What engines and axles would they use?

 

Whatever Hino uses on their heavy duty trucks?

 

They might have, but between the voluntary export restrictions that Toyota agreed to, combined with the 25% tariff on imported vehicles lobbied for by the domestic auto industry (not the recent tariffs, but the tariffs began in the 1960's), American access to Toyota standards and practices of manufacturing quality was suppressed by factors unrelated to manufacturing or market demand.

The Toyota Hilux was wildly popular in the 70's, due to its sturdy reliability. The model that followed was the archetype truck platform for the landscape, parts delivery, and with the introduction of 4WD, the small truck platform of choice for the recreational rock climbing community. That truck later became known as the Tacoma, when it began being built here, in the United States. Toyota expanded on their success by introducing a larger truck called the T-100, but plans to produce a T-200 and T-300 were met with fiercely fought lobbying efforts from domestic truck manufacturers... who also fought back by stepping up their own game in the quality department.

Ford was once in negotiations to partner with Toyota, but those talks broke down. GM accepted a partnership with Toyota so that GM could learn the Toyota Production System, Just In Time Manufacturing, and other manufacturing leadership philosophies and practices known as the Toyota Way, which I witnessed first hand several times at the NUMMI plant, run by Tatsuro Toyoda, one of the sons of Mr. Toyoda himself, the founder of the company. I recall in the automotive news during the 80's and 90's how much push back the Big 3 exerted over Toyota's continuing expansion into the light truck market, especially once the T-100, with a full length 8' bed, was introduced. America is truck country, and Toyota was not a welcome importer.

Hence, Toyota became a domestic manufacturer, and at one point, the successor to the T-100, renamed as the Tundra, had more USA domestic content than any of the trucks from the Big 3. (GM was importing a lot of content from China, where it was expanding to build cars for that faster growing foreign market, while Ford and Dodge were leveraging NAFTA to the hilt).

Speaking of bigger trucks and Toyota's subsidiary Hino, you will soon find Cummins diesel engines, instead of Hino diesel engines, in new Hino medium duty trucks from 2022 forward. The same will hold true for another Japanese truck and diesel engine maker, Izusu, who will also equip future medium duty trucks with Cummins diesels, rather than the Isuzu 7.8L diesel engines, and 5.2L. (The Duramax 6.6L in GM light trucks is unaffected). What has happened is that Isuzu and Hino have formed a truck technology partnership under Toyota's umbrella to focus their resources on developing future motive power solutions in medium duty trucks. So by retiring the current crop of Hino and Isuzu diesels, and letting Cummins handle keeping the immediate and near term Hino and Isuzu medium trucks on the road with current diesel emissions compliant B6.7 and ISL9 offerings, the power train engineers at the three Japanese companies can focus more resources on the long term future, which will involve other motive power sources, including hybrid electrification, and hydrogen.

Businesses who look ahead through the foggy windshield of a future yet unknown, (Bezos, when Amazon was only a rapidly dwindling rainforest; Mosk, when GM's EV1 was a failure; Ford, when cars were built by hand one at a time), rather than look through the rear view mirror at what has already been done that has always worked before... will make bank. And if not in this country, in others. Toyota is the most popular truck and van in use in Australia, for example.

 

I think you're equating 'quality' with 'reliability'. Toyota's haven't had exceptional quality, but their historically simple and underpowered drivetrains have reliability. People often conflate the two words.

Think of Ford with the 2.3/2.5 Lima. Cheap platform with bulletproof, simple drivetrain.

Ford has also made great headway into truck markets with the global Ranger, surpassing sales of Hilux in some months. Reading Aussie opinion, it seems that simple, stagnant, reliable Hilux isn't cutting it for them, and the fresh Ranger is.

 

sorry wouldnt trade my tacoma for two ford rangers

 

What is so great about the Tacoma's? I have a 2007 Ranger I have been driving every day for years and it's by far the best vehicle I have ever owned.

 

I had a pair of 2010 Tacomas. One was a 4cyl 5 speed and the other a V6 auto. Both were dogs and got 19 mpg. Absolutely nothing special.

 

You are quite right. The number one quality that I seek in a vehicle is in fact reliability.

And it seems like a lot of other people connect the same two dots. JD Power names their annual reports "Dependability Awards and Ratings" and has furthermore named their annual survey "Vehicle Dependability Study ℠" , going so far as to protect the name and purpose of their annual vehicle survey with service mark symbol ℠... that's how important they perceive the quality of reliability is to most folks deciding on a vehicle, for any purpose. Consumer Reports likewise has their Reliability Ratings.

While the quality of reliability and dependability has unquestionably been established as being the number one quality on a vehicle purchaser's mind (otherwise, Ford would not have invested millions of dollars marketing their famous Ford phrase "Quality is Job 1"), there are yet other qualities that a vehicle can have that are worthy of consideration. One such quality is capacity.

What is quoted below reads as if the quality of capacity is being discussed...

If Toyota's simple drive trains have historical reliability, then that is an exceptional quality (because many other brands of vehicles have not been historically considered reliable).

If Toyota's underpowered drivetrains haven't had exceptional capacity, then "capacity" is now conflated with "quality", and that's OK, because capacity is a quality that some vehicles have over others, by design.

I've been inside both a Toyota truck plant and a Ford truck plant, during the same era, watching both brands of trucks get manufactured. This was a couple of decades ago, so I can't speak to how the manufacturing methods between the two brands may or may not differ today, but back then, the observable differences in parts, processes, procedures, production, and final product that in combination created the quality of reliability were discernible.

The Ranger was quite popular (and different than the US version) in Australia long before Ford's recent resurrection of the Ranger in the US. Another very popular ute is the Ford Falcon, outfitted with a tray bed. I don't say this from reading, I say this from personal observation, having traveled up and down Australia and Tasmania. I found Ford branded utes and small pickups to have a more dominate presence than GM's Holden brand of vehicles (that ceased production there).

Yet as far as trucks having the quality of capacity, it is the Japanese branded trucks that dominate in commercial applications... from road maintenance to construction workers to delivery vehicles to small and medium tourist buses to knarly outback rigs to personal motorized caravans...different types and sizes of Toyota trucks and vans that I've never seen in the United States, and wouldn't be allowed here. (Although the Ford Transit, in different form, existed there prior to becoming a brand in the USA). Anyway, from my visual observation and interest in commercial vehicles, it is the Toyota, Hino, Mitsubishi Fuso, and Isuzu (about in that order) that deliver the goods and do the work down there. So I guess they are "making bank" somewhere.

All the Ford Super Duty's I saw down there (comparatively few and far between) were private vehicles, owned by proud owners, judging by how they were tricked out.

 

Interesting and informative replies.

 

Welcome to the party peeps...

It's nice to see a little education for our forum brothers and sisters.

Legislative battles have always been shaping our vehicular landscape. Passenger vans and larger displacement motorcycles for example.

I've had a positive Toyota experience, but I remember driving the T100 and thinking it was soft and delicate. Pretty sure I would have broken it and a 190 horse 3.4 liter V-6 was not impressive in any way.

 

hmm. the toyota 3.4 woops the ford 3.0 and 4.0 in hp and torq per liter.

 

Anything woops a GM 4.3L v6 lol. I had one once and it was a gas guzzling dog. Best mod to do to that engine was remove it and replace with a 5.3L v8.

 

If you still had it it would probably still be running.

 

longevity is cool, but not the only matrix. The newer Tacomas are still uncomfortable, over-priced, way under-power, chitty milage, etc. if you want one, get one. But they aren’t all that great unless you just want a cute/hipster half truck.

 

Two definitions of quality, one being the various facets that a vehicle can be judged by, the other being the standard or best > "top quality". I was inferring the latter. Quality is something(That facet, attribute, feature) that is THE standard to beat. Rusting frames and cheap interior/build is not overall "quality". I see your point in the marketability of using "quality", but used by itself it becomes muddied and vague, quite intentionally. Is everything 'quality'? Or are we looking at if a basic powertrain can go 200000 miles untouched while the rest of the vehicle falls apart? The pervasiveness of this 'quality' term used in marketing is quite effective, so much so that people will spend $6000 on a clapped out Tacoma with 200000 miles, when you can buy a Ranger with 100000 miles thousands cheaper. It's incredible, but less so after seeing how much people can be swayed these past two years.

I find products that exhibit complexity or higher HP often have lower 'reliability'. American vehicles of the 80's/90s/00s were often spec'd with emission, HVAC, electronic systems that had more complexity than a similar import, part of the reason why those commercial vehicles you referenced aren't sold here.

Imports were largely cheap, basic vehicles of the time period.

Domestic manufacturing processes may have played a part of this, but then you have outliers like the Ranger, Crown Vic, Explorer, F-150 OBS. Domestic company, domestic factories, reliable result. You will note those vehicles were either simple or were on a long running platform, such as the panther car or F-150.

I believe Toyota's lean manufacturing also includes 'sit back and observe', the company has been reluctant to introduce new technologies and seem to have longer model cycles than GM and especially Ford. The Tundra is essentially unchanged since 2007.

Ford dominates commercial sales in SA, so it would seem that availability is the factor on that end.