According to all the Signs...Toyota is going to CAT

[steveinaz]

Modern diesel development should lend itself well many aspects of their use. When Cat rates an engine it formulates the maximum output on a 50% duty cycle. What it boils down to is the engines ability to control heat/energy without failure. Stationary engines in the past would be designed and rated to run a a constant speed and a constant load. All components were mechanical and tailored to the constants. The engines had no way of regulating themselves if oil pressure became too low or cooling temp was too high. Hence the ratings in the past would be very conservative. The fueling would be focused on a very narrow rpm range and a predetermined load. The common rail systems of today should adjust well to all the variables. And on another note, Cat and Toyota do seem to have a very curious relationship developing. SteveinAZ

P. S. I wonder what body Toyota put on the test mule?

 

[Dieselnut59]

Either way, does Cat make an engine of appropriate output and size? The smallest on-highway truck engine is the C7, which I believe is way too large and heavy to fit in a Tundra. They do make smaller engines for off-highway use, but those would need major modifications for use in an on-highway application.

So now I'm not so sure about Toyota going Cat...

Ryan

Don't be so sure of that. Off highway emissions regulations are quickly catching up to on-highway standards. By 2008, they must meet "tierIII" standards, which basicly means electronic controls (common rail fuel systems, etc). By 2010, they must meet tier IV standards, which means exhaust aftertreatment will be added. I am not sure how this plays across the board, but I found this information in some research I was doing about the forklifts my company sells. The positive side to all this is an engine manufacturer can make one engine and offer it for on and off highway use. With computer controls, this will be even easier because RPM's and power can be programmed into the computer on the engine for whatever necessary application. The positive side, already being pushed in the forklift industry, is that with clean diesel technology, diesel forklifts will be safer to run inside warehouses than propane powered units.
Mitsubishi forklift was bought out by Caterpillar several years ago and is now called "Mitsubishi-Caterpillar Forklift". They have 4 and 6 cylinder diesels in this equipment that will have to meet tier III and then IV standards. These engines could be easily used in a pickup. Remember, the engine itself will not have to be changed much to meet emission standards, just the fuel delivery and aftertreatment systems. I can see Toyota developing something and it might be with an alliance with the Mitsubishi-Caterpillar company, but they also have their own 4 and 6 cylinder diesel engines in their own forklifts which will have to meet upcoming emission standards. I think Toyota will stick with its own engine.

 

[BTowler]

I remember seeing a press release from Cat stating they have no desire or intention to enter the light truck engine market, it would require way too much investment as they are not set up for that kind of volume.

 

[Nordby]

OK back to the rumor-mill. And no proof - but have to stir the pot some more. My Toyota-expert friend chatted with his Toyota-service employed mechanic - just got back from continuing-ed mechanic school (they update them several times a year, etc). So, friend of a friend - but this from a Toyota employee.



He was told in class about a 2009 Tundra, dually, cat diesel powered rig. There was also a pic of a racing Toyota Camry with Cat Diesel decals on it (sponsorship, not powered by). That second bit of info ought to surface if the Camry is on a track somewhere.



Now, my opinion is this. Whoever provides a good towing vehicle, and backs it up the best, wins. The big 3 are busy running around trying to deny warranties, not stand behind their trucks, and are going to pay for it. Don't get me wrong: many, many dealers are wonderful and do everything they can - but a huge number of them are not doing the right thing, and often those trying to do the right thing have their hands tied by Chrysler. Toyota is likely dong it too - but the perception from lots of folks is that they are more reliable and deliver better service. Whether that is true or not probably doesn't matter, it is the perception of the buyers that matters.



Tundra's in their current configuration will never weigh enough to pull a loaded horse trailer with LQ, or RV's, or equipment trailers (tail wagging the dog) - but they sure will be able to safely handle anything in the 7-9K range all day long at highway speed if they make that 2009 a bit heavier.



Dealer's - it is not rocket science. Stand behind your trucks. Give me a loaner when mine is in the shop. A loaner truck - not a K-car - I bought a truck for my work, or rv, or hauling, and the k-car is not going to cut it. And, if I am out on the road 1000 miles from you and my under-warranty-truck breaks - get a loaner there from another dealer. Bend over backwards to fix it under warranty, even if a few miles expired. I'd pay MSRP for that. As it stands, I'm avoiding buying a truck at all, even on fire sale here in Denver, because I have no confidence you the dealer, or Chrysler will stand behind it. Or any other vehicle mfg for that matter.



Just an opinion - sorry it is a dark one as far as dealers are concerned,

jon.

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

OK back to the rumor-mill. And no proof - but have to stir the pot some more. My Toyota-expert friend chatted with his Toyota-service employed mechanic - just got back from continuing-ed mechanic school (they update them several times a year, etc). So, friend of a friend - but this from a Toyota employee.



He was told in class about a 2009 Tundra, dually, cat diesel powered rig. There was also a pic of a racing Toyota Camry with Cat Diesel decals on it (sponsorship, not powered by). That second bit of info ought to surface if the Camry is on a track somewhere.



Now, my opinion is this. Whoever provides a good towing vehicle, and backs it up the best, wins. The big 3 are busy running around trying to deny warranties, not stand behind their trucks, and are going to pay for it. Don't get me wrong: many, many dealers are wonderful and do everything they can - but a huge number of them are not doing the right thing, and often those trying to do the right thing have their hands tied by Chrysler. Toyota is likely dong it too - but the perception from lots of folks is that they are more reliable and deliver better service. Whether that is true or not probably doesn't matter, it is the perception of the buyers that matters.



Tundra's in their current configuration will never weigh enough to pull a loaded horse trailer with LQ, or RV's, or equipment trailers (tail wagging the dog) - but they sure will be able to safely handle anything in the 7-9K range all day long at highway speed if they make that 2009 a bit heavier.



Dealer's - it is not rocket science. Stand behind your trucks. Give me a loaner when mine is in the shop. A loaner truck - not a K-car - I bought a truck for my work, or rv, or hauling, and the k-car is not going to cut it. And, if I am out on the road 1000 miles from you and my under-warranty-truck breaks - get a loaner there from another dealer. Bend over backwards to fix it under warranty, even if a few miles expired. I'd pay MSRP for that. As it stands, I'm avoiding buying a truck at all, even on fire sale here in Denver, because I have no confidence you the dealer, or Chrysler will stand behind it. Or any other vehicle mfg for that matter.



Just an opinion - sorry it is a dark one as far as dealers are concerned,

jon.

You know, everything you say is true - but the makers and dealerships suffer from exactly the SAME "get it now" syndrome we do us buyers! The automakers and their dealers are focused on their profit margins THIS month or quarter, and if they can't stay financially afloat today and the rest of THIS week, what might happen next YEAR doesn't really make much difference.



Just as we consumers love to preach "Buy AMERICAN" - but when push comes to shove, will pay $20 less for an Asian made product, rather than buy the domestic version, if it's available. We do it for the same reasons as the auto maker/selling crowd - it's TODAY'S survival that is most important to us - we'll worry about tomorrow when it GETS here!

 

[Nordby]

Fair enough Gary - very good point. We've created part of our own problem by shrinking the margins on the dealers so bad they have to drop $10K off a new truck just to compete for customer $$$'s. Probably very hard (or impossible) to make a valid business model of loaner trucks, fetching broken ones off the interstate from far away places, etc if the selling margin is so thin. Not that I am shedding a tear for them - but fair enough that we are squeezing them too...

jon.

 

[RVTRKN]

I would buy Toyota if they can build something comparable, but that wont be in 09, more like 2015 or beyond. I'm not saying they wont build one in 09 but to have same frame, brakes, heavy duty differentials, suspension and all other items related to a heavy duty platform. My 07 will be due to be replaced by that time, and if its truely a HD I will consider it.



The rummers are circulating now like "Dodge will have a Mercedes next year" and the most famous "Ford owns Cummins so next year it will replace the

Powerjoke" for Toyota as in the past other examples



Dodge has never done me wrong in any new vehicle and they are as follows 92 V8 Dakota, 93 Shadow, 94 2500HD 360 2X2 Ram, and look at sig for the rest of my Dodges. I'm not saying I didn't have any problems, I'm saying they were repaired hassel free, so unless Toyota does a whole lot better than Dodge it will have to be a quite substantially better truck. As of now I dought that Toyota can, and will just have to wait and see what happens.

 

[FATCAT]

I would buy Toyota if they can build something comparable, but that wont be in 09, more like 2015 or beyond.

By 2015! It won't matter by then, Paccar will have their new "light" duty trucks out by 2012. 4500/5500's running around with the "Red Oval" on them will be hard to beat ... especially since they will be keeping their relationship with their current engine/drivtrain manufactures for their new "light" duty trucks.

 

[BTowler]

I'll say it again, I saw a statement from Cat that said they have no intention of ever getting into the light truck engine business as an oem, they don't have the production capacity to do it. It would require more production for that one engine than their total yearly production now.

 

[Dl5treez]

By 2015! It won't matter by then, Paccar will have their new "light" duty trucks out by 2012. 4500/5500's running around with the "Red Oval" on them will be hard to beat ... especially since they will be keeping their relationship with their current engine/drivtrain manufactures for their new "light" duty trucks.

Doubt PACCAR will be offering a re-badged Dodge product, since DC owns Freightliner, Western Star, and Sterling, and has already issued the press release for the Sterling Bullet:



The Sterling Bullet -- Nothing Stops The Bullet

 

[FATCAT]

Doubt PACCAR will be offering a re-badged Dodge product, since DC owns Freightliner, Western Star, and Sterling, and has already issued the press release for the Sterling Bullet:



The Sterling Bullet -- Nothing Stops The Bullet

No, PACCAR won't be offering anything like the Dodge/Sterling. It is suppost to look like a small version of their Pete 335. Choice of an Allison auto or two types of manuals. 10K front drive axle, 16K rear; reg or crew cab.



And since this is a "rumor" thread ... . well I've said too much already. :-laf

 

[Dl5treez]

No, PACCAR won't be offering anything like the Dodge/Sterling. It is suppost to look like a small version of their Pete 335. Choice of an Allison auto or two types of manuals. 10K front drive axle, 16K rear; reg or crew cab.



And since this is a "rumor" thread ... . well I've said too much already. :-laf

I'd buy one... . with the company's money.

 

[2broke2smoke]

I'll say it again, I saw a statement from Cat that said they have no intention of ever getting into the light truck engine business as an oem, they don't have the production capacity to do it. It would require more production for that one engine than their total yearly production now.

c'mon man these guys aren't interested in the facts ...

they're like a bunch of old women at a laundry mat ...

 

[AKaiser]

Speaking of PACCAR, they have an agreement with Cummins to manufacture proprietary 6 and 8 liter engines under the PACCAR name for the North American MD truck market. This is old news (almost a year old) but it bears reading. PACCAR Inc News Release

 

[CBarr]

Local paper (Evansville Courier, IN) had article in business section that Toyoto has reached agreement with Isuzu (sp) for joint venture into diesel engine design. Apparently have now the controlling interest in Isuzu.

 

[AKaiser]

Local paper (Evansville Courier, IN) had article in business section that Toyoto has reached agreement with Isuzu (sp) for joint venture into diesel engine design. Apparently have now the controlling interest in Isuzu.

Interesting. I must've missed that, or it wasn't online. Might explain how it was so easy to get into the Isuzu plant in Lafayette. Wonder what that will mean for GM.

 

[mberry]

Local paper (Evansville Courier, IN) had article in business section that Toyoto has reached agreement with Isuzu (sp) for joint venture into diesel engine design. Apparently have now the controlling interest in Isuzu.

I read that Toyota purchased a little less than 10% of Isuzu stock, not a controlling interest. Not that that means anything, it's just what I read.