Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Toyota Tundra vs. Chevrolet Silverado

1242527293062

Comments

  • beliasbelias Posts: 316
    It will be interesting to see how the competition game will end up. Obviously the F150 and Ram will improve greatly on their current offerings, but in what areas?
    They're already starting to reach the limits on what can be considered a 1/2 ton truck. My guess is that there will be power plants that beat the Tundra by just a bit and probably one or both of them will eclipse the 400hp mark.
    I also imagine that at least one of them will boast 11,000 lbs + of towing capacity. Don't know how they'll look, but I gotta think that unless there is a dramatic change in exterior looks, a simple refresh of the exterior is not going to make them more attractive then the Silverado or Tundra.
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    That is well said. ;) I think you hit the nail on the head and kinda what I was thinking. If dodge, doesn't get the interior right they might be finished. The Ford F-150, had the nicest interior when it came out in 2004' but can they repeat that feat again ????? Will they finally get rid of that POS 5.4 engine that is seriously under-powered ????

    Rocky
  • beliasbelias Posts: 316
    Well, regardless of sales numbers (Ford will continue to claim to be #1), there is no doubt that the Silverado and Tundra are the top trucks right now. Dodge, unfortunately is in a very difficult position. They've been touting their Hemi engines for a long time, and though they are "good", they lack the power and efficiency of most everybody else's engines. What I mean by this is that their competitors are producing engines that are either just as powerful (or more) or more efficient and in many cases both.
    If Dodge wants to get a better powerplant, they risk abandoning the Hemi engine or worse, relegating it to other vehicles in favor of a new "non-Hemi" engine -- essentially saying that this engine is old news.
    Ford's 5.4l engine is... wow, what can I say... just disappointing in most aspects. But this isn't unusual for Ford, most of their vehicles have lackluster power and they always seem to be 3 ot 4 years behind everyone else in this regard. If they don't start kicking it up a notch in this department, they'll be 2nd place and loose their #1 standing to the likes of Chevy and GMC.
    What I find may even be more interesting is whether or not both the Silverado and Tundra have upcoming powerplants or trim levels that trump what they have now. Even Dodge went with their 6.1L Hemi (though that thing sucks more gas on a sedan than most trucks weighing 1700 lbs more).
    I know for Chevy, it isn't a matter of what is available so much as whether they'll bring certain powerplants to the Chevy line or keep them exclusively in the GMC/Cadillac brands. For Toyota, it may be that they are waiting to release a HD version or perhaps a 3/4 ton or 1 ton version of the Tundra. As I understand it, a TRD super-charged version of their current powerplant producing 480hp+ may become available as a build-to-order option next year.
    Either way, I only see Dodge and Ford sales slipping continually -- even with new models. They just can't produce very powerful engines without sucking up gobs of fuel. It didn't matter that much when gas was $1.50/gallon, but at twice that amount, people start looking at options... that extra $30 to $40 per week makes a pretty good dent in one's wallet...
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    1) Agreed all manufacturers have issues some serious ( ball joints on the Tundras ) some not so serious ( hesitation on the Camrys/ES350's ). I read all the threads here and on Ts and GMI as well to see what's going on all around.

    2) Having been a Toyota owner now for 18 years and seeing how they move it's sometimes frustratingly glacial but it is always forward. That's why I mentioned baby steps. One thing that is far better than their vehicles is their market understanding. It's far in advance of the rest of the industry. They don't make $5 Billion investments without doing all of the homework first. This Gen Tundra was planned back in '99 or even earlier before the first Tundra was sold.

    I was in the steel business for 30 years and sold to Ford and Chrysler and GM ( indirectly ). We were sole suppliers for multiple parts on multiple vehicles. Normally we had a 3-6 year advance notice on vehicles we'd be supplying. This is why I know that Toyota now has their plans ( as does GM ) for what they will deliver in 2015 up to 2020.

    Will it all go smoothly. Not a chance. If gas goes to $4/gal every heavy vehicle maker will be at risk. Will any 'glitches' occur? Yep. Will they be resolved? Yep. For 20+ years this is how the progression has occured. Start modestly and aim for the heart of the market where all the volume is, then branch out from there. The Camry, Corolla and Tacoma are prime examples.

    Reliability is on their side from the current Tundra and other products. It also depends on how the issues are handled. Make it invisible and painless and people will forget about a ball-joint replacement during one oil change back in 2007. It's like it never happened.

    I can use a Tundra any time I want so there is no purpose to own one and it would be counterproductive with a 150 mi daily commute. The Prius is a much better choice.

    I've driven all 5 of the competitors several times ( not the Sierra ). There are 200 Chevy's within 100 yds of me now ( of all types up to $69,000 2500's ) that I can drive at any time.

    The F150 and the Rams survivability is out of their hands now. The banks own Ford lock stock and barrel. Mercedes will decide the fate of the Chrysler. Seriously what benefit does the RAM bring to Dodge/Chrysler/Mercedes if it is being discounted to breakeven at prices $10000-$14000 less than GM and Toyota. Ditto the F150. Ford desperately needs the F150 to generate operating profits .. now it can't do that.
  • jreaganjreagan Posts: 285
    Belias,
    Can't argue with this one. Although I will say I do think Ford will keep up with GM and Toyota in the "Automotive Leapfrog" game. And they have a pretty secure loyalty base. So, if they can figure out how to keep up with HP and efficiency, they'll be fine. And I do think they can, it's just a matter of when? I'm guessing it is a high priority and it will be soon. If they come out with a 2008 model that accomplishes this, watch out GM, their sales will rebound with a mighty bang and they will retain/regain their foothold on #1 in sales. Hate to sound like a Ford fan, but I do think they make a good truck (2nd best overall IMO). My second choice after a GM would definitely be a Ford F150. Sorry Toyota, not jumpin' on that bandwagon yet.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    Both have another 18 months to go. The current Gen F150 came out in 2003 as a 2004 model. Unless they somehow goose the developement like GM did You can expect it Sept/Oct 2008. It has a lot of development ahead of it still.

    And to be competitive it needs
    a new big V8 - mandatory
    6 Speed tranny - mandatory
    Stability Ctl/Tract Ctl
    6 or 7 airbags standard
    better fuel economy

    The interiors need to be brought into the 21st century as well.

    ... and they need to raise the real world transaction pricing by at least $10000. This may be the most difficult job of all. After 8 years of F150 buyers waiting for the next crisis and waiting for prices to drop - again, to convince these buyers that it's mandatory that they pay $10000 to $15000 more than they are now paying or Ford will cease to exist forever will be a heck of a job.
  • jreaganjreagan Posts: 285
    Seriously what benefit does the RAM bring to Dodge/Chrysler/Mercedes if it is being discounted to breakeven at prices $10000-$14000 less than GM and Toyota.
    Funny, my last month's Pop Mech magazine had an article that put Dodge at the bottom of their 5 truck comparison, but they said the Dodge was the most expensive truck they tested. It listed at $45K. Are they really discounting them down to 30K? I also priced them out on Edmunds (and others) during my research over the past 6 months and found them to be more expensive than GM and Ford. But I didn't look into discounts. No matter, they could discount them down to 20K and I still wouldn't buy one. I just like to know what the competition is selling for.
    The banks may own Ford, but they also know that when they get back on track, they stand to make ALOT of money from them. I will say it again...Ford is NOT going away..PERIOD!!! And this is coming from a GM guy. It is in the best interest of everyone (GM, Toy...everyone) that Ford sticks around. I also think Dodge will be around in some way, shape, or form too.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    Yes when the RAM is equpped the same as the GMT900's or the Tundra it's $3000-$4000 higher in MSRP. This is all fluff but the $10000 below the GM/T level is real. It's all their profit. It's their lifeforce and they are slitting their wrists.

    Depending on the trim level I've heard pricing as low as $24000 with Cummins 4x4's in the mid 30's.

    And to give Ford another problem to solve...today.
    A spokesman for Illinois-based Navistar International Corp. tells Inside Indiana Business that 1,200 workers at the company's Indianapolis facility were notified this morning of a temporary shut down of a diesel engine production line.

    The company says the decision was made due to an ongoing dispute with Ford Motor Co., which Navistar says has stopped honoring the terms of an agreement under which the engines are built. Navistar has been the exclusive diesel engine supplier for Ford's heavy duty pickup trucks since 1979.

    Navistar says workers will spend today shutting down the line. A spokesman for Navistar gave no time frame on when employees could be called back.

    Source: Inside INdiana Business
  • blufz1blufz1 Posts: 2,045
    I think these trucks are becoming too big! The Tundra 6 reg cab stripper weighs 4600#! What happened to the smaller trucks? No,smaller than the Tacoma. If you need a work truck, then I understand but there are way too many of these things used as commuters. Further,unless you are working it, I think an suv is more practical. What do you guys think? Btw, Tundra is more handsome than the Chevy.
  • The problem I have with Supercharged and Turbocharged Truck engines is all the power is usually in the higher RPM range. The last thing I want to do is have to tach the engine to 5000RPM just to pull my trailer up a long grade. Have you ever heard how loud a V8 is at that RPM range? The only current beef I have with my Tundra is the lack of a large gas tank. It really sucks to need to stop every 225 miles to fill up on a trip (With the trailer). Edmunds needs to post MPG ratings while towing a 6000 LB load.
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/future/dodge/09ram0120070203.html

    Here's hoping it knocks off the Rampage style! I'm sold on that.

    DrFill ;)
  • blkhemiblkhemi Posts: 1,717
    "..No full size pick-up truck I know of except a Unimog has fulltime 4WD."

    That's not true at all. The last time I looked, my Dodge had a fulltime 4WD/AWD transfer case.
  • blkhemiblkhemi Posts: 1,717
    Well written post, but I have to sharply disagree with you on certain subjects within it.

    Are you aware that the 5.7L HEMI Ram was the most powerful pick-up sold in America until this very year? Sure Chevy had the SS Silverado, but it is technically classified with the SRT as well as the Lightnin' Ford, and even then the plain HEMI smoked it.

    But as far as mainstream powertrains, up until '07/'08, it went like:

    Ford: 4.6L/231hp - 5.4/300hp.
    Chevy: 4.8L/285hp - 5.3L/285 or 310hp depending upon model
    Nissan: 5.6L/305 or 317hp(hugely conservative)
    Toyota: 4.7L/282hp
    Dodge: 4.7L/235hp - 5.7L/345hp
    And given the fact that this generation Ram has been around since '02, it's a given the competition is going to surpass it, given that's it now the oldest ride in the class.

    As for facts, Dodge will never abandon the award winning HEMI. What they will do is refine it to the limit and advance upon MDS. And yes the next HEMI will have over 400hp by virtue of increase in engine size(among other things) all the while returning better fuel economy than any of the top optional engines of any truck make.
  • jreaganjreagan Posts: 285
    Keep dreamin' blkhemi. More than likely, the next new "Dodge" will be a GM. Or the current one will be a future collector's item, because it will be the last Dodge Ram ever built.
  • then you are driving a dakota, not a ram. the latest ram has part-time not full time 4wd. Unlike the dakota. Go check your own manufacturers web site. Also the dakota is not full size any more then the last gen tundra was. The correct size for the dakota is "mid-size" or "small" depending where you look. Or you could be driving an older generation ram. Either way the new rams are not full time 4wd. My comment stands. If you want full time 4wd on any new full size pickup sold in the USA you are out of luck, none have a center differential built with there transfer case.
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    After effusive compliments and admiration, an easy and decisive overpowering of the competition, in most every test, here is the list of complaints and shortcomings they came up with:

    Underseat storage is limited. Tow hooks are low. Understeer when pushed. Intrusive stability control.

    This is a joke, right? Understeer? Too much stability control? Are we testing BMWs or trucks?

    And they failed to list that the Tundra can tow up to 10,800 lbs., more than the Silverado. They listed it as 10,300, max.

    Sounds like a 3rd-rate truck to me. :confuse:

    They also gave the Silverado top marks for exterior style, something Chevy wasn't even going for. No effort at all from GM in that regard.

    I think I've had enough of C&D. They need to get their S%&$ together! :mad:

    DrFill
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    The Ram 1500 does indeed offer an AWD system... was introduced a couple of years ago.

    kcram - Pickups Host
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    Next time you decide to test full-size trucks, do us a favor, and don't! Looks like your"contractors" know how to test them, and you don't. No payload tests, no towing tests, and Tundra's extreme power advantage and ability, on and off-road, were no match for it's low tow hooks and intrusive stability control, which most trucks don't even offer! Nissan's at spray-on bedliners; GM isn't even up to plastic yet! Why don't you just say "Hey, truckers! You don't really want a powerful, capable truck, right? Why not drive a Denali with an open bed? Damn, that's smooth!"
    A smooth ride and a carlike interior didn't win the last Tundra any awards, but when GM does it, you were either awestruck, or dumbfounded. Maybe you were dumbstruck? Let's play "Deal or No Deal":
    GM: I drive a luxury box, with six liters of futility. No deal.
    Nissan: Great engine, greater cost-cutting. No deal.
    Toyota: Yeah, my tow hooks are low. Watch me move the Earth, and whistle while I work! Deal!

    DrFill
  • pmuscepmusce Posts: 132
    Not sure what you mean by Chevy not going for best styling. When you see these 5 trucks together, you will appreciate the tight gap tolerances the chevy has and great stance. It's a great looking truck. So the Tundra can tow 10,800 pounds and the Silverado can tow 10,500 (the HD Diesal Silvy's can tow in excess to 16,000 by the way). You think 300 pounds is significant? Anyone that would tow 10,000 pounds on a regular basis is not buying a half ton pickup.

    The next time you have a chance to be near a Tundra and Silverado, open and slam the tailgate on each. The Tundra is tinny in comparison. The Tundra also does not have a fully boxed frame which leads me to question its long term durability.

    By the way, I guess you are done with Motor Trend as well because the Silverado beat the Tundra in their April issue as well.
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    belias,

    One of your best posts pal. ;)

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    Spyder,

    Both have another 18 months to go. The current Gen F150 came out in 2003 as a 2004 model. Unless they somehow goose the developement like GM did You can expect it Sept/Oct 2008. It has a lot of development ahead of it still.

    And to be competitive it needs
    a new big V8 - mandatory
    6 Speed tranny - mandatory
    Stability Ctl/Tract Ctl
    6 or 7 airbags standard
    better fuel economy

    The interiors need to be brought into the 21st century as well.


    100% agree ;)

    and they need to raise the real world transaction pricing by at least $10000. This may be the most difficult job of all. After 8 years of F150 buyers waiting for the next crisis and waiting for prices to drop - again, to convince these buyers that it's mandatory that they pay $10000 to $15000 more than they are now paying or Ford will cease to exist forever will be a heck of a job.

    Well it better be one helluva truck with every gadget know to man if your going to get those MSRP's. ;) I think the buyer would proble just buy something else as tears streamed down their faces.

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    So the Silvy one again. :) Wow I was worried.

    Rocky
  • pmuscepmusce Posts: 132
    Sorry buddy, a Tundra will not move the earth. A Silverado with the Duramax diesal and 6 speed Allison Transmission will.

    660 1b.-ft of torque @ 1600 rpm
    Trailering Capacity 16,000 lbs

    Hears a hint, contractors who use 1/2 ton pickups are not trailering 10,000 pounds all day or lighting up the tires a every stoplight. They need a truck that can capably load and transport materials. They spend alot of time driving so comfort and ride is a priority. The Silverado does this better then the Tundra.

    By the way, you can get a spray in bedliner aftermarket no problem for a Silverado. Maybe after you buy your Tundra, see if you can get the frame fully boxed aftermarket. The Chevy comes standard with that and I think its a little more important than plastic in the bed.
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    You're missing the point. Find something the Tundra can't do as well, or better than the other trucks. Inside line explained it great. The Tundra just does more, and does it better. The GM is the kinder ride, The Tundra is the better truck. Simple. :)

    Don't have a problem with the Tundra losing, if you have a reason. Read the article, and show me how this truck is inferior to any truck tested. The firmer ride comes with the TRD pkg. That's a given. Give me something.

    The G35 vs 328i article was brilliant! Old-school C&D, why I loved the magazine from when I was young. Now I know why the BMW is better. But this truck article is virtually useless. It is painfully obvious that trucks are not big in C&Ds skill set. The trucks weren't even tested as trucks, but as AWD cars. It missed the point, and misses the winner.

    Fully-boxed frames aren't new, and Toyota knows that some trucks have them. Implying that the Tundra will fall apart without one is wishful thinking. Toyota seems to think there is a better way for a truck to tow, haul, and drive with a composite frame. With this truck, they weant to lead, not follow.

    The last Tundra was more carlike and gentile than the Silverado, and it won no awards for it.

    Have tried the GM, Nissan, and Toyota tailgates, and I like damped tailgates better! :D

    Hopefull, MT did a better job justifying their decision.

    If the GM is better, fine! Tell me why. C&D sure didn't. :confuse:

    DrFill
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    The Tundra also does not have a fully boxed frame which leads me to question its long term durability.

    Oh NO not the 'it-doesn't-have-a-fully-boxed-frame' curse again.

    Darn didn't Toyota learn from all those dead GM's and F150's from the 80's and 90's that died from overwork because NONE of them had fully-boxed-frames. Heck they're all over the road and job sites dead as Iraqi tanks simply because they don't have fully-boxed-frames.

    Oh wait a second none of this is true. Many are still working and have given GM and Ford a reputation of durability and toughness WITHOUT fully-boxed-frames.

    What did Ford gain by going to a f-b-f? Nothing, except that it wasn't embarrased when the IIHS did follow up crash tests on the new 2004 models and the frame withstood the crash forces instead of folding up like an accordian the way the 2001 did. It gained lots of weight to further stress out the weakest engine in the class and it made the F150 a hard working burro.

    Then Nissan and GM followed dutifully along behind because Ford was the leader. And they gained?
    Nissan - great motor but the payload capacity of a Frontier.
    GMT900 - a solid smooth ride....and more weight....and.....
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    Well those Fully-Boxed Frames do help a truck hold togeather better when they driving around farms. ;)

    Rocky
  • Test drove an 2007 4wd ext cab Rado today. It is greatly improved over my 2003 Rado, steering is perfect, better control over bumps, very quiet.

    I dislike the new interior gages, too much plastic chrome. GM, This is a truck, not some blinged-out pimpmobile. The old interior was straightforward, easy to read gages, please bring it back.

    While you're at it, please bring back the Protec composite bed. I absolutely love this option in my truck. No dents, rust or cracks in 3 years and now Toyota is offering a composite bed. GM had this option years ago and really needs to market this again or risk falling behind Toyota.
  • pmuscepmusce Posts: 132
    Composite frame? You are making things up. The Tundra frame is very similar to the Silverado frame except its not fully boxed. There is nothing different about the frame. It was on display at NAIAS for all to see. Can you tell the difference between a fully boxed frame and one that is not? I never said the Tundra would fall apart. I simply questioned long term durability. The frame will twist more which will cause squeaks and rattles over time. GM has a damped tailgate option as well.

    No matter what I say or C&D or Motor Trend or anyone else you think the Tundra is the best and thats fine with me. Its a good truck. I think the Silverado is better. You asked me reasons why and here they are:

    Better Interior
    Tighter gap tolerances
    Fully boxed frame -> More rigid frame (Read Automobiles review of the Tundra. They complained about the chassis flex)
    Heavy Duty Versions
    Diesal Power Available
    Better Ride
    Better Looking (this is subjective)

    drfill, have you ever owned a full size truck? Again, I'm not trying to convince you because I'm sure I won't. To each his own.
  • pmuscepmusce Posts: 132
    Again I never suggested the trucks would fall apart. Great for Toyota to match the 80-90's GM and Ford trucks for frame integrity. The standard now is fully boxed frame. If you don't understand the benefit of that, that's your problem. It had nothing to do with crash tests. It reduces chassis flex. As to what it did for Ford is gave Ford the best chassis in the fill size market. Ford has other issues with their truck (i.e. power) but the frame and chassis are great. The reason Nissan and GM also boxed their frames is that it is better engineering. I can't wait to see the HD Tundra with its current frame try to tow 16,000 lbs on a regular basis.

    So Toyota did not follow the leader. What does the Tundra bring to the market that is so unique? Don't say power because each generation of these trucks ups the power race. I'm sure the 2009 Ram and F1050 will trump 381 hp and then the leapfrogging will occur again and again.
This discussion has been closed.