I’ve got a 96 that is currently in need of its third 3.4 V6 at “only” 250,000 miles after originally being replaced in early 2020. The driveshaft also recently gave out, along with the dripping steering rack and mysteriously disappearing brake fluid.
I also had a 98 with the 2.7 that had a cracked exhaust manifold which luckily in my case didn’t lead to a burnt valve. But I did eventually find a hole in the frame - it looked clean, but at the time I was unaware of their propensity to rot from the inside out even in relatively mild conditions.
Yes, I know these are typical things that come up on older cars, but they still seem at odds with their “bulletproof” reputation. I talk to people about whether it’s worth it to throw another 5VZ in my truck, and they tell me “those are always worth fixing.” I’m left wondering why they’re any more “worth it” than any other old truck, however.
I’m beginning to think “old Toyotas run forever” just means that fanboys are so infatuated with them being so reliable that they dunk thousands of dollars into their clapped out jalopies in order to make them reliable, regularly replacing the engines and everything around them when they shit the bed. And with Toyota, everything counts as maintenance, up to basically rebuilding the whole vehicle.
Marketplace is chock full of Toyota V6s, and the forums are full of accounts of burnt valves, cracked heads, and of course the infamous tension loaded ball joints that literally cause the wheels to fall off when they fail (see: Toyota LBJ Failure Support Group on Facebook).
And this particular generation of IFS is piss weak when tested on truly technical trails - put on tires bigger than 33s, especially when used with a front locker, and they will snap CVs and third members like candy. See post 26 and onward on this thread: Is a Land Cruiser really better off-road than a Tacoma? My experience says the opposite...
Before all the Toyota cultists come after me, I’ve had good experiences with some Toyotas, like a 1996 Camry wagon and 97 Land Cruiser, along with a 13 Avalon. But for me, the quality and reliability wasn’t there with the early Tacomas. At least they’re not any less crappy than any other truck of that vintage; in fact, most OEMs made a pretty decent drivetrain in the 90s, even Dodge. In fact, there’s plenty of Big 3 domestic trucks from the 2000s and earlier still putting in work in fairly brutal conditions on American farms, racking up the miles without all the fanfare of Toyota.
I guess I’m just curious where all the hype comes from. Maybe it’s the sleek good looks, or the reputation Toyota built by offering a higher-quality product in the 1980s, which was a low bar set by GM and the other domestics at the time.
Anyway, go ahead and flame and downvote if you want. I’m just a bit frustrated from having wasted so much money after buying into all the internet hype instead of digging deeper into what all can go wrong on these trucks. Oh well, I have no one to blame but myself. Regardless, I think I’ve owned my last Tacoma.
I also had a 98 with the 2.7 that had a cracked exhaust manifold which luckily in my case didn’t lead to a burnt valve. But I did eventually find a hole in the frame - it looked clean, but at the time I was unaware of their propensity to rot from the inside out even in relatively mild conditions.
Yes, I know these are typical things that come up on older cars, but they still seem at odds with their “bulletproof” reputation. I talk to people about whether it’s worth it to throw another 5VZ in my truck, and they tell me “those are always worth fixing.” I’m left wondering why they’re any more “worth it” than any other old truck, however.
I’m beginning to think “old Toyotas run forever” just means that fanboys are so infatuated with them being so reliable that they dunk thousands of dollars into their clapped out jalopies in order to make them reliable, regularly replacing the engines and everything around them when they shit the bed. And with Toyota, everything counts as maintenance, up to basically rebuilding the whole vehicle.
Marketplace is chock full of Toyota V6s, and the forums are full of accounts of burnt valves, cracked heads, and of course the infamous tension loaded ball joints that literally cause the wheels to fall off when they fail (see: Toyota LBJ Failure Support Group on Facebook).
And this particular generation of IFS is piss weak when tested on truly technical trails - put on tires bigger than 33s, especially when used with a front locker, and they will snap CVs and third members like candy. See post 26 and onward on this thread: Is a Land Cruiser really better off-road than a Tacoma? My experience says the opposite...
Before all the Toyota cultists come after me, I’ve had good experiences with some Toyotas, like a 1996 Camry wagon and 97 Land Cruiser, along with a 13 Avalon. But for me, the quality and reliability wasn’t there with the early Tacomas. At least they’re not any less crappy than any other truck of that vintage; in fact, most OEMs made a pretty decent drivetrain in the 90s, even Dodge. In fact, there’s plenty of Big 3 domestic trucks from the 2000s and earlier still putting in work in fairly brutal conditions on American farms, racking up the miles without all the fanfare of Toyota.
I guess I’m just curious where all the hype comes from. Maybe it’s the sleek good looks, or the reputation Toyota built by offering a higher-quality product in the 1980s, which was a low bar set by GM and the other domestics at the time.
Anyway, go ahead and flame and downvote if you want. I’m just a bit frustrated from having wasted so much money after buying into all the internet hype instead of digging deeper into what all can go wrong on these trucks. Oh well, I have no one to blame but myself. Regardless, I think I’ve owned my last Tacoma.
