(first posted 8/21/2013) I’ve given it some thought over the years, and there’s only one truck that I’ve seriously considered as a replacement for my ’66 F-100, and this is it. In fact, it’s almost a perfect update on the Ford, with the benefits of modern technology. Don’t laugh, but I’ll take mine with the 2.7 liter four cylinder. It’s got more (net) horsepower (150) than the Ford (129), and a pretty healthy dose of torque. It’s not like I’m planning on pulling 10,000 pound trailers down the road. Oh wait; I actually have done that with the Ford…
As far as I’m concerned, Toyota made a giant blunder when they abandoned their T-100/gen1 Tundra platform for the current monstrosity. And I don’t just say that in hindsight. But then my perspective is not Texan, and I accept that different folks have different ideas about how massive trucks need to be. But here’s the ironic thing: these T-100 trucks are very popular around here with professional landscapers, who try real hard work them to death, but rarely succeed.
The thing about big new trucks as I pointed out in my earlier post is that you pretty much have to use a trailer for hauling materials that some of us like to still put into beds. But landscapers (and others like me) like a low bed for placing materials, often need to back into tight spaces, or just don’t care to pull around a second bed on wheels. And the T-100 is old-school Toyota rugged and simple, has a full-sized bed and can fit three in the cab. And it gets up to 25 mpg with the four. Just the thing to keep operating and maintenance costs low. That explains why the resale value on these trucks are still holding up.
Well, I doubt Toyota is going to bring back the T-100, but sooner or later someone’s going to see the hole in the market for a full size bed that’s reasonably low to the ground and married to a mid-sized cab big enough for a tall guy. A torquey four cylinder, gas or diesel, and we’re good to go. Well, my old Ford isn’t exactly getting worried yet.
“That explains why the resale value on these trucks are still holding up.”
If by “holding up” you mean “sky high”.
I really think the Gen 1 Tundra and last version of the Dakota were about the perfect size for a general use pick up.
Used pickup prices in general are high. I bought my ’06 F-150 4 years ago used for $18,300. Right now the “good” private party book price @ KBB is $17,400. Retail they are selling for around $19K.
I wanted one of these when they were first introduced, for the same reasons you cited. I have little interest in the current Tundra. Too big, too expensive for what I’d want a truck for, and too much like the F-150. This was about the right size for me, and then they killed it.
These are, like every other compact truck you can name, in heavy use by landscapers in LA, who often have dubious legal residency status but an excellent eye for utility vehicles.
Now that truck has exactly the right dimensions, tire size, clean looks and ride height.
“Less is more” works. In this case literally.
I’ll take one. In green.
I remember scoffing at these when they were new, but I am now liking them for the very reasons you cite. Compact pickups have completely gone away, and midsize pickups are all but extinct (does the Colorado qualify as mid sized now?)
I look at this one and think “I could do with something like this.” Of course, I say that about a lot of cars. 🙂
At the time these came to market, the Tacoma was a much smaller truck. But isn’t the current Tacoma about the same size as a T100? Was the 1st gen Tundra based on the T100? I’m just wondering. To me, I mourn the loss of the compact Tacoma even more than I do the T100, although I wish they still sold them both. And the Matrix, MR2, FX16, Paseo, etc.
Add an 8′ box option to the Tacoma and they’d be there. Or better yet, bring in the current Hilux as sold in the rest of the world.
After posting, I researched the differences between the current Tacoma and a T100, and if Toyota did offer an 8′ bed on a regular cab, it would pretty much be a modern version of the T100, at least size-wise. The Tacoma is a bit narrower, but is available with a longer wheelbase on the extended cab version.
A Tacoma is way smaller inside than full size pickups. In these days of people wanting do-it-all family vehicles it’s just not big enough. And it’s mileage isn’t good enough and price low enough to justify living with the size IMO. I used to have a 4Runner but right now I see no compelling reason to go back to something that size and give up the space, comfort, and capability of full size. Although I do admit I’d like to see lower bed heights, even at 6’4″.
I had high hopes for that Mahindra diesel that was promised but never arrived here in North America.
Yeah, what happened to that? I didn’t expect great things, because Joe The Plumber isn’t going to accept an Indian product here in ‘Murica,’ but I thought maybe they’d at least be around long enough to sell to a few fleets.
My problem I had with these, is the low seats, and the low steering wheel placement. I always felt like a giant (6’2″) driving one of these, the dash was too Camry like to me to be in a truck and the goofy column shifter.
I’d take a 1st gen Dakota though, those ‘felt’ right despite the iffy powertrain, and the decidedly non-Camry like interior.
At 6’3″ I hated that about T-100’s too, as well as the feeling I was sitting on the floor of the cab. Terrible ergonomics IMHO and a deal killer for me.
The new Tundra really is enormous. I have an 80 series Land Cruiser and when I pull up alongside one at a red light I feel like I’m in a first generation Rav4. They really seem wider than a Humvee and as tall as bus…I still see the 100s around, usually really beaten up but still running. Thought the exterior was nice looking back then and still do. Just a very understated no nonsense machine.
A potential future CC question could be “What are the Rodney Dangerfields of the Automotive World?”. IOW, vehicles that got no respect when new, but turned out to be quite competent and long-lived in whatever market for which they were intended. Examples could be:
Chevy/Pontiac-branded Toyotas (NUMMI vehicles).
Mazda MPV minivan.
Toyota Tundra.
I have owned both a NUMMI vehicle (86 Chevy Nova) and a Mazda MPV (03). I loved them both and wished I could have them back. My wife and I bought the Nova as newlyweds and put over 100,000 miles on the car driving all over the country. We endured all the “That’s not a REAL Nova” and “Look! A Toyo-let!” crap we heard from the unenlightened. When we sold it because we needed the money it was just getting broken in. The 2003 MPV lasted until just last year and had 286,000 miles when we sold it to a salvage yard. It was the perfect size for a minivan and had that brilliant disappearing rear seat.
Oh, and as a bonus, my son has a 2003 Pontiac Vibe–another NUMMI vehicle in the family!
Fyi there are some Texans who like this size truck. I think I pretty much have it in my S10 with 7 1/2 foot bed. I could be talked into it myself.
Someone mentioned Hino on this site this week. I read somewhere that Hino subbed these for Toyota. Any truth to that?
Think I will change my name to “small truck in Texas”.
+1 I’m a native Texan who lives in the Houston area. My Jeep Comanche pickup works very well for me. I’m only 5′-10″ but I can imagine if I were 6-2 or taller I might not be so happy in the driver’s seat. The 4.0L six has plenty of torque and consistently gets 20+ mpg with the type of driving I do. I like that it is narrow, the floor of the bed is not too high off the ground, and the truck fits nicely in the garage with enough room to walk around it on all sides. I also like the T100 and would consider getting one if I did not have the Comanche.
How do I get 4×8 panels in the bed? I made three little benches out of 2×6 lumber that I put at the front, back, and between the wheel wells. Once I stack several sheets of plywood or gypsum board on top of those they stay in place and hold everything level. With the load tied off, the tailgate down and some red tape on the end of the panels I’m good to go.
I had a 95 Dakota; it had the same set up with the notches in the bed; you could place a couple of 2 x 4s in the back and put anything in the bed. The 3.9L V6 could haul almost any load from Home Depot or the local landscaping company. The fuel mileage wasn’t the greatest, but it wasn’t unlivable, either,
I long believed that the T100 was a substitute for the Dakota or the original F100.
I seem to remember the same thing – that the chassis engineering was done by Hino and they were built in a Hino plant. Of course Hino is owned by Toyota.
how about some words on LANDCRUISER PICK UPs?since it is Toyotas week.please.
If I recall, weren’t these pretty slow sellers when new? I remember reading that Toyota was trying to break into the US large pickup market. These, having no V8 option and a bit smaller, didn’t have the formula right to do that. The 1st gen Tundra had a V8, but still didn’t sell a lot, I think.
Plus if I recall correctly they were made in Japan and therefore slapped with the Chicken Tax in the US. That’s not good for sales – the same tax just killed American distribution of the Mini Clubvan.
I looked at a T-100 base with a 2.7 four and five-speed. I asked about an x-cab version equipped the same way and was told (no surprise, here as it is SERVCO Greedy Pacific) “we’d have to special order it and we won’t take a deposit on it – you have to pay it in full.” Turn off. Same attitude in 2009 why we flew away from SERVCO* and into the arms of Mercedes-Benz.
T-100’s have my respect as I’ve seen (the few that were sold) plugging along; can’t say I’ve never seen one used for sale private or dealer. 1st Gen Tundras were cool – just under the current full size at the time. Those things are everywhere here in the Aloha State and were tremendously popular in Alaska. Down side – a bad, bad problem with frame rust.
*SERVCO Pacific is the distributor for Toyota vehicles in the State of Hawaii. They are not affiliated with Toyota, USA out of Torrance, California. They pretty much do as they please telling you what you should buy. In ’09 we were looking at a Toyota Venza but wanted to inquire about getting one with leather and the four cylinder. We were flat out told “not only do we not carry these, but we won’t order one either.” We would’ve had to settle for cloth seats with a four or a fully loaded V-6 to get leather. Pretty much told what we were going to buy and what color! Blow me!
It’s worth noting that Bob McCurry, the same Chrysler executive responsible for originating rebates (Joe Garagiola telling viewers during a 1975 Super Bowl half time commercial break to “Buy a car, get a check!” was McCurry’s doing), retiring from Chrysler in 1978, then joining Toyota in 1982, was very instrumental in convincing Toyota to not only enter the large pickup market with the T100, but also to start the Lexus luxury brand. It could be said that McCurry was the father of the T100 and Lexus.
McCurry would eventually retire from Toyota as vice chairman of Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. eleven years later in 1993. He died on November 15, 2003.
as an owner of a gen 1 tundra (reg cab/manual trans) It maybe my last truck. 200k miles and runs like new. we’re shooting for 500k…happily.
In my neck of the woods plenty of 4×4 T100s still chugging along. They don’t seem to rust as much as the same vintage Tacomas. Also popular for masons and landscapers are the smaller trucks that started out as RVs that have been converted to a dually with a flatbed or stakebed.
No one really makes this vehicle for the USDM anymore. Ford used to offer an 8ft bed on the Ranger, but it was pretty much a fleet only special order item.
Toyota offered a proper cab and chassis, there was no need to cut up one of the motor home versions.
I’ve never seen nor heard anything about Ford every offering an 8′ bed for the Ranger, now they did have a fleet only plastic short bed available in a few years.
They did, the longbed Rangers are odd looking, but Ford offered the option from the start.
GM had longbed S-10s up until the mid-late ’90s.
I see examples of both around quite a bit.
Well, you’re both right, but you’re both a little wrong.
Both Ford and Chevy offered a 7′ (maybe a little longer, but definitely not a full 8′) bed from the get-go on their compact pickups in the early 80’s. Chevy dropped the long-bed S-10 in the early 2000’s, and Ford in the mid-00’s (the last of any compact pickup to have anything longer than 6′).
Chevy was, I think, the first of any manufacturer to offer a longer-than-6-foot bed on a compact pickup with the LUV in 1977, and then Ford on the Courier later that same year, but I could be wrong.
Dodge offered an 8 foot bed on the Dakota until 1999. I had one and loved it. They were slow sellers though, as most people bought the short bed.
I would like one of these trucks someday, but I have to assume that the V6 is the way to go over the 4 Cylinder since if you load the bed with 1,000 Lbs you are asking 150 Horses to move 5,000 Lbs. My current vehicle weighs 3,900 Lbs and I cannot imagine putting another 1,000 Lbs in it then asking it to tackle hills.
When I lived in the US for a brief period, I really fell for the first generation Tundras. If someone want to write up something on them , I’d love it.
I like the T-100, it’s just that I really want a V8.
This was also introduced at the tail-end of the buy American period. I kinda remember the vitriol that was around and frankly this truck didn’t have a chance. I mean people would have keyed this truck in a few States if you parked it to go shopping. You know, Japan was buying up the US at that time ;)…That really was before the golden age era of Toyota where they could really do no wrong and that if you bought one the car would be reliable and last almost forever.
After reading a little about the truck, they decided that a smaller engine would provide better fuel economy. No one cared about that until 2005 or 2006. If you weren’t driving a V8 you were considered gay. Just really liked these trucks. Also appreciate the scaled down cabin.
I am currently driving a ’97 T100 extra cab 4×4 that I’ve owned since ’99. It’s hands down the best vehicle that I’ve ever had. And as others mentioned, the size is perfect.
Small world. this exact truck is usually here at the business park where my studio is. its here as I type.
It’s no longer parked at my studio. Dang.
Texas here. The Tundra embarasses me. The FIL has one and I don’t see a single thing about it that would pull me away from a F150 if I had to drive a monstrosity.
And the 2014 is even more hideous.
I recently got this 2004 Tundra, 6 cyl, Manual (32k Miles). Drive it most days now.
I still drive daily a compact 1993 Toyota SR5 pickup and it’s been very dependable over the years. A friend of mine has a T-100 DX from the same year with the 8ft bed and he uses it as a work truck. He also carried a closed trailer with his tools in it but he wishes it had a bit more power. Both my truck and his have been aging very well and all their accessories and A/C still work! That’s not very common on vehicles that are 25 years old around here in Quebec. My truck has 239,000 miles on it now and I’m not too concerned about driving it for long distances.
Considering that your F-100 was 20 years old when you bought it and still does the job over 30 years later, I think you’ll be able to find a T-100 when it finally gives up the ghost. Then again, parts are still available for those old Ford sixes. Still, a T-100 would be a more-than-adequate replacement for your trusty old Ford. Choices, choices….
My dad had a 93 t100 for 13 years. He replaced it due to the gas tank rusting.
I don’t recall this article when it was originally posted but had a T100 for several years. It’s a long story why I sold it, and the replacement (a Tacoma) is now our only motor vehicle (4 wheeled) so we appreciate the modernity, improved MPG, etc, but the T100 is A) really good and B) somewhat misunderstood. Yes, it is smaller than a full size domestic or even new Tundra, externally, but where it counts … interior room, bed dimensions, even load capacity and tow rating … it was pretty competitive with them. And, smaller, lighter, better visibility, and very well built in Japan. Unfortunately some parts are a little tough to find if they are unique to the T, especially used or aftermarket. And the standard bench seat is no fun for all-day road trips. BTW, these are very popular here with landscapers and one-man contractor operations … I can see 2 or 3 in one block sometimes.
The main reason the T-100 was dropped was because few bought them.
It took Toyota quite a while to learn what most in this country want or demand in a truck – at least those willing to buy new.
Personally, I kinda liked them, but I had my Ranger back then, and that served my purposes quite well.
Absolutely correct that few bought them. But I think that’s because they were mis-understood. In fact, I think they may prove to have been way ahead of their time. In most ways that matter, they were equivalent to a full size truck, but smaller on the outside and more economical – just like a modern Camry or Malibu 4 cylinder is equivalent to a full-size car of yore, but smaller on the outside and more economical. A 4 cylinder EcoBoost Ranger with a slightly wider 8′ bed would put a big dent in F150 sales (the T100 was just over 48″ between wheel wells, to fit those mythical 4×8 sheet goods) I think, at least for fleets and tradesmen who hopefully look beyond the “bigger is better” mentality.
Gotta agree with Paul on this one.
I had a long bed, V6/automatic T-100 for about 6 months as a company truck, around 1994..
The long bed was deep enough for everything that I needed to haul around. I am one of those who do NOT like pulling a trailer.
The powertrain was more than peppy enough to merge into Los Angeles freeway traffic and keep up with everyone.
When the lease expired on this Toyota, I was given a brand new, (very) full sized Chevy Silverado for a company vehicle. I preferred the Toyota!
I’d love to find the duplicate of ”my” T-100 today, for a reasonable price, on the used truck market, that wasn’t all dogged to hell and back.
Sneaky rusters. Bodies don’t perforate unusually fast and the running gear its stout, but for some reasons the frames seem prone to rot much faster than the rest of the truck.
Definitely Rob. The 1st gen Tacomas and 3rd gen 4Runners are the exact same way. I just remotely helped a friend buy a ’02 4Runner in the NYC area. I coached him extensively on what to look for, focusing specifically on frame rust. He ended up getting what seemed like a hell of a deal (an ’02 4wd SR5 with only 128k miles) for only $3k that needed just a few odds and ends and catch-up maintenance. Body on it is perfect, minor rust perforation starting on front and rear steel bumpers. Well the frame turned out to be a real sh*tshow, rotting from the inside out, with a half-dollar perforation next to the transmission crossmember. Still structurally sound, but technically wouldn’t pass NYS inspection if someone were to find it (they didn’t). Further reinforces my own regimen of thorough oil based undercoating of my frame on MY 4Runner (a ’96 with zero rust whatsoever), inside and out.
Those things were a joke. My dad had one a V6 auto and it wouldn’t pull a sick girl off the couch. Second rate uncomfortable seats and had a terrible ride. Just disposable junk. They are very rare here and I probably go a week or two without seeing one.
Fortunately I don’t need to pull any sick girls off couches, so it would work for me.
“Just disposable junk” Yup, just like all Toyotas.
My company bought a few T-100’s with the 4 cylinder. Very handy for larger employees that would have normally been assigned a regular Toyota pickup or S-10/Ranger. They served very well.
I always wanted one, too. For many of the same reasons as Paul, as well as the same cofiguration: Regular cab, long bed, with a 4 cylinder and a 5 speed. I see them for sale, very occasionally; usually the extended cab with a V6, which I have no desire for. The long bed 4 bangers seem to always be about $2,500, a steal in my book, but they always pop up when I’m broke. One of the advantages of these trucks is the fact there is 48 inches between the fender wells. Talk all you want about the “mythical sheet of plywood”, but it’s a big deal if you work a truck. I briefly owned a ’93 Dakota, nice truck (it had the 318-V8, man…would it lay some rubber), but the width between the fenderwells was less than 48 inches, so carrying a pallet of sod was out, unless I unloaded the sod off the pallet, a real pain in the a**; might of well just had a small jap truck like I had before (an ’86 B2000), so I replaced it with a ’95 Isuzu. It’s true that the T100 sold poorly; in fact Toyota promoted it as “7/8th” full size. You’ll notice they did not do that with the 1st gen Tundra; which I also wanted, but were just too pricey when new or still late model. Side note: Nissan is promoting their new Titan HD as a 5/8th tonner, spotting it between the Big Three’e 1/2 and 3/4 tonners; a mistake, in my opinion, in the same vein as the T100 being called a 7/8th half ton. My only concern (and it should be Paul’s concern, too), is the payload capacity of the T100. Having had four jap trucks, I learned this: My first truck, an ’80 F-150 with a payload rating of just under 1600 pounds, would carry a little over 2500 pounds safely, and up to and over 4000 pounds with white knuckles. I replaced it with an ’83 Toyota with the “3/4 ton” package. Let me tell you, when Toyota said the payload capacity was 1500 pounds, they meant it; anything over 2000 pounds was a suicide mission. The same held true for my successive jap trucks (’83 Isuzu, ’86 Mazda, and ’95 Isuzu). The ’93 Dakota was a bit more stout, but as I said earlier, had its limitations.
I’ve just taken possession of a plain jane, white ’03 Silverado 1500 reg cab long bed, with a 4.8 V8, factory tow package, and air conditioning. It’s a secondary vehicle, but it’s equipped to handle most anything I can envision, so hopefully it’ll last as long as Paul’s F-100, provided I don’t have any cash crunches. There’s something to be said about having a paid for, work ready truck at the ready,
I hauled 3/4 ton (weighed) of gravel in my V6 T100 and didn’t notice the load much. The most I’ve hauled in my new Tacoma is 1200 pounds (twice) and it felt sketchy. For urban load carrying I can’t imagine needing much more than the T100 can do. But let’s hope Paul’s F100 holds up!
My friend was given a T100 in ’96 by his uncle when he basically lost everything in his first disaster of a divorce. Number 2, at 60, was going to make the first one look like a picnic. Ugly isn’t the word for it. And it’s all his own fault, unlike the first one, where he was the wronged party. He’s living in a place that makes the place he lived at during the previous divorce a palace. The T100 was a total stripper, already rusting badly when he got it at 2 years old. Most Toyota stuff showed rust by the second winter’s end, and it was no different. The 4 banger was amazingly slow, to the point of really being annoying, if not unsafe during passes and freeway merges. He had it for a couple of years and when he finally got some money together, he couldn’t wait to sell it. Now he’s driving the ’10 F150 he had just paid off when the shit hit the fan with his second wife. It’s about the only thing he’s got that’s worth anything. He’s got 3 more years of child support on his 4th kid, and then there’s the baby that set the whole bomb off on his life, he’s got 16 years of support to pay for him. He’s going to be about 77 when he’s done with paying support, plus he has to deal with the kid’s mom, who seems to be truly evil. Moron.
You COULD say that the T-100 fits the idea of a “modernized” F-100 to a “T”–literally! The concept of an “in-between-size” pickup actually started with the F-150 in 1975, slotted in between the F-100 (which continued until 1983) & the F-250. Then along came the Dodge Dakota in 1987 to bridge the ever-decreasing gap between “compact” & “full-size” pickups (they ALL look “big” now!). Nissan is now doing with its Titan & Titan XD like what Ford did with the F-250 when the F-150 was redesigned in 1997 & before the Super Duty pickups were introduced: offering a “regular-duty” model (based on the then-new F-150 but with heavier-duty suspension & wheels) in addition to a heavier-duty variant closer in line to the rest of the larger pickups.
FWIW, I’d still take any version of the Dakota over one of these. My favorite pickup truck, ever.
The styling on the ’05-’11 Dakotas was wretched IMO, that generation of Daimler-rubbermaid interiors was awful too. Made worse by the fact that I think the ’97-’04 Dakotas rank as some of the best looking pickup trucks every made, by anyone, ever. They look particularly good in butched up 4wd guise with the larger tires. Extended or Quad cab for me!
I have a ’92 Ford F-150 Custom, 2WD with the 4.9L I-6 and five speed manual. It has a radio and not much else. My Dad bought it used in ’94 with 10,000 miles on it as a work truck for their rural property. After he died and the property sold, I kept the truck. It still has only 55,000 miles on it. Handy to have and costs nothing to maintain. It’s low like Paul’s F-100 – I basically use it like a wheelbarrow. Taught my daughter to drive a manual transmission in it before turning her loose on my GTI. Here’s my favorite photo of the truck, working on fences at my parents’ farm:
The Ford may be safer, the T100 is a “one star” crash test rated vehicle!
https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle/1993/TOYOTA/T100/2%252520DR
Safer? With a “spear of death” non-collapsing steering column, steel steering wheel, lap only seat belts, no crumple zones, no side impact protection, no headrests, the gas tank in the cab right behind the seat, drum brakes….need I go on?
Believe me, the Ford is not “safe”. I’d feel a whole lot safer in the T100.
I’ve owned two Toyotas in my life; a 1974 Corolla 1200 with the 3KC engine, and one of these T-100s. In both, I experienced the common gripe about the crappy, low, odd-angled cushions. In both I removed the seats, exchanged the bolts for some an inch-and-a-half longer, and used washers to jack the rear an inch higher and the fronts 1½” higher for greater height and a better rear tilt. Suddenly, those crappy seats were comfy.
Now, if only I’d known how to put more foam or something into them….Japanese people must be lightweights.
The regular cab 1st generation Tundra is a pretty good replacement for the T100, I purchased this 2002 as a CPO truck in ’03… V8, 4WD SR5. It will have 177,000 on it very soon.