Toyota Trucks Win Best Residual Value for 2014

Tacomaexterior5 (1) II

Toyota is doing something right with its midsize and full-size pickup trucks, according to the latest reports from ALG, a leader in determining how well a vehicle will hold its value over time. Our friends at Cars.com have several stories up (about the best and worst scoring vehicles) and have noted that the vehicle winning top honors across the board for all 2014 vehicles is the Toyota Tacoma midsize pickup, which is expected to maintain more of its overall value (or resale price) over time than any other vehicle sold in the U.S.

In the full-size pickup segment, the Toyota Tundra won. Congrats to both pickups.

2014_Toyota_Tundra II

 

 

Comments

@Dav
You have to realize that residual value hold a different amount of importance to different people. Sure, if you trade you truck in every few years, then it's important. The point I and others made earlier is that some of us drive our trucks to the ground, and thus residual value isn't important to us. That doesn't mean it's not important to you.

The insurance companies are always going to try to pay out as little as possible, so that diminishes the importance of residual value for me. That's the same reason I am always reluctant to buy an extended warranty, because the manufactures like to come up with excuses for not paying out. You are free to place whatever importance you want on residual value, all I'm saying is there are a good number of us who don't care much. Heck, I bought a 5th wheel new in 2005 and according to nadaguides.com it's worth about 1/4 of what I paid for it. To me depreciation is just part of life, I have to live with it.

@ HEMI MONSTER

I would have to agree with you on that. I don't think I have ever made a truck buying decision based on residual value and it does even cross my mind. I am not saying that it doesn't cross everyone's mind when buying a truck, but I would probably be safe making a bet that it doesn't for the vast majority of non commercial truck buyers. Still, it won the award for it. Although it means nothing to me, it may to some.

The TFL tow test was made for the ecoboost. They even admitted it had an advantage at that altitude do to the power loss a normally aspirated engine would suffer. Even so the 6.2 had the quickest time to 60 under load. The best grade braking and best fuel economy (witch turns out to be its downfall.) The 6.2 has the power but the programming is biased towards fuel mileage and won't hold gears long enough or shift as soon as it should. The solution is simple... manually put your tranny in your power gear! (This would have changed the entire test!) Only idiots leave their tranny in Overdrive to pull the highest grade in America!

The TFL test could have been even worse for the 6.2 because they had to floor it to keep it at 60 and it dropped down into the 50's and the EcoBoost they let off the gas to keep it at 60 because it could have gone 80 or 90 mph.

@ Jake

If you look at the F150 video, he had to back off the throttle just before he got to 60 mph because a car got in his way and then got back on it again. Also, why would it be Ford's or any other truck makes fault because Chevy program's the transmission's tow/haul mode for more fuel economy and less tow/haul. Look at all the other makes and their transmissions held right where the engine made the most power in tow/haul mode. That is more of GM's fault for not making a better T/H shift strategy, not the testers since every other make did just fine without any extra input or manula mode. Yes you can just put it in manual mode if your truck has that option, but the point is that Chevy would need it while the others wouldn't. Also, some fleet models do not come with select shift. Trust me it sucks when they don't. That is the whole point of tests like these because not every truck is the same and each are different. Both are great engines although each are better than the other in some areas like the 6.2L was better at engine braking because of it's displacement advantage while the Ecoboost was better at climbing hills at altitude because of it's forced induction advantage and tow/haul shift strategy. Each manufacturer rated these trucks to tow a certain weight, but each tow that weight they say it can do differently in different scenarios. The reason why these guys use this scenario is because this is where they live and it is just about the hardest you can get on US highways. What better way to test then by throwing the steepest highest grade ate it. After all, if it does good there then it should do great anywhere else.

In your dreams Ken lol!... The ecoboost was floored for most of the run with only a couple brief execptions. The 6.2 was also backed down on one ocassion due to traffic and was doing well over 60 at the time. The Silverado was trying to pull the hill in the highest gear possible due to a transmission programmed for optimal fuel efficiency. Had the Silverado been manualy shifted into its power gear as anyone who pulls often already knows to do and the even the owners manuel suggests the 6.2 would have put down the best time.

Ford EcoBoost vs 2014 Silverado 6.2L videos here:

http://www.f150online.com/forums/2009-2014-f-150/492013-ecoboost-vs-nissan-titan-chevy-6-2-towing-10k.html

@All1 Ken Alex

The 6.2 chevy was way better then the ford eco turd. The 6.2 got better mileage then the eco turd, the brakes never had to be touch in the 6.2 going down hill. The 6.2l would of beat the piss out the eco turd if they ran the trucks in manual mode like a normal person towing up hill would and that's fact! the eco bust lost bad to the 6.2 hands down! You ford boys must be really pissed off you guy smoked bad LMAO!

All1 I will fully agree that Chevy needs to design a more aggressive tow haul program and forget about fuel mileage but the bottom line is that this test is not a true reflection of what the 6.2 is capable of.

@ Jake

Hmm! it says that in the Chevy Owners manual? I did not know that. I just checked mine and all it says is to select tow/haul mode on my Ford, and take out gears if needed. I am not sure Chevy's have the feature though. In the 2009 up Fords, you can press the minus button on your gear selector to take out gears even in Drive "D" mode. For example, if the I were in Drive(not manual mode) and my truck were constantly shifting between 5th and 6th gear then all I would have to do is hit the minus button. It will take away 6th gear making 5th gear the highest I can go. You can away them all the way down to only having 1st gear if needed. To add the gears back then just hit the plus sign on your gear selector. I know Chevy's have the manual mode gear select, but I am not sure about the Drive mode gear take away and add. It would have been the thing to have for the Chevy in this test video since all they would have had to to do is hit the minus button to take away that gear without having to put it in manual mode to do it. But, like I said before, that is a downside for Chevy for not having a good T/H shift strategy or a gear take way feature.

@Alex The ecoboost did not destroy the 6.2! The gm trans is calibrated for fuel economy so it wasn't down shifting aggressive like the other trucks. But the ecoboost did win far and square with the quickest time but it had horrible fuel economy and the break temp was hell. How do you let the v8 get better gas mileage than the heavenly praised ecoboost? unless your going up the gauntlet all the time in a speed race then why by a ecoboost!? Might as well get a v8! They'll last way longer! Turbos are expensive to replace

@johnny doe

Run along, grown ups are talking in a mature manner and it is rude to interrupt adults while we are talking. Have you no respect? Oh wait, silly me I forgot. ______s don't have respect for others or know how to have a mature conversation without name calling and brand bashing.

EcoBoost did not have horrible fuel economy. There was only 0.5 mpg difference between EcoBoost and the Silverado, and the EcoBoost KICKED A$$ in making it up the hill!

@ J crews3

Based on FACTS, engines wear quicker the more they are in higher engine speeds (rpm). As shown in these tests the Ecoboost did not require as much engine speed as ANY of the V8's in the competition to get the same job done. While most of the other engines stated in the 4,000-5,500 rpm rand, the Ecoboost was in the 2,500 to 4,000 rpm range. Also like diesels, in daily driving very little rpm is required to go in an Ecoboost which lives most of it's life below 2,000 rpm when driven normally and below 2,750 when drivel moderately aggressive on take offs. Compared to most V8's that require more rpms to do the same job. Now I am not saying the Ecobost will last longer than V8s. I am just saying the argument can be made both ways. Also, the right turbo in the Ecoboost costs $540 and the left costs $490 at a dealer. Lastly, this was not a speed race. It was to floor it to at least try to keep the speed limit, but not exceed 70 mph. Not every truck can keep the speed limit in the is test even with towing less than what the manufacturers said they can tow like seen in previous videos. So it is not a speed test and more like how someone would normally drive to keep up with traffic test. The 6.2L did a great job on the down hill and mpg portion and I have no problem saying Chevy did something good with a 'BUT" even though I drive a Ford. It is what it is and it ain't what it ain't.

***I have no problem saying Chevy did something good withOUT a 'BUT"

@Dave when you have 2 less cylinders, twin turbos, and peak torque at much lower rpms yeah that gas mileage is horrible! Because technically the engine shouldn't have to work as hard. And force induction has advantage at altitude! But the silverado had the faster 0-60 time than the ecoboost when loaded how do you explain that?

@All1 I can agree with that! That's the benefit of forced induction. Lol but also i don't think most people that tow up the gauntlet would floor it from start to finish. Probably floor it when they had no choice but too to keep up speed. But hey they both get the job done

@Johnny Doe, you are taking the Chevy's annihilation quite hard! The Ford should have used more fuel, it was pulling the trailer much faster! Obviously you are not aware that there is more resistance at higher speeds and the engine needs to put out more power, which uses more fuel. Anyway, who cares, I would prefer a diesel anyway. I just laugh cos you were expecting so much from this Camaro engine.

@ Toycrusher,

"Residual value is entirely based on how hard a vehicle is used. Toyota's are rarely used for work, therefore, they are typically in much better condition when it comes to resale. Ford has the highest commercial market, and therefore the lowest resale value because the trucks are well worn when they are resold. GM trucks are also primarily pleasure vehicles and they, like Toyota, are in better shape at resale time."

Oh really!

You have data and FACTS to back that up? You sound bitter because Toyota's retain their value better than your pickup, so you have to sling mud in the best pickups in value retention.

Until I see data and facts to back what you claim, I will listen to the authority's on this subject from cars.com and KBB.


@ HEMI MONSTER,

When a pickup loses its value more than others, you have to wonder why.

So why?

Market perception is not as great for those pickups, they lose value because they are not made as great, etc...

So just because your fan boy pickup did not make the cut does not mean you can slam those Toyota's because cars.com and KBB are the authority in this subject and not what you think it should be.

Give me data to support your claims and I would look into it or else it's just your personal opinion.

who cars about residual value? I guess u tundra owners need to worry when you gotta sell it to the scraper and its on 185 a ton u get worried u aren't getting the value, oh that's right you cant beat it to the ground, may as well to to scraper now, fords dodges and chev are way better quality then that crap from japan.

Aahhh...Toyota wins again. They may take their sweet time on mechnical updates, power and mpg are rarely class leading, styling has limited appeal, etc... Economically it is almost always cheapest to own one. The bottom line is a huge factor for so many people. Just look at the Corolla- often the best-selling appliance in its class. Dynamics/performance? Embarrassing!

@HEMI RAMPAGE: your caps lock is stuck (That's the one that makes the letters bigger)

@J Screw3 -Scratch my last post, I messed up on the numbers of the rpm before it shifts. O need to start reviewing these things before I hit post Here is the right numbers.


After doing more research I am not too sure it is totally the programming or that even putting the truck in manual mode would have done any better. If you look at 12:29 of the Chevy video, he is at 50 mph at 3000 rpm. Based on the tire size for that rim and the rear gear ratio that would mean he was in 3rd gear at that time based on the gearing of the GM 6L80 transmission. When the truck downshifted into 2nd, it went into the 5,000 rpm range. Based on previous videos of the guys showing the rpm gauge at WOT, we know that it pegs out at 5,750 at WOT before it shifts. With the gearing of the Chevy's 2nd gear(2.364:1) the max you can go even in manual mode is 62 mph before you are bouncing off the rev limiter at 5,750 rpm. The engine just didn't have enough power in the right spot to keep it in 3rd like the Ecoboost did there for it had plenty of power left.

GUTS
GLORY
Vapid freaks who are taken in by retard box advertising.

In our area we have a lot of mountains and the Toyota's fuel milage is atrocious. I am a mechanic and dislike Toyota because parts are so hard to get, and so expensive. The wife bought a Toyota, Venza, no manual available.
A friend had a Toyota pulling a horse trailor, his fuel usage was twice what his Chev was. He dumped the Toyota, in 9 months.

Toyota is still charging the consumer for the 25% duty fee that was imposed on Japanese pickup trucks that were built overseas. Toyota never reduced their US pricing after they started building pickups in the US. They used to import the pickups & add the pickup bed to the chassis once the truck was off loaded in the US port. They still are having frame rust problems on their currant Tacoma's which they are trying to hide from the public. Their pickups are priced 5 to 10% higher than the completion. That's why they have a higher residual value.

@All1 Im pretty sure its the trans calibration. It was running those rpms because the tranny kept shifting into over drive. But once it kick into passing gear it jumped from 45mph to over 65mph pretty quickly, and that's pretty good for a NA engine towing that weight at that altitude. It just wouldn't stay in the proper gear to really use all of its power.

Recent reading pointed up the fact that the Toyota FJ has the highest % 3 yr resale value, of any vehicle for sale in the US.

@J Crew3

No I was saying even if in manual mode keeping the truck in 2nd gear it would not have hit 65 mph because it would hit the rev limiter/max engine speed before you got there. I did some more research on the 6.2L and and found that it's max engine speed is 6,000 in manual mode and not the 5,750 in regular drive like I thought. I also found that the power numbers are with premium fuel.
Look for the 6.2L V-8 AFM VVT DI engine
http://www.gmpowertrain.com/VehicleEngines/PowertrainProducts.aspx

So the engine cannot go past 6,000 rpm even in manual mode. Based on this, the truck cannot go past 64.6 mph even in manual mode because anything faster will be over 6,000 rpm. In order to go faster the truck would have to up-shift, but the 6.2L did not make in enough power in the rpm that 3rd gear put the engine speed at so it started to loose speed. The Ecoboost however made plenty of power in the low rpms that 3rd gear was at which was right around 3,900 rpm. It is not that the 6.2L is not powerful, it just doesn't make power in the right spot of the engine speed to take advantage of 3rd gear like the Ecoboost did. It is not necessarily just how much, but when as well which is why engines with low end torque that don't quickly taper off are better for towing than engines that get their power way later in the engine speed. An 8 speed gear box would have made a big difference in this test, but that is a moot point.

If you want to plug the number for yourself her is the link and info to plug in. Remember, the engine cannot go past 6.000 rpm and would require an up-shift to go faster.
http://www.crawlpedia.com/rpm_gear_calculator.htm
Rear axle gear:3.73
Tire diameter:31.9
Input different speeds to see different rpms

GM 6L80 gear ratios(which is almost identical to the F150 Ecoboosts 6R80 in gears)
1ST)4.027
2ND)2.364
3RD)1.532
4TH)1.152
5TH)0.852
6TH)0.667

The "not a work truck/not a fleet queen" excuse for Toyota having a higher residual is a very weak argument.

Pickup fleets are very different than car rental fleets.

Car fleets tend not to get run too hard and are usually sold off well before they are worn out. That really hurts residuals for civilian off the lot car purchases.

Pickup fleets tend to get worked extremely hard. Manufacturers brag about how tough their trucks are but in the hands of multiple drivers towing or hauling max loads on job sites or gravel roads, they do not live very long. These trucks tend to get sold at "as is where is" auctions for considerably less than a comparable used truck. Any moron trying to haggle on a used pickup quoting the sales price of one of these trucks would get laughed off of the planet.

I'd never buy one of my brother's 3 year old company trucks even for 1,000 dollars. There is nothing left to them.

Residual value is affected by supply and demand, purchase price, dealer/manufacture discounts on new trucks, and reliability. I'm sure there are other legitimate factors.

@All1 - the Chevy is defiantely set up wrong for towing. The 0-60 times prove that it has the torque but who does foot meet floor driving off the line with a 10K trailer?
The EB 3.5 powered Ford clearly kills the Chevy 6.2 powered Chevy towing up the hill.

It is funny to read all of the excuses and crybaby lines from the Chevy camp. The mighty 6.2 was expected to be the king of the land but ended up being humbled by a V6.

My brother has had 3 GM crewcab 6.0 HD 4x4's as company trucks. All of them exhibited the same shifting tendencies as this truck under load in tow/haul mode. Rev up then shift, then bog down further an further, then down shift and rev. This process gets repeated until one is over the top of the hill. His 2012 isn't as bad as his 2009 but it still does it.


Haters say what you will, but I was floored when I recently looked up the value of our 2008 low-mileage Tundra and found its value to be just over $26,000 on KBB. We paid $28K + tax for the truck. In comparison, our 2001 F150, for which we paid $22K in 2004, dropped to only $9K in 2008.

Lower-volume, well-built truck, not a "true" work truck, "timeless" styling, etc. Whatever justification/reasoning you want to give for the high resale value, it certainly works for me!!

Say what you will but if you like to buy a new truck every couple of years Toyota is the way to go. Those that say Toyotas are not worked are just dumb. I dropped an engine in the back of mine the other day. And yes I have a Tacoma with a composite bed. She just grinned and boar it. Just because I didn't drag a piece of rebar down the side of the bed at the same time doesn't mean the truck wasn't worked. She does exactly what I ask of her and she'll pay me back when I get ready for another one in a couple of years. Win-Win for me. Lose-Lose for you.

Not a Toyota fan boy , but nice to see they have good resale value. If you like a truck made in China. assembled in America, that so wants to be a America Truck. .


If you do your research you will find that ford F 150 and the Toyota Tundra tie for the most American parts in there trucks at 75%. Chevy and GM and Dodge are all tied at only 67%.

Vehicles with better resale value do so because they are more reliable. This means they break down less often and therefore help you in several ways; you do not stop working, you do not waste time travelling to the garage that fixes it and you do not have to pay for the repair.

Sounds as if many anti-Tundra and other Toyotas are so because the Tundra is less "American" although they are built in the US by Americans. Other Americans have made the Toyota Camry the best selling sedan for years mostly because it is the most reliable. This means saves them more time and money than if they own another brand.

It seems there is something special about many of the buyers of trucks from the (formerly) big three; it seems many of them put GM, Ford and Chrysler ahead of their own interests. I guess they have solid information that the two american manufacturers and the Italian one (chrysler-fiat) have formal policies of purchasing to make sure they help the business where the buyers of their products work. I guess they do not mind using their own money to keep GM and the others alive.

In the end Toyota will prevail, as long as it continues making the superior product. Current Tundra buyers are like the first buyers who chose Mercedes Benz over Cadillac in the 1970s; smart people who spotted a superior product and did not want to be dumb with their money. Eventually many others followed and cadillac lost its prestige status because it was an inferior product and never recovered.
Even Jews who had uneasy feelings about MB being German, did the smart thing and switched.

Just like many MB owners later swtched to Lexus.

The most American thing to do is buy the best truck for the (overall) money.

The sad fact is that through years of mismanagement by MBA bean counters from the "best" business schools former Big Three run themselves into the ground, as they are running the US economy.

The thousands of dollars their truck "donate" to them every year will not save them because they are unable to recognize Toyota out sells and out earns them and out innovtes because it is a better managed company, period. But they phony pride and fatter paychecks than their counterparts at Toyota fools them into thinking they are not the problem.

Unless the US throws away the belief in star executives and MBA degrees Toyota will prevail.

Consumer Reports' latest reliability survey has dropped Ford and its Lincoln subsidiary to the bottom tier in the magazine's 2012 Annual Auto Reliability Survey, which predicts reliability for 2013 models. Among 28 brands ranked, Lincoln ranked 26th; Ford placed 27th.

Six out of 10 Fords had below-average reliability, as did half of all Lincolns, the New York-based magazine said. Recent Ford redesigns — like the Explorer SUV, Focus compact and Fiesta subcompact — continue to experience reliability issues, and Ford's much-maligned MyFord/MyLincoln Touch continue to have problems. As the magazine focuses on reliability for new cars, several reliability stalwarts — the Ford Escape, Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ — were excluded because of 2013 redesigns. All three, however, gained Ford's controversial multimedia system in their overhauls.

This comes after Ford pledged renewed efforts to work the bugs out of MyFord Touch and MyLincoln Touch, tweaking the system for faster response times on many 2013 models. Consumer Reports' reliability findings appear to encompass only Ford's first-gen system. Still, we've driven thousands of miles with MyFord Touch 2.0, and it remains as buggy as ever, and Consumer Reports isn't the only publication to document real owners — not just journalists — taking issue.
On the other end, Toyota and its subsidiaries, Scion and Lexus, earned top reliability scores. Mazda, Subaru, Honda and Acura followed. Big movers included Cadillac (up 14 spots), Audi (up 18), GMC (up 10) and Volvo (down 10). Jaguar remains the least reliable brand.

We should note that the reliability survey assesses only reliability, as opposed to Consumer Reports' seasonal Automaker Report Cards, which combine reliability surveys with the magazine's editorial evaluations. Case in point: The magazine slammed quality and drivability in the new Toyota Prius c — a viewpoint we disagree with — but it turns out the Prius c is darn reliable, or so says Consumer Reports’ reliability survey.

What's more, the rankings appear to ignore sales popularity. We checked some of Consumer Reports' aggregate rankings against reliability for individual cars, and it appears the publication compiles a straight average among the cars any given brand sells, without any extra weight given to the more popular ones. That means if a brand sells six models with four popular nameplates that have above-average reliability and two low-volume sports cars with dismal reliability, the overall results would trend below average.

Chrysler's Ram brand appears to have been torpedoed by that math. The magazine says the Ram 1500 has average reliability, but the Ram 2500 HD is a reliability nightmare. Chrysler didn't return emails seeking a sales breakout (the automaker groups all Ram sales under one figure), but if Cars.com’s national inventory is any indication, the Ram 1500 is more popular than the 2500 by a 3-to-1 ratio. Adjusted for that, Ram's composite reliability for the models Consumer Reports ranked ought to be around 20% below average, which would place the brand considerably higher.

"We're basically looking at the manufacturer's ability to bring a reliable car to market," said Jake Fisher, director of auto testing at Consumer Reports. "Whether or not one of those models sells at higher volumes or not is somewhat immaterial to that. We're looking at the chances of their ability to bring a new car to market."

Here's how the magazine ranked the brands:
Scion: 72% above average (no change vs. last year)
Toyota: 47% (up four spots)
Lexus: 47% (down one spot)
Mazda: 40% (no change)
Subaru: 37% (up three spots)
Honda: 36% (down one spot)
Acura: 26% (down four spots)
Audi: 16% (up 18 spots)
Infiniti: 14% (down two spots)
Kia: 11% (up two spots)
Cadillac: 10% (up 14 spots)
GMC: 6% (up 10 spots)
Nissan: 5% (down four spots)
Mercedes-Benz: 4% (up four spots)
Chevrolet: 3% (up two spots)
BMW: -2% (up three spots)
Hyundai: -3% (down six spots)
Volkswagen: -9% (down two spots)
Jeep: -12% (down six spots)
Volvo: -14% (down 10 spots)
Buick: -29% (up three spots)
Mini: -42% (up one spot)
Chrysler: -43% (down eight spots)
Dodge: -46% (down three spots)
Ram: -55% (first year)
Lincoln: -58% (down 12 spots)
Ford: -59% (down seven spots)
Jaguar: -141% (no change)

Jeff S:
"Not a Toyota fan boy , but nice to see they have good resale value. If you like a truck made in China. assembled in America, that so wants to be a America Truck."

Wrong.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2012/03/what-percentage-of-your-truck-is-made-in-america.html

I just bought a 2014 Tundra for reliability, resale, and as "Made in USA" as any pickup on the market. Do some research and study your grammar.



The comments to this entry are closed.