Is it advisable to apply aftermarket rustproofing to my Toyota Tundra. A good preventaitve measure or a marketing ploy?
Not needed. Just give it a good washing now and then and a coat of wax a couple times a year. If you live where there is a lot of salt put on the roads go to a car wash every few weeks that does an undercarriage spray during the winter months.
I haven’t had a truck rust since my 78 Chevy. I don’t wash mine much either and there’s always mud underneath it. It just doesn’t happen much with today’s trucks. I think they are selling you stuff you don’t need.
WHAT areas of the Tundra don’t have rust-proofing, or aren’t made of rust-resistant metal?
Around where I live they started using salt brine mixed with beet juice. Nasty stuff, it sticks to the underside of cars. You see a lot of newer model rusting vehicles.
I noticed a while ago that I had a little sticker from a rust-proofing company on the doorjam of my 1989 Toyota Pickup, which happens to have several very nasty patches of rust. In my opinion, aftermarket rust proofing is kind of a scam-- after all, rust issues usually take decades to develop, so even if they have no effect, you don’t know it until you’ve long since forgotten where you had it done, if they still exist, and even though they claim things like “life-time warranties”, the chances that they’re going to honor something like that 10 to 15 years down the road when rust issues typically start to develop are very slim.
At least with domestic models, I don’t think its needed anymore like it once was. The coatings used now along with galvanized panels make it pretty much unnecessary now. You might want to look at the literature and see what exactly they do to it to protect from rust, especially inside doors and other hidden places.
I’m surprised anyone even offers rustproofing anymore in this day and age. Modern cars are so corrosion proof it’s amazing. Besides most manufacturers warranty their cars as corrosion proof for something like 10 years now. I can’t even remember the last time I saw rust on a car built in the last 10 years.
First there is no need. The factory rust treatment (there is nothing that is really rustPROOF) is very good. Second if they don’t do the job just right, they can comprise the the OEM rust work and that would only make it worse.
No. If applied incorrectly(likely) it will clog body drains for water and cause rusting. This was the case for my parents 89 Toyota Truck that turned to junk in 10 years due to corrosion from inside out.
No, but you might consider it to lower road noise if it is applied right. Discuss application with the dealer or whoever does the work to see how they make sure all the drain holes remain clear and how they ensure that there are no pockets where water can collect on an inadvertently uncoated surface.
you might consider it to lower road noise if it is applied right.
I don’t think so. That was really the job of undercoating, not rustproofing. I don’t think either is recommended these days – they can both do more harm than good due to plugged drains and pockets holding moisture against steel.
The last car I had rustproofed was an '81 Subaru. It was pretty much gutted by rust when a truck ran over it 7 years later. The rustproofer (Rusty Jones) had gone out of business about that time, in part due to excessive warranty claims (mine among them).
I assumed that rustproofing and undercoating meant the same thing. That used to be the case, but may not be now.
You aren’t old enough. I can remember when three year old cars showed considerable rust. Rust was standard equipment. Today’s cars are great.