing up, or entering or leaving a parking space, a statistically significant effect was found due to engine type. The HEV [hybrid electric vehicle] was two times more likely to be involved in a pedestrian crash in these situations than was an ICE [internal combustion engine] vehicle…the incidence rate of bicyclist crashes involving HEVs [hyrbids] was significantly higher…

The data that this report is based on was only taken from a small number of states (13) and over the course of a relatively short time period (8 years). Therefore, the study is far from conclusive (and NHTSA has said as much).

But do we really need a study to “prove” that hybrids hit more people? Doesn’t it seem sort of self evident? Ask yourself the following questions:

1. When walking, do you rely upon your ears to alert you to vehicles outside of your peripheral vision?
2. Have you ever honked your horn when backing out of a low visibility parking space, pulling into an alley, or coming around a corner in a parking garage?
3. If you’ve driven a hybrid, have you ever accidentally “snuck up” on a pedestrian and scared them?

Chances are good that you can answer yes to 2 or 3 of these questions…here’s why.

You’re a human who uses your EARS. Hearing is one of two really important senses that people use while driving. It’s why our cars have horns. It’s why ambulances have sirens. It’s why it’s illegal in most places to drive your car while wearing headphones. It’s why there are laws against really loud stereos and exhaust systems.

While hybrid advocates are quick to point out that the study results could be explained by poor visibility, and that the study data is significantly flawed, (and they’re right), do we really care? Isn’t it obvious that hybrids don’t make noise and that as a result some pedestrians get hit?

There are three options going forward:

1. Mandate that hybrids make noise via some sort of regulation.
2. Conduct a better study.
3. Do nothing.

Option 3 is probably off the table, but just for grins let’s consider it. While hybrids were 50% more likely to hit pedestrians according to the flawed study, the total incident rate was less than 1% of all vehicle crashes. In other words, as bad as it could be, it pales in comparison to other problems. Animal strikes (cows, deer, elk, etc.) injure FAR more people than hybrids hitting people in parking lots. Maybe our energy is better spent elsewhere.

Option 2 is less likely. Most people aren’t going to critically evaluate the current study, so they’re probably never going to learn that it’s flawed and that a better study is needed. Such is politics in America.

Option 1 seems most likely. It’s very easy for NHTSA and/or Congress to instruct auto manufacturers to add a noise maker to hybrids while operating in electric mode.

What do you think – which option makes the most sense? Is there an option missing?

Read user reviews of Tundra Accessories.

First reported in Japanese newspapers (and now on Reuters and PickupTrucks.com) it looks as if Toyota is voluntarily recalling nearly 3.8 million cars and trucks in order to fix and/or replace the accelerator pedals. If this is indeed the official “fix” (Toyota has yet to announce this formally), it’s a bit disappointing.

Since many Toyota vehicles have electronic throttle controls, a software upgrade to the engine management system would cure this issue. A software upgrade that prevents a vehicle from operating at full throttle whenever the brake is depressed would almost completely eliminate the possibility that a vehicle could careen out of control because of a stuck throttle. Chrysler and Mercedes-Benz vehicles with electronic throttles already have this feature – it’s called a “brake to idle failsafe” – but Toyota, Lexus, and Scion vehicles do not.

Toyota's gas pedal "fix" isn't the best solution for preventing run-away throttles.

New gas pedals are probably a cheaper “solution” to this problem, but they’re not the best way to solve the problem.

As you probably know, this all started when Toyota issued a voluntary floor mat recall in late September, 2009 asking owners to remove their driver’s side floor mats pending a more permanent fix. This voluntary recall was in response to a tragic accident involving an out-of-control Lexus that killed four people.

The Lexus that crashed was a loaner car provided by a California Lexus dealership. After a comprehensive investigation, NHTSA concluded that this accident was caused by an over-sized floor mat that interfered with the gas pedal. The floor mat (which was the actual cause of the problem) was not designed for the Lexus it was installed in, nor was it secured. While this accident was tragic, it was NOT a result of a design flaw. It was simply the wrong floor mat.

Nonetheless, NHTSA and/or Toyota have decided to make some sort of change to the design of the gas pedal. Perhaps there is evidence of a more severe problem, or perhaps Toyota feels this is the best way to resolve this issue with the public. While there’s no reason NOT to change the gas pedal design (it’s probably reduces the possibility of a stuck pedal), changing the engine computer software seems like a much better fix. After all, the notorious Lexus loaner car accident wasn’t caused by a poor gas pedal design. There were a number of factors at work:

1. The driver’s floor mats (one on top of another) were too large. It’s certainly possible a smaller pedal would have helped, but the news reported there were TWO floor mats installed, one of which was a big rubber all-weather mat designed for an SUV. Pedal size might not have mattered at all in this particular case.
2. The driver was unfamiliar with the vehicle he was driving (he didn’t know how to shut it off, nor how to put the vehicle in neutral).
3. The driver was in a state of panic.

In all likelihood, none of these problems could have been prevented by a smaller gas pedal. However, ALL of these problems could have been prevented by a software fix that prevented the engine computer from allowing simultaneous brake and throttle inputs. There aren’t any normal driving scenarios where a vehicle’s electronically-controlled throttle should stay open while the brakes are being depressed (that’s a racing-only situation).

In Toyota’s defense, this was a freak accident that could have been prevented any number of ways. If the driver had been more familiar with the car he would have known how to shift into neutral and/or kill the engine. Had the dealership been more careful about the floor mats they used, the pedal might not ever have gotten stuck in the first place. Toyota really shouldn’t have to do anything here…but the negative publicity from this incident has led Toyota to take action.

However, if Toyota is really wants to fix this problem, why not update the engine computers? Toyota is famous for quality, yet this is a half-ass fix.

What do you think – is Toyota doing too much here or not enough?

Read user reviews of Tundra Accessories.

Forbes and Yahoo have compiled a list of the ten dirtiest vehicles on the road, and surprisingly this list is NOT dominated by pickups. Instead, the list identifies a handful of SUVs and uber-expensive luxury cars that are “dirty” – as in “most polluting.”

Their calculation is pretty simple – they take the EPA’s emissions score for each vehicle and add it to the EPA’s greenhouse gas score. Both scores are a number from 0 to 10, 10 being the best. The lowest scoring vehicles rank as “dirty.”

The ten dirtiest / highest polluting cars are (according to the list here):

10. Dodge Durango

9. Dodge Ram

8. Dodge Dakota

7. Chrysler Aspen

6. Mercedes-Benz S600

5. Mercedes-Benz CL600

4. Chevrolet Trailblazer

3. BMW M6

2. BMW M5

1. Jeep Grand Cherokee

There are some problems with this list. First, the Aspen and the Durango are essentially the same vehicle. Same goes for the S600 and the CL600 – mentioning the same platform twice results in a “double count” for these manufacturers. The list also doesn’t include heavy-duty trucks like the Ford SuperDuty or Dodge Ram 2500 (this class of vehicles are likely the dirtiest vehicles on the road).

Still, the data is interesting in that some of the vehicles with the worst fuel economy aren’t found. The Jeep Grand Cherokee with the 420hp 6.1L Hemi – which gets 11 mpg in the city and 14 mpg on the highway – is less of a polluter than the 4.7L (see below).

The article is also particularly hard on Chrysler. According to Forbes, the Grand Cherokee is a perennial member of this list, as are many other Chrysler vehicles.

Diving into the EPA’s scoring system, the pollution score is based on 4 categories of tailpipe pollutants:

• NOx – Nitrous oxides (abbreviated NOx or just NO)
• CO – Carbon monoxide
• NMOG – Non-methane organic compounds (the chemical pre-cursor to actual smog)
• PM – Particulate matter

The data table below shows the difference between the pollutants produced by a 2009 Jeep Grand Cherokee and the 2009 Toyota 4Runner. Both vehicles feature a 4.7L V8, making the comparison pretty close to equal.

Comparing the pollution scores of the 09' 4Runner and the 09' Grand Cherokee

About the data – the numbers in the NO, CO, NMOG, and PM categories are represented as grams per mile.

If you take a look, you’ll notice that the Grand Cherokee pumps out almost twice as much particulate matter, nearly three times the amount of nitrous oxides, and 30% more of the chemicals that directly lead to smog. Despite the fact that these two vehicles have roughly the same fuel economy (the EPA gives them both a 15 mpg “combined” rating) the Jeep somehow manages to be a much bigger polluter.

The next obvious question is “Why?” The Jeep 4.7L does produce more horsepower (305) than the Toyota’s 4.7L (260), and the Jeep’s engine may be tuned more towards HP than pollution. It could also be that the Toyota has a better set of catalytic converters. Without all the data it’s hard to know for sure, but what is certain is that there’s a very big difference in pollution between these two.

If you’re interested in seeing the pollution scores of some other vehicles, check out the EPA’s Green Vehicle search system.

Special thanks to TXTee (a frequent commenter and a member of TundraNetwork) for sending us a link to this story. If you have an idea for an article you’d like to see here on TundraHeadquarters.com, please contact us.

Read user reviews of Tundra Accessories.

Toyota produced two special edition Tundras for the 2009 SEMA show last week. The first was the “Tailgater” – a fancy tribute to country music duo Brooks and Dunn that doubles as a tricked-out mobile BBQ platform. The second was a call-back to the hot rod days of the 50’s, a regular cab short box Tundra with a flame job, moon hub caps, and a 50’s era Toyota logo.

Toyota's custom Tundras shown during the 2009 SEMA show.

While they’re both cool, neither truck demonstrated a new concept or an attempt to establish the Tundra as a great canvas to work from. Still, there were a couple of neat ideas, and you have to give Toyota for trying in a down market:

The Tailgater

The Brooks & Dunn Tailgater edition of the Tundra

This was the show-piece – the truck that Toyota really sunk some time, effort, and energy into. The stand-out features are the engraved silver door handles, the pull-out grill assembly attached to the tailgate, and the various hand-tooled leather elements in the interior.

The pull-out BBQ grill on the tailgater.

That's real silver engraving - very sharp.

What’s missing? Well how about the fact this truck has a 3″ lift with tires and wheels that are too big for such a small lift. What about the fact that this “show” truck doesn’t even have a TRD exhaust (that’s a stock pipe sticking out).

The Hot Rod

The retro call-back Hot Rod Tundra

Wood paneling in a truck bed? It's been done...many, many, many times before.

This truck almost seems like an after-thought. A flame job, some retro hub caps, and a wood-paneled bed are cool, but all these features can be found on a classic show truck at any good-sized car show. Frankly, what’s the point of tapping into a history that Toyota had absolutely no presence in?

No disrespect to the creators and artisans who built this truck , but the bottom line is ‘meh.’ This truck doesn’t even sport a TRD lowering kit, despite the fact hot-rodders were cutting springs and removing leafs to get lower back in the day.

The retro Toyota logo is cool, and the interior has some cool aspects…but if the words “slapped together” don’t apply to this interior, when do they apply?

Retro 50's Toyota logo.

The problem with SEMA trucks is that auto manufacturers have nearly unlimited resources…taking a stock truck and doing it up is always cool, but we expect a lot more from an auto manufacturer. Either demonstrate a new accessory concept or package that could make it into production, show a potential styling cue, or use all your resources to make something awesome. Last year, Toyota recycled the diesel dually concept they showed in 2007. This year, they made a couple of rather tame trucks. Next year, how about one of the following:

• Show us a working Tundra with a jury-rigged hybrid synergy drive in a goofy Prius color. THAT could get people talking.
• Show us a Tundra with a full complement of TRD performance accessories and a custom-designed ground effects kit that might just be available someday…either from Toyota or a friendly after-market company.
• Take a Tundra short box, chop the frame, and make some sort of toyish monster truck that doesn’t look even a little bit real.
• Show us a military version of the Tundra – see if the Army might participate somehow…they’re always looking for recruiting opportunities.
• Make a special edition production version of the Tundra that taps into a popular movie or video game, then announce at SEMA it will be available on a very limited basis nationwide (sort of like the special edition Scion xB concept crossed with the Terminator Tundra from back in the day). Even 100 of these trucks would be enough to get a lot of attention from the movie’s fan base.
• Attack Ford’s Raptor F150 and make a one-off TRD Tundra that one-up’s all of the Raptor’s features.
• Turn a stock Tundra into a half-size semi truck, complete with a set of half-size semi trailers in tow.

Whatever you do, do it right. No more “show trucks” with fewer accessories than your customers are installing on their own vehicles with their own limited resources.

Read user reviews of Tundra Accessories.

Saturday Chris Baccus posted a link to an old Studebaker commercial on his Twitter account. This old commercial is corn-ball and ever-so-slightly offensive to women, but it also shows what might just be the very first tailgate step ever…installed on a station wagon.

Studebaker put a tailgate step on a station wagon a long, long time before anyone else.

This is just a still photo of the commercial – you can watch the commercial on YouTube here.

Sort of fascinating, isn’t it? Contrast it with some of Ford’s marketing literature.

First, here’s a photo from the Ford website of the tailgate step in action.

Ford's F150 tailgate step in action.

Ford brags that the “2010 F-150 features an available class-exclusive integrated Tailgate Step,” and they show lots of images of hard-working truck owners making great use of this option on their website, in brochures, etc. They’re proud of the fact they can advertise this feature – and they should be.

For the record, the tailgate step is a good idea. The execution on the F150 isn’t great (it can be hard to load around), but it’s certainly not bad. Ford’s truck marketing manager said that the feature was selling well back in January in this article on Jalopnik, and a lot of people really like it. Kudos to the engineers at Ford.

The point here is that there aren’t a lot of new ideas in the auto industry. 6-speed transmissions, electric powertrains, dual-overhead cams, superchargers, trucks with coil-spring rear suspensions, and just about everything else you’ll hear a truck salesman brag about has been done before. Most of these features were toyed with 50 to 100 years ago.

The military used nitrous oxide injection in aircraft in world war two. The first all-electric car was built all the way back in 1891 by a tinkerer in Iowa. Gottlieb Daimler (one of the namesakes of Daimler Benz) might have been the first to supercharge an automobile back in 1885.

And Studebaker might just have been the first to invent the tailgate step…or maybe not.

Read user reviews of Tundra Accessories.

Here’s a quick update on our growth plan for our loyal readers. If you like the site, I would be grateful for any feedback or comments you have on these items, our plans, and what we can be doing better.

New Stuff

First, as you may or may not know, I’ve been posting on Twitter on behalf of TundraHeadquarters.com for a few months now.

TundraHeadquarters.com Admin Jason is posting on Twitter - click the image to see his profile.

Second, I setup a Facebook fan page for TundraHeadquarters just now. It’s sort of ugly right now (at least I think so), but I’m going to get some help with making it prettier.

The first attempt at a Facebook fan page for TundraHeadquarters.com

It’s also very empty right now…so anyone who wants to post a “Hey what’s up” or start a discussion or put a picture or whatever would be greatly appreciated.

I’m also on Facebook myself and I’d like to be Facebook friends with anyone who wants to be friends with me. http://www.facebook.com/tundrahq.

Third, we added a section for user reviews of Tundra accessories a month or two ago. It’s sort of empty right now, and we still need to add a bunch of parts, but I’m getting a helper to work with me on adding more stuff. If you have one of the accessories listed (like one of these air intakes), please take a moment to add your review. It will help other people out when they’re ready to buy.

Our new Tundra Accessory user review system

Future Plans

• We’re going to re-do the Tundra Buyer’s Guide to be more useful.

• We’re going to integrate a used Tundra classifieds system into the website.

• We’re going to try and re-design the site to reduce clutter.

• We’re going to try and publish an eBook about Tundra accessories, how they work, options, etc. for new Tundra owners or for anyone who wants to learn more about their truck.

Big Picture

As many of you know, TundraHeadquarters is about 90% me. I want that to change because I think the site could be better. I’d also like that to change because I want to create other sites like this one (one for Tacomas to start with, maybe some others…).

I’ve got some help from Mark (a behind the scenes guy who I’d like to get more involved), I’ve got a couple of writers that help me with reviews, etc., but I’m always interested in the idea of having another author or two.

If you’re interested in writing blog posts or articles (and if you have some experience), I’d like to hear from you. This is a paid writing opportunity, so if you know a writer who knows cars and you like their outlook on things, I’d love to hear from them.

Final Thought

Please, please, pretty-please, contact me with ideas, suggestions, things that don’t work, things that you’d like to see changed, etc. I’m very open to criticism and always looking to make this site better. You can email me directly jason[at]tundraheadquarters.com. Just replace the [at] with an @.

Thanks to everyone who visits!

Read user reviews of Tundra Accessories.

If there is one characteristic that all of the best-selling portable GPS devices share, it is uniformity. In terms of shape and size, most GPS units look very, very similar, and as discussed in the first part of this two-part portable GPS buying guide, all of these portable GPS units offer very similar functionality.

The portable GPS industry is dominated by two companies: Garmin and TomTom. In fact, of the devices we examined, all but one were produced by Garmin. As such, we’ll analyze Garmin’s offerings first, arranged in descending order by price.

Garmin's top-of-the-line Nuvi 885

The top of the line Garmin GPS unit is the nüvi 885/885T. With a list price approaching $600.00, the 885 can more often be found selling for around $350.00 online.

One of the benefits of paying so much for a GPS device is the fact that the nüvi 885 can recognize speech commands – you can use your voice to move through its menus. It also includes 6 million pre-loaded destinations such as restaurants, movie theatres, national parks and other points of interest. It’s a solid unit, but it’s not our favorite…mostly because of the price.

Garmin's nuvi 755-765-775-785 family are all the same unit, with only minor differences between them.

The next Garmin we looked at is the nüvi 765/765T. Its street price is just under $300.00, and for that amount of money it offers similar features to the 885, minus the speech recognition. The device’s lane guidance feature helps you to more easily find highway exits, and like many Garmin devices it can be transformed into a hands-free speaker for a cell phone thanks to Bluetooth.

The 755-785 family also features multi-point routing, which means you can use your GPS to find the best route to visit more than one destination. Using a built-in FM transmitter, all the units in the 755-785 family can transmit directions through your vehicle’s speaker system. This feature is nice because, sometimes, the volume on the GPS is just a little too low.

If you like the 765 but don’t need Bluetooth connectivity, the nüvi 755 is a nice option that’s less than $250. Moving up from the 765, the nüvi 775 and nüvi 785 include more maps and a slightly upgraded traffic data system. Cool extras, but we think the 765 or 755 are the units to pick from this family.

Our top pick is the Garmin nuvi 260

Our favorite unit on this list is the nüvi 260W (about $140). It’s very basic, but it features a nice big screen, text-to-speech directions, an easy-to-use interface, and good battery life. The nüvi 260 doesn’t have the traffic finder feature (the 260 isn’t even compatible with the feature, but the 255 is compatible with an external adapter), so if you want traffic info then one of the higher-priced units on this list is a better option.

However, as far as “bang for the buck” is concerned, the nüvi 260W is a solid little device that does exactly what you need.

TomTom's GO 720 is a nice mid-range portable GPS with some nice custom mapping options.

The sole TomTom offering to crack this list is the GO 720. Priced at around $220.00, it compares favorably with the mid-range Garmin options in terms of features. It includes an MP3 player, traffic and weather updates through a Bluetooth cellular connection and of course spoken directions. The GO 720 can also connect to an online service called MapShare, which allows for special maps and directions created by other TomTom users to be uploaded into the device.

Bottom Line: If you’re into futuristic options like voice recognition and up-to-date traffic data, a high end unit might be the way to go. Are you a road warriors doing business on the road? The mid-range devices are probably the best option – they’re catered to a business type user with a little bit of tech savvy. Are you looking for a lot of the features of a good GPS without spending a lot? If so, the Garmin 260 is our recommendation.

Whichever GPS device you choose, it’s hard to go wrong choosing one of the units on this list. We found them all to be fun and easy to use, and in our limited “test drive” they all performed nicely.

FTC Disclosure – This was NOT a paid post. However, if you buy a product using one of our links, we get a small percentage of the sale. So if you want to help us out…cool. If not, that’s cool too. See our about page to learn more about how we make money.

Read user reviews of Tundra Accessories.