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

1444547495062

Comments

  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    Silvy had 4 recalls last year on the '06, a truck they've been making for 10 years!

    You meant 7 years as the current truck was built in 1999' The 07' Classic makes 8 years. ;)

    Rocky
  • pmuscepmusce Posts: 132
    "Toyota has trouble just keeping up with demand, at this point. They have a real problem!"

    drfill, the article you linked to mentions Toyota having a a problem keeping up with demand for engines in general, not with the Tundra in particular. In terms of sales of the Tundra so far, there should be no issue with having enough engines to meet demand. If Toyota spent the massive dollars they did building a 200,000 capacity plant and a new pickup but can't build enough engines to support the plant capacity, then they are idiots.

    "I'd expect a new 5L that gets 300+ HP and 20MPG in 2010"

    2010? Gm's 5.3 currently makes 320 HP and is rated 16/22 today. By 2010, the numbers you are stating will not be competitive. They better be aiming higher than that.
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    "or does "sierra2007" sound alot like jreagan?"

    What'd I miss? I can't find any posts from 'sierra2007' (and a few posts appear to be missing as well).

    Is someone being a bad boy?
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    That's a good question, truckgirl76.

    Have you ever posted to Edmunds before, under a different username? From what I understand, Edmunds has the capacity to track individuals through their ISP address so that even if a particular individual changes their user name, an individual who has been banned will STAY banned.

    However, if you are indeed a brand new individual posting here (rather than just someone with a new user name), you might try sending a note to Edmund's technical support. Or, you might try sending an e-mail to the Host of the Pickups forum, kcram@edmunds.com.

    I hope this helps - and welcome to the forums. It can get lively......
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    Their 4.7 is used in many different vehicles, which affects Tundra in particular, and creates the 5.7 push from Toyota.

    GM will have the same problem with the 6-speed, and it'll be a couple of years before every Silverado engine gets a 6-speed.

    By 2010, both trucks middle-offerings will be similar in drivetrain.

    Haven't seen the 4.7 tested in the Tundra. Have seen 7.7 0-60, 7k towing out of the 5.3 with a 4-speed. Nothing to fear there. I'm sure the 4.7 can compete with that at this point, and with a 5-speed at that.

    DrFill
  • rubendogrubendog Posts: 7
    Did jreagan change into sierra mist2007 then into truck girl 76? I thought cross-dressing was banned in the truck forums. :)
  • beliasbelias Posts: 316
    Well, I've been away from the forum for a number of days doing my own research on the vehicles after work and trying to bring some possibly new info to help with the discussion here.
    I spent 2 hours at a Chevy dealership and almost 1/2 hour at a GMC dealership in my area and got a lot of hands on information. Again, unfortunately, I was not able to take a test drive, but I did deal with a very knowledgeable, experienced, and all-around good salesman at the Chevy dealership.
    Even though I've had several more "personal" attacks (even when I was off the board), I made a point of at least trying to emphasize the benefits of the Chevy truck that the GMers here were pointing out and asked the salesman (lets call him CH) about them and told him about some of the points for/against both the Chevy and the Tundra that were made and assured him that even though I wasn't there to buy on the spot, that if he could help sort through the info that it would at least give me the chance to actually look at things in more detail and more objectively.
    I told CH that I had just been to another Chevy dealership in the area almost 2 weeks earlier and looked at the truck, but there were a number of things that I had questions about. I also assured him that he has every opportunity to emphasize the positives and make the best case for why things are the way they are.
    CH looked to be in his late 50s, maybe early 60s (but I doubt that). He said that he had sold cars/trucks from Ford, Dodge, and now Chevy and has been selling for a total of over 20 years and for almost 10 years with Chevy. So I got the notion that he knows what he is doing.
    The first thing he did was asked me what I drove and what do I know about the new trucks. I told him that currently I have an Acura, but that I've had both Toyota and Chevy before. I also proceeded to tell him everything that I knew about the new trucks. The whole time he listened and didn't once interrupt me.
    After I finished, he said that while not everything that I knew was 100% correct that most of it was; but more importantly that some of those things weren't why he thinks the GMT900 was a better truck overall.
    He proceeded to take me over to a truck that had been recently sold and was getting gassed up and prepped for the customer to pick it up the next day (crew-cab LTZ – fully loaded except for Nav and 4x4 – steps uninstalled). Then he asked me if I had a family, and I told him yes, that is why I’m looking at doing a crew-cab only. What followed was a confirmation of what I had said much earlier in the discussion. He said that this truck is more than capable of doing what I needed it to do unless I have a yacht of some kind (which I assured him I don’t) and that luxury crew-cabs have essentially become a family vehicle and that people that want REAL trucks usually get at least a ¾ if not 1 ton truck. I didn’t expect CH to say that, but again, that is how I’ve always felt about trucks and it established some common ground right away.
    CH did emphasize what he felt were some proven aspects of the truck that I had brought about in the discussion. First off, he said that the frame is fully boxed and is very strong all the way through. He did say that while they believe that it is better than Toyota’s, that he would not want to insist on that yet because they have not completely examined the whole Tundra setup through and through and that to him it didn’t matter much in the grand scheme of things (that he has not seen a broken frame on a truck even before they were fully boxed that was not in some kind of an accident). But what he did know was that there is no issue to frame strength with the Chevy. He then proceeded to talk about the power-train saying that whether I get the 5.3 or 6.0 engine, that both were proven to be strong and reliable and that Toyota’s may indeed be more advanced and have broader power around the range, that it won’t really matter much in real-world driving. Beyond a certain amount of power, there is no real benefit. I agreed with him somewhat on that count. Still, he admitted though that if people truly felt that it was no issue, we wouldn’t need to build the larger engines, so CH said that it is up to me to choose what I think is good, but that what they have is proven well. He talked a little about AFM but said that it is not a major selling point because most people don’t know the difference in gas mileage and that at about 10,000 miles the truck will really be giving the proper mpg for virtually the rest of the life of the truck.
    CH said that for families, we try to emphasize that we have the best mileage, but if you buy a truck, that isn’t what I should count on and that I should look at cars/minivans if mileage is a big concern to me.
    Following this, he took me inside the truck and proceeded to show me the luxury items and seating configuration for the back seat and the fronts. Here I took a little issue, but didn’t make a big fuss, but I did tell him that it didn’t feel really luxurious (lots of plastic and the fake wood didn’t remotely look close to real wood and “creaked” when I put my fingers on it) he said that for a truck this is as good as it gets unless I step up into the Denali which is sold at the GMC dealer down the street. He didn’t seem to want to talk too much about the interior (surprisingly), but he did show me the flip-up rear seats in the back to address my concern. He said that while he won’t claim that it is bigger than in the Tundra CrewMax, he does feel it is better then the reclining feature because it offers space on the floor. So I told him about the fact that reclining the seat up does provide space on the floor, but takes away width and that it is already 6 inches less-wide then the Tundra’s when the seat folds down. CH did say that yes, it just depends on what you want… larger square boxes more easily fit in the Tundra, taller narrower boxes more easily fit in the Silverado. So I told him what he thought about loading a big ice box in the back here after a hunting trip. He got this look of shock on his face and said that it should be put in the bed – that the mess of the cooler and the smell coming out of it would get in the carpet and would need to be thoroughly cleaned. CH did say that if I’m going to go hunting, that, unless I need to take all my hunting buddies with me, I should look at a regular cab or get a cap or tonneau cover on the bed if I’m concerned about theft or space. I told him that I don’t hunt now, but that this was mentioned as a benefit of the flip up seat. CH said that a better benefit is if I want to take a new Plasma tv home… the box should fit in the cab.
  • beliasbelias Posts: 316
    We went through a number of things including how to properly engage 4wd low (the vehicle must be in N and go no more than 30mph) and things like storage, etc. Neither of us were rude or challenging, just genuinely asking questions and he never got upset or frustrated – neither did I. CH did mention that two things they didn’t anticipate being a big deal on these trucks were that having no driver’s grab handle and only a total of 4 air bags possible. CH thinks that these should have been corrected because guys (like me) that have families and are looking at these vehicles have a hard time with WAF (wife acceptance factor) when a) it is difficult for the wife to get in without the grab handle, and b) that the single biggest look of shock from the wife comes when they find out that you can’t get more than 4 air bags. CH did emphasize the bed and the tailgate assist. Just an fyi for people here though, the tailgate assist only works bringing it up, not down… it will slam down if you let go. But nothing bad about that setup, just a caution.
    Now, CH did concede that the truck does ride lower (not as much ground clearance) than the Tundra but he saw that as an advantage. He also talked bout E85 compatibility, lots of available parts and a knowledgeable service staff and crew that understand how to build and repair trucks and Chevy’s incredible history in this regard.
    Overall I left with a positive impression of the truck, and especially with CH. He was pretty honest about the strengths/weaknesses of the truck overall when I questioned him about it. The interior was something that just didn’t seem nearly as good as people made it out to be and both times that I saw one I wasn’t that impressed with it, but that is more personal taste. Even the 07 Denali that I looked at afterwards (though it was a Yukon and not the truck since the truck was not in stock) had all plastic door panels and dash/surround. We both agreed though that it was a lot better then the last one. CH said that the old interior just had to go! I think Ford seems to be the best in this area, though it lacks in many other areas.
    So while there is a lot of fur flying over which truck is better on this forum, I can say that many of the points argued on both sides do seem a little exaggerated when it comes to how it will influence the buying decision. That is not to say that they don’t matter, but ultimately what suits each individual’s needs is going to drive the decision. While I came away with a good impression of the truck and an even better one of CH, there were a few things that he even admitted should be improved on. I thought that an extra headrest in the back and moving the back seat away from the window would make a more comfortable ride for adults. He thought that adding leather in more places and a more rugged look to the interior controls were called for. I mentioned that the side-curtain air bag really protruded into the driver’s headroom on the side (i.e. that it goes into the cabin too deeply for taller guys not to hit their heads on – especially when turning or on bumpy roads). I also pointed out the differences in the stereo and just a lack of storage bins in the cabin overall including the center console not being as large as expected. Also that the gauges looked dated and that there is no option for the shifter to come off of the steering column when not having a bench-seat up front. He nodded and said that not every truck is going to be perfect, but that capability and reliability were not issues.
    In any case, we parted company with a very good impression of the other. CH even told me he was impressed with what I did know and wants my business and that questionable claims by loyalists often alienate new people from coming into their dealership. He mentioned that while he loves having their business, they don’t want to be viewed as an exclusive bunch and that there is room for everyone. I thought that was a nice gesture! Anyhow… this is a really long post, but I just wanted to get it out
  • Hmmmm.... I see on the Wall Street Journal on line that some of the Toyota dealers are offering $1500 cash on the 2007 Tundra. It seems they are "stacking up" on the dealers lots. I think Toyota over estimated the demand for this truck. Stay tuned.
  • bugchuckerbugchucker Posts: 118
    "Some" dealers? How do you find them? If this is just off MSRP, you could negotiate that yourself on any Tundra. With the price of gas rising, the sale of any truck will slow. It is $2.75 for regular and will soon be over $3 again. The first thing that my wife pointed out on the truck was the 14/18 MPG posted.
  • beliasbelias Posts: 316
    2010? Gm's 5.3 currently makes 320 HP and is rated 16/22 today. By 2010, the numbers you are stating will not be competitive. They better be aiming higher than that.

    True, but one has to wonder in general if fuel economy will get better for anyone. The epa numbers for the Silverado next year are going to fall considerably because the new epa standards will be in place (something that will now actually be meaningful). Not that it is bad, but more likely a 13or14/17or18 city/hwy rating and an overall average of 15/16 may be more the case.
    By 2010 it is doubtful that any truck will get any meaningful fuel average benefit (though we can all hope!). Alternative fuels (aside from diesel) that are new are not getting better economy, in fact it is worse in most cases. And historically, the averages have been getting worse for most of the last 20+ years. That isn't because engines are worse; they are a lot better, but people's demand for more power and capability has usurped much of the technology used to deliver the main fuel-efficiency strides that were gained along the way.
    In 2010, people may demand a 500hp engine on a 1/2 ton truck. It sound ridiculous, but until recently 400hp sounded that way too... we're already there and even more on several engines in the market.
  • fshifshi Posts: 57
    Toyota Dealers Offer Discount On Newly Redesigned Tundra
    By Norihiko Shirouzu
    Word Count: 916 | Companies Featured in This Article: Toyota Motor, General Motors, Ford Motor, DaimlerChrysler

    Toyota Motor Corp. says some of its dealers are offering as much as a $1,500 discount on the basic work truck version of Toyota's newly redesigned Tundra truck, just barely one month after it went on sale. The discount for the Texas-built large truck reflects the intense competition in this lucrative segment, and the challenge Toyota faces in its effort to substantially expand its sales in a segment long dominated by Detroit brands.

    The discount is a one-month, nationwide program that began this month and is described by Toyota as "another tool," to spur sales, in addition to relatively low ...
  • 03accordman03accordman Posts: 671
    "Hmmmm.... I see on the Wall Street Journal on line that some of the Toyota dealers are offering $1500 cash on the 2007 Tundra. It seems they are "stacking up" on the dealers lots. I think Toyota over estimated the demand for this truck. Stay tuned."

    Yestarday's WSJ had the Tundra listed on the top 10 list of vehicles that stay on dealer lots for minimum days (i think it was like 17 or so days for the Tundra)
  • beliasbelias Posts: 316
    Personally, I would welcome a discount as that is good for the consumer, but I think it is relatively early for having trucks "sit on the lot". If the article is true and it is referring to regular cab work trucks, then it may be that they're targeting that group to get more of their trucks on construction sites, during the pre-spring/early-spring season.
    Judging how home-building companies are doing though, truck numbers for everyone may be down this year...
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    Belias - I just wanted to say thanks for the time and effort you put into this; and for the fact that even though CH knew you weren't in there to buy but was willing to spend a LOT of time discussing the truck with you. He sounds a like a rare breed of salesman.....
  • beliasbelias Posts: 316
    Yes, I was surprised that he spent that much time with me going over the truck. But I should let people know a couple of things that make it easy for the salesperson. The first is that you shouldn't go during busy times; generally speaking busy times are evenings and weekends. I went literally early afternoon and nobody was in the showroom when I arrived, though a couple of people showed up during part of my discussion with CH.
    Secondly, make it a point to let the salesperson know that if he/she has to look after another customer to get a sale that they are most welcome to do so. Not only does this give some good will and show sincerity, but the salesperson should appreciate the fact that you understand that they need to make a living like everyone else. Another benefit is that the salesperson won't rush the answers because they are worried about not getting in on a deal...
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    From Day#1 the more agressive dealers have been dealing at $500-$2500 off sticker. See Ts for reports. A good sized dealer need to have about 40 to 70 in stock to cover the wide variety of colors and configurations ( there are nearly 700 possibilities ).
  • You can't make any judgements based on these # of days on the lot at this time because the supply pipeline is not full.

    If the typical Toyota dealer only has an average of 4 trucks on the lot, he is going to burn through these much faster than if he had a more normal 40 units. With 10 times the inventory, the average number of days goes to 170.
  • bingo3bingo3 Posts: 3
    This is correct. It's margin-of-safety CYA.

    Toyota says to use trailer brakes over 1000# Gross Trailer Wgt
    GM say to use trailer brakes over 2000# Gross Trailer Wgt.

    Next subject.

    Why so quick to brush this off as a non issue? Seems like a pretty big advantage for the general on this issue to me. Twice the rating. 1000# is not very much weight before you need trailer brakes. Sounds pretty lame to me, What happened to those big bad brakes on the tundra?

    If you tow anything... jet skis, fishing boats, ruabouts, lawn tractors or any other light to moderate trailer load that does not require a 3/4 Ton, that 1000# limit is a major factor to consider. Why buy a truck if you cannot use it. I want a pick up that will tow 2 PWC's or a ski boat. TOYOTA CANNOT. There is no logic in risking a warranty on a $30K investment to go fishing! That ALONE stopped me from buying the Tundra. So I guess I will now say hi to my new Silvy brothers (and sisters)!
  • titancrewtitancrew Posts: 17
    California law requires trailers weighing more than 1500# to have brakes. Laws differ for other states.
  • fshifshi Posts: 57
    Toyota Tundra Makes Inroads with Its Owners
    autoobserver.com (Edmunds.com)

    By Michelle Krebs

    March 9, 2007

    Toyota launched the Tundra pickup truck only last month, and so far, based on Edmunds.com’s analysis, it is drawing sales largely from Toyota loyalists rather than stealing sales from General Motors, Ford, Chrysler and Nissan.

    Based on February sales data, Edmunds.com puts Toyota ’s loyalty rate on the Tundra – calculated based on what make vehicle was traded in for the Tundra – at 50 percent, up dramatically from 38.3 percent the month before. That indicates Toyota owners are trading their current Toyotas – Tundras, largely – for the new Tundra.

    To meet its goal of selling 200,000 Tundras that are built at its new plant in Texas annually, Toyota will have to steal sales from existing truck makers. Ford and Dodge may be most vulnerable to Toyota ’s conquest attempts. The Dodge Ram is the oldest of the full-size pickups on the market. The Ford F-150, America ’s best-selling truck for three decades, is just behind it.

    Ford’s loyalty rate slipped to 61 percent in February from 65.2 percent; Dodge dipped from 53.2 percent to 49.6 percent. Nissan edged up to 33 percent from 31.5 percent.

    The Edmunds.com data shows General Motors owners are extremely loyal to the automaker’s full-size pickup trucks, and their loyalty is climbing. Loyalty rates on the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra, already the highest in the industry, have been creeping up month by month since the new models were introduced. Chevrolet Silverado buyers in February, who previously owned a GM-branded vehicle rose to 75.6 percent from 71.3 percent; the Sierra to 70.4 percent from 69.3 percent. More specifically, owners of Silverado and Sierra pickups increasingly are trading them for the new versions.

    Toyota kicked off its largest advertising campaign ever with the NFL Super Bowl; Advertising Age places Tundra advertising spending at more than $100 million, a number Toyota does not dispute. Those ads focus on the Tundra’s hauling and load-carrying capabilities, aspects lacking in previous versions of the Tundra. Toyota also spent more on training dealership personnel on the Tundra than it has on any other vehicle.

    Toyota is rumored to be providing incentives to dealers to sell Tundras, giving a bonus if it is sold to the owner of a Detroit-produced pickup.

    In response, Ford began advertising its Super Duty heavily during Super Bowl and recently announced a new truck ad campaign featuring Mike Rowe, host of the cable television program, “Dirty Jobs.” Dodge has beefed up advertising. And GM’s pickup truck advertising remains strong since its trucks still are in launch mode.
  • beliasbelias Posts: 316
    If you tow anything... jet skis, fishing boats, ruabouts, lawn tractors or any other light to moderate trailer load that does not require a 3/4 Ton, that 1000# limit is a major factor to consider. Why buy a truck if you cannot use it. I want a pick up that will tow 2 PWC's or a ski boat. TOYOTA CANNOT. There is no logic in risking a warranty on a $30K investment to go fishing! That ALONE stopped me from buying the Tundra. So I guess I will now say hi to my new Silvy brothers (and sisters)!

    This isn't saying that you can't tow those things with the Tundra, just that trailer brakes should be used beyond a certain weight. Anybody that has towed anything remotely heavy will understand this is a non-issue as you should be using trailer brakes anyway. Toyota just has a more restricted interpretation of its safety policy. It has nothing to do with capability. If you believe that, you've obviously never towed anything -- even with a compact truck. I gotta say bingo3, your posts sounds an awful lot like somebody that was previously on the forums... funny how you started around the same time he had to leave too! ;)
  • How strange? Car and Driver had a Pickup contest for its April '06 issue.

    They did not mention the Chevys 6.0L engine fuel cutoff-slash-lying to customer about Engine Performance feature.

    They did however, say that the Chevy won the comparison!
    What does this mean? And you know, if you read the artcle without looking at the place number, you would think that they hated it :P

    I hope that next year they will add the 6 speed and remove the fuel cutoff thing. It would increase performance and have more respect for the customer.

    I am not a buy foreign guy, but seriously guys GM has to change this.
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,675
    Most manufacturers, not just Toyotas, have a 1000 lb. non-trailer brake tow rating. Nissan, Jeep, Dodge Ram and so forth all are rated at 1000 pounds for non-braked trailers. If you read Ford truck/SUV owner's manuals they recommend trailer brakes on EVERYTHING!

    Full size GM trucks do have a 2000 unbraked tow limit. The Chevy TrailBlazer has a 1500 pound rating, but the old S-Blazer was rated at 1000. I think Land Rover is around 1650 pounds, not sure about the VW Touareg?

    This towing information is in your owners manual. Check it out.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,675
    Not sure if this has been mentioned here, but the new Tundra passes the upcoming 2009 government roof strength/rollover regulations. Not sure if GM, and any/or any other fullsize truck can match that.

    For MY2009 all trucks must meet these regulations, and the Tundra already does.

    Bob
  • geo9geo9 Posts: 739
    I guess the "toyota terroists" salesfolks aka NON-owners
    are gonna beat up on the new guy (a GM fan)............

    And yes its funny the tundra with those big bad brakes
    is limited to 1000 lbs. of unbraked trailer towing
    while poor ol' GM is rated at 2000 !!!!!!!!!!!

    Ahh........the spin continues !!!!!!!!!!!!

    Could be worse........could of bought a honda "pantyline"
    or those problematic titans.....aka future orphan trucks!
    Sales of both are swirling down the bowl! :sick:
  • ggesqggesq Posts: 701
    I guess being a "toyotaterrorist" & "nonowner" is worse than getting booted off of Edmunds and then coming back under a different name and then getting booted off again?

    Desperate times call for desperate measures.

    I agree with most that the Silvy/Sierra are probably the "benchmark" in this segment. I also believe that it is "healthy" for the full size truck market to be competitive. I don't believe anyone here or Toyota corporate intended the 07 Tundra surpassing the Silvy/Sierra in sales because obviously it needs to prove itself.
    IMHO, Toyota is finally taking the full size truck segment seriously and will keep GM on its toes. Obviously that last statement is up to debate but for the time being however short it may be there are specific advantages that the Tundra has over the Silvy/Sierra and vice-versa. It really depends on what your looking for in a truck and in a company in general.
    This isn't a sprint to the top, it's a marathon. Only time will tell how well either truck will do in the long run IMHO.

    BTW, here's a perfect example of a spin:

    "And yes its funny the tundra with those big bad brakes
    is limited to 1000 lbs. of unbraked trailer towing
    while poor ol' GM is rated at 2000 !!!!!!!!!!!"
  • Ur funny u redneck, so what who cares about sales it's quality that matters. Look at the Tundra for a instance the Tundra has nothing in sales compared to Ford, GM, Dodge, but the quality is the key ingredient, in the Tundra. So what WOW! GM is rated at 2000 lbs of unbraked trailer towing, big deal. Those are manufacthers estimates, the trucks can get more or less depending on the engine. For all you could know Tundra could stop upto 2500 lb and GM could be at 1500 lbs, who knows! All I know is that Toyota is gonna steal alot of sales from Ford, and Dodge!
  • obyoneobyone Posts: 8,065
    seems like all the tundra is doing is stealing sales from previous tundra owners.

    Personally, don't care who the manufacturer is....I wouldn't buy the first model year of any truck or car. No company is perfect.
  • blckislandguyblckislandguy Posts: 1,150
    Belias, gee, both you and CH must have a lot of time on your hands. There isn't really anything new or significant in all this. Yeh, the GM interior isn't quite a Maybach's, while the Tundra engine can wind higher and has slightly more power at the margins you can buy Chevy parts anywhere, blue collar guys and wannabes buy 3/4 ton or more, etc. etc.

    Speaking of frames, the reason why you box a frame on a 1/2 ton really isn't to prevent the frame from breaking (these aren't KW logging trucks pulling double trailers from a landing in ME) but to not allow flexing and to keep the suspension geometry fixed. As a side note, I have had a frame break, actually rust through, on an F150. But only after 20 New England winters. I wonder though if boxing the frame is going to trap moisture and hurt longevity some years down the road?
This discussion has been closed.