Why did Toyota decline to play?

It's simple: there is basically ZERO upside for Toyota to enter that "contest".

 

The engine for one. It's the second engine downgrade. The Gen 1 Tundra was essentially a Gen 2 Tacoma with a V8. That got renamed and down graded to the 4.0. Now down to 3.5. That alone is a deal breaker.

 

For you. Not for the 250k+ that are buying one each year. Sales have gone way up after 2015, not down.

 

All gens

 

Safer, better tech, better mpg, better interior, but the 3rd gen is a downgrade; Okay 2nd gen fanboy.

 

At least they all had four wheel disc brakes.

 

And yet the Tacoma is still doing this...

 

They really aren’t for towing anything other than small light trailer or your motorcycles man. That’s what the midsize is for. It’s for a guy that needs a truck as a homeowner to put some building materials or mulch, machines, etc in the bed, but still have something compact and not a behemoth F250. Tacoma is just a 4Runner with a bed, ridge line is just a pilot with a bed. The ridgeline is the perfect truck for the suburban dude who needs a bed once in a while to run to Home Depot but still wants comfort and SUV feel when driving in the city and picking his kids up etc. I would never buy one and I hardly consider it a truck, but you can’t knock it for what it is. It’s a great vehicle and really practical and the interior/creature comforts are probably leaps and bounds over the Tacoma.

I don’t think anyone should be comparing the ridgeline to Tacoma’s because it’s a pretty different target consumer IMO. Lots of overlap in the customer base for sure but I think most people who buy a ridgeline don’t actually think of it as a legit truck.

 

Trust me, if I was in the market for a new midsize truck, it would be a Tacoma. Even with drum brakes!

 

Great post.

 

I considered a Ridgeline before I bought my 2006 taco, until I realized they did not have a 2 speed transfer case. My dad had one and it was very comfortable and roomy inside.

As far as the car reviews, I take them with a grain of salt, like JD Power "initial quality" awards. The industry is much more concerned with who has the best phone integration, biggest center screen and mpgs. I would like to see a 10 year quality award, but that won't sell many cars since they probably wouldn't be made any more.

I too wish we had the old 4.7 V8 in the tacomas, but it was never going to happen due to stricter efficiency and emissions requirements. But also, the rear end on modern tacos is a big improvement over the 1G tundra. As far as the 2G vs 3G tacos, I have owned both and feel my 3G is superior in every way.

 

That was my whole point the Ridgeline IMO isn't even close to the midsized market and the capability of the other trucks in the market. I don't use mine like I did my old f350 dually but I do use mine for work and haul on a regular basis much more than the typical motorcycle. It's still an actual truck after all and a very capable one for the size.

 

I'd really like to know about these "improvements" which the gen 3 has over the gen 2.

 

UM, I think you misread my post.

 

I'm totally just mucking around man. Lol.

 

But just because you use your truck in that fashion doesn’t mean that other people in the same market do. The ridgeline checks a good majority of the boxes for the average consumer. The average consumer is what drives sales. And the ridgeline was never made to fully compete with the BOF midsized market. Honda was genius for implementing it onto the same assembly, and producing a vehicle with basic truck capabilities at low cost. And to be completely honest, it can do what the majority of Tacomas I see do on a daily basis. Hell I’d even opt for one if I didn’t NEED a vehicle with off-road capability and BOF construction.

 

None of that makes it a better truck. The gas mileage would be great if it didn't come at the cost of useable power. It would get even BETTER gas mileage with a 3.0. Would you see that as an improvement? Lots of gingerbread and no meat. If you think that makes me a fanboy, then fine. You should read a few of my posts. I'm pretty damn critical of the Gen 2 when it is warranted. To be fair, they DID actually improve a few things. The manual transmission in the Gen 3 is better, as is the rear axle paired with it. The last thing I need in a truck is more tech. I've disabled most of that in my Gen 2.

 

NEVER take the bait.

But for ya'll that can't help yourselves, I'll leave the wagon here awhile.

 

While it probably doesn't apply to very many TW folks I think the reality is the mid-size truck market is primarily a "soccer dad" vehicle. When dads didn't want to be emasculated by a minivan they bought an SUV back in the 1990s. Then the SUV became the "soccer mom" or "Karen" vehicle. Dads needed something else to distinguish themselves and so along came the mid-size double-cab. Obviously a full-size would work even better for toting around the tots but if you want to put your vehicle in a garage that doesn't work so well. Plus you've got to sell the thing to the wife and trying to climb into or park a full-size is going to fail on that point. The mid-size DCSB ticks the box of having the missus be able to go pick up that awesome craigslist linen dresser herself making her feel adequately empowered to sign onto the acquisition.

Vehicles are primary marketed aspirationally rather than pragmatically in the US. They are designed to match that marketing. Most of us on TW are "bycatch" really. The third party accessory market exists to support us.