toyoguy

Yeah, everyone else's interiors are original And you've driven them, so you know which engine is quieter, smooter, and offers better fuel economy right?

I like the Camry plood, and do you find the plood in the Lamda vehicles more appealing.

http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2008-toyota-highlander/

Actually I've been pretty busy lately.Overall it's not for me, if it had more "personality" I bet it would end up cannibalizing 4runner sales. Technically I'm not and I doubt anyone else on the board is in the market for an SUV with three rows for their non-existant family. So I doubt it really matters. Minimize costs, the Avalon, RX350 use it.

Altima is a hit.

those Civic sales will be picking up anytime now.

I'm curious where'd you get CTS-V #'s?

I have never personally heard anyone complain about a vehicle's interior in my life. GM sold millions of GMT800's so I doubt anyone cared. As far as the biased comment is concerned, not the case at all. The Accord is hard plastic, tiny buttons, an overall sterile german-like bland design. I much prefer the new Camry's interior, including the Timex center console. I've sat the VW Jetta, and its interior is the blandest I have ever seen.

You mean the interior? Personally I like think the new Camry's interior is fine, certainly better than the Accords, I dislike the Avalon's and haven't sat in a Tundra. The FJ's interior is terrible, but it sells. I really doubt anyone cares. I doubt anyone but magazines pay that much attention to interior quality.

why would a Japanese exec bother speaking English anyways.

Stabilitrak is not standard according to the fine print. and where I live you can't option power windows/locks/mirrors on the WT model

which model?

You'll see the new Highlander at Chicago.

Not so in the newer trannies, drive the Accord's 5spd auto or the 3.5L V6 Camry's 6spd. Shifts are seamless. The older Sienna 3.3L 5spd is based on Toyota's previous 4spd. The Tundra's V6 and 5.7L V8 transmissions are completely new.

I will, I've driven the GMT-800 Yukon XL many times, and the tranny wasn't smooth when driven aggressively. I don't know why you'd want to bet that a ancient 4spd shifts comparbably to a completely new 6spd. TRD offers an exhaust as well.

except the truck he priced is missing air conditioning, CD player, power windows, energy absorbing glass, fabric seats, stability control, side & curtain airbags. And the 6.0L engine isn't even an option on the regular cab.

I was expecting more agressive pricing, but I can see the why Toyota plans 60% will be the 5.7L.

those were the #'s provided by edmunds dyno test. Toyota power curves in their brochures. This doesn't all really matter since GM forces you to wait 4seconds. Tundra 5.7L 381 hp @ 5600 rpm 401 lb.-ft. @ 3600 rpm Silverado 6.0L 367 horsepower @ 5500 rpm 375 lb.-ft. of torque @ 4300 rpm

it's not false just oddly unavaliable till after 4seconds. Why do you think that would be any difference unless the driver has a lead foot? I bet it's only there for EPA mpg #'s as so far every GMT-900 tested has missed EPA # s by a wide margin. The Tundra was equipped with the TRD off-road package, which uses a different suspension.

No, Toyota said this months ago as reported by the WSJ. They are looking for ways to trim cost off production and believe there is a large percentage of waste.

yikes the Tundra''s 5.7L V8 is too peaky with not enough low end power. No wait that's the Silverado's 6.0L V8

probably announced within 2 weeks.

the Avalon sold 7,955 units last December and 95,318 units in 2005

media is only biased sometimes. I think they aren't biased if a Toyota does poorly or GM does outstanding.