Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Toyota Tundra vs. Chevrolet Silverado

1…3133353637

Comments

  • 1offroader1offroader Member Posts: 208
    vmax,

    See my post a few pages back on AFM. It really works. I noticed that my mpg went from 17-19 in V-8 mode to 24-26 in V-4 mode. The trick is to keep it in V-4 mode as much as possible, which is not possible in hilly terrain. As soon as you start to climb a slight grade, or need to pass, the engine goes back into V-8 mode and mpg drops. You can watch all this happen on the Driver Information Center. However, on a 335 mi. trip at 70 mph I got 18.2 mpg overall. With the a/c on the whole way.

    My concern is not whether it works (it works quite well), but whether it will be reliable in the long run.

    I wish GM would offer a manual 'lock' in the V-4 mode so that the driver could choose the econo mode when driving conditions allow. MPG could potentially go WAY up.

    I wish a Tundra owner would do a similar test and post the results. I'm guessing it's significantly less than 18 mpg. The laws of physics cannot be repealed - those cubic inches MUST be fed. The AFM cuts cubic inches by 50% when it is engaged, hence the superior fuel economy of the Silverado.

    At $3.00+/gallon, I'll take every mpg I can get.

    1offroader
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    I see a lot of bells and whistles on your list, and the depth of the GM line-up can only be rivaled by Ford.

    Toyota, obviously, isn't trying to sell every truck buyer on the market. They want to hit the heart, then grow from there.

    It could be 10 years before Toyota has a line-up including HD and diesel. That apparently is secondary to Toyota, as more 1/2 tons are sold, and are easier to develop.

    Toyota's first job is to build a legitimate full-size truck, that is fully-competitive with any domestic trucks core models.

    Toyota has never done this before. So let's start from there.

    Part 2 is to get the truck plant running at close to full-capacity, building the truck as planned, and having as few kinks as possible, which would be a mighty achievement, given everything is brand-new.

    Then they can start to fill in the spaces. Full-size trucks need more customization than other vehicles. Some buyers want luxury. Some want more off-road parts. Some want more strength. Toyota will be able to sell more parts after a couple of years on the market.

    This will be a long year for Toyota, but if they can do it without major issues, they can sell more than 200k next year.

    It seems Toyota targeted off-raod ability, towing capacity, engine and transmission, interior room, bed volume, engine availablity (even the RC can get the top engine), and braking ability.

    Has Toyota hit it's mark in building a full-size truck? One good enough to get conquest sales, at least initially. Can they get the ball rolling?

    I think they've got their game face on, and this is a high priority for Toyota, and it shows.

    I think the lack of Tundras on lots is due to heavy quality controls. Toyota doesn't want recalls and such to hurt the vehicle at the start.

    I think they'd be happy selling 150k this year, with no major building issues.

    Toyota cannot afford to be perceived as weak or small. The truck will be marketed accordingly. I believe the truck can do anything any other domestic can do, some things better. Being plush and genteel didn't help the last truck, so they'll attack from another angle, and see what they hit.

    DrFill
  • vmax2007vmax2007 Member Posts: 46
    I agree that it works, I have watched it on my DIC as well. But I do not have enough miles on it to determine the real-world effects on mpg. It only seems to go into 4 mode while decelerating. But I have not had it on any freeway trips yet. So, your info is promising, thanks!
  • vmax2007vmax2007 Member Posts: 46
    Doc, doc, doc,

    Finally, once you calm down, your posts get MUCH better. I agree with most of what you just said, that is a first. But, based on that, how can you say..generally speaking..that the Tundra is the leader when it's still in it's infancy getting it's 1/2 ton to the lots with all of the gaps filled in?

    Yeah, they may want to hit the heart, but they are going to have to go through a bullet-proof vest to get there. This is a tough segment to break into. They should know that by now after the T-100 fiasco, and the last Tundra wasn't much better. they have their hands full, but this is by far their best attempt...so far.
  • pmuscepmusce Member Posts: 132
    "The point is Tundra is the best Half-Ton.

    Silverado is best at HD/Diesel.

    Oops....wait a minute!

    2008 Super Duty! 24k towing. Curses!

    Ok....Chevy can be 2nd Best at 1/2 ton. 2nd Best at HD/Diesel.

    I guess when Chevy "ponies up", funny you should mention that, then you can make your argument. "

    Amazing how can pick the best 1/2 ton and HD/Diesel from your computer. Have you ever driven a 2008 Super Duty? (By the way I think the Super Duty is a great truck. I'm in no position to say whether its better than a 3500HD Silverado). Have you ever driven any Full Size pickup? If you want think the Tundra is the best 1/2 ton, go ahead and think it but don't proclaim it like its a fact. The market has spoken loud and clear and the GTM900's are king.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Well then by default, you must admit to the same for the Tundra. The "planned" 200k units Toyota anticipates on moving won't scratch the 450k of the Rams, the close to 900k of the Silverado, and the near 950k of the F-150, a vehicle that was eclipsed by the Silverado last month and is on track for the same this month?

    Your numbers are off somewhat. I don't think you've been keeping up with news reports.

    The Ram may struggle to reach 350K units.
    The F150 may struggle to reach 800K units.
    The GM twins should reach almost 1 Million.
    The Tundra should hit 150K this year ( ramp up ).
  • pmuscepmusce Member Posts: 132
    "The big three have not produced a decent truck since GM's 1972 models."

    That's the most ignorant statement on this forum. You lose all credibility when you post a nonsense comment like that.

    "Why didn't they do it from the start? Toyota puts their best foot forward so then the rest of them decide clean up their act?"

    So let me understand your reasoning. You think GM should have ramped up there new 6-speed from 0 to 900,000 in one year (what they would need to supply all GMT900's), but you have no problem with the fact that Toyota is only offering the 6-speed on the 5.7 V8 version of the Tundra. If Toyota always puts there best foot forward, why do the V6 and 4.7 V8 Tundra's not have 6 speeds?
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    And the BoatTrailering mag which is something real truckers refer to, chose the Tundra over all the others.

    CAR and Driver is somewhat suspect in analyzing trucks for how trucks should be used.

    I'll go with BoatTrailering. You can stay with CAR and Driver if that rows your boat.

    Bring it.
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    If you want think the Tundra is the best 1/2 ton, go ahead and think it but don't proclaim it like its a fact. The market has spoken loud and clear and the GTM900's are king.

    From what I've seen of the truck, in person, sitting in it, and all the reviews, from owners, and testers, the Tundra is at least as good as a 6.0L Silvy, which is fine with me.

    GMT900 sales will, and always will be at or near the top.

    But Toyota may have struck "Deep Impact". Phase 1 is complete.

    Tundra may be benchmarked my Ford and Dodge for their '09 trucks, so all I can do is agree with Edmunds on their decision.

    DrFill
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Tundra doesn't have to sell 700-900k to be a grand slam success.

    Depends on their goals. But if they want to surpass the big 3, they will have to.

    The sales volume doesn't matter because obviously they just can't produce more than maybe 250K units. The only thing that matters is keeping the volume growing in small steps and keeping the line profitable. Nothing else matters.
  • pmuscepmusce Member Posts: 132
    "Tundra may be benchmarked my Ford and Dodge for their '09 trucks, so all I can do is agree with Edmunds on their decision."

    Yeah, I'm sure Ford wants to tear away all those people flocking to Toyota dealerships to buy Tundra's. Why would they want to benchmark the GMT900's? GM is only on pace to sell 850,000+. You must be right.

    "GMT900 sales will, and always will be at or near the top."

    You got that right.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    I went to a web page that explained the ratings. 5 stars means 10% or less chance of serious injury. 4 stars means 11%-20% chance of serious injury. So, let's say that the Silverado was 10% and the Tundra was 20% (the highest for each vehicle). The Tundra has TWICE the chance of serious injury for its driver and front passenger.

    Unless you get T-boned then the T900's and F150's without side airbags are sure to create more passenger injuries than the Tundra.

    Tundra owners will have a sore chest. F150 and T900 owners may be in the morgue. There sure is a significant discrepancy here. As pointed out previously OnStar is of no use if you're in heaven.
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    The initial sale is not necessarily what Tundra is here to do.

    Toyota also wants the owners best friend to hear about the truck, the girlfriend whoi drives a Focus. It's conquest sales that Toyota really wants.

    I think if they can get to 75-100k a year, they will be thrilled! It will have a domino effect, and generate secondary income off of the initial sale. Tundra traffic may fund other projects, and just the buzz can bring in fresh traffic that will help Toyota as a whole.

    I think they can get 75k conquest sales a year, by next year.

    DrFill
  • bostnwhalrbostnwhalr Member Posts: 128
    Personally, I think that the Silverado and Tundra each offer their own advantages and disadvantages.

    Previous Tundras have been very reliable in comparison to the domestic competition. However, I'd be surprised if Toyota is able to achieve similar reliability ratings for the first year or two given the fact that the 2007 Tundra is a new design being manufactured in a new plant with a new engine and transmission. Nissan certainly bombed (reliability wise) with the Titan.

    Having said that, GM loyalists can't deny that Toyota has made significant inroads in almost every segment they compete in. Look at the market share gains of Toyota and losses at GM over the past 20+ years.

    Take the minivans. Remember the "Toyota Van" from 1984. Horrible! The Previa? Very weird but very reliable. Now, the second generation Sienna is the top minivan (along with the Honda Odyssey) in every comparison test. The GM minivans? Worst reliability and now discontinued (along with Ford's Freestar).

    How about the compact/midsize truck segment that GM and Ford used to dominate with their Rangers and S-10s? Does anyone honestly feel the Colorado/Canyon are competitive against the Tacoma? Around here in New England, I see mostly Tacomas and Frontiers along with a smattering of Dakotas. VERY few Colorados.

    I'm not suggesting that Toyota will dominate the Full-Size Truck segment. However, Toyota knows how to compete in markets they go after. This will put further margin pressure on Ford and GM in this segment. Their response should be to figure out what people want and delivery.

    Having said this, I do think that GM has turned a corner. Their reliability is getting there and their new designs are very promising (Acadia/Outlook/Enclave, Aura/2008 Malibu, Suburban, Silverado, 2008 CTS). Time will tell....
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    GM seems to have turned around their product and quality, management.

    They are not capable of "stopping" Toyota. Only Toyota can do that.

    Toyota is in a hunting position where they can just prey upon the wekest link, if you will, and take sales from GM, Ford, or Chrysler. Whenever somoone drops the ball, they can be the X-factor, and convert them.

    It is comforting to a market that sees the domestics with quite a checkered past. It is threatening to the the domestics, who have to jump over quite a perception hurdle in order to compete with a Teflon Don, if you will.

    What Toyota is really doeing is changing the face of American cars, one car, or truck, at a time.

    There was a time when Arnold Schwarzenegger was laughed at for wanting to be a movie star. Now he's much more than that.

    It's a beautiful story, with real conseqences (sic) here, and worldwide. :surprise:

    I don't know what'll happen to Chrysler and Ford, but GM seems to be up and running, but Toyota has a head of steam, and Tundra may be the final baton in this race.

    Toyota is fast, and patient. A deadly combination.

    Can't wait to see the ending!

    DrFill
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    You have got to be kidding?

    Toyota couldn't have said it better themselves....talk about propaganda...sheesh.

    What's interesting is that the bulk of the Tundra sales are coming from owners of the first generation Tundras. Once that runs its course we will see how the Tundra sales will hold up. Till then the rest is speculation.
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    Great minds think alike! ;)

    Good night all.

    DrFill
  • beliasbelias Member Posts: 316
    Just caught up again with this forum. Interesting tests going on in this area with Toyota dealers buying up Ford, Chevy, Dodge and Nissan trucks and letting you compare them right there at their dealership. I think that would be good for GM and Ford to do as well.
    No point in making the argument that Tundra sales are going to first gen Tundra owners. Not only is that a good thing for Toyota, but GM, Ford, and Dodge would loose 3/4s of their sales if previous gen buyers didn't buy from them again. That is loyalty and every company aspires to keeping it.
    When I went to the Chevy dealer, the new Silverado was selling well, but he had a lot full of previous gen Silverados sitting there too. Not sure how many were taken on trade for the new ones, but no doubt that they had no shortage of them on the lots.
  • beliasbelias Member Posts: 316
    BTW, welcome back jreagan... :D
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    As has been noted here many times. What happens in these first months is of no consequence at all. You may very well be right about the first sales but from posts on Ts and here it seems that there are a vocal group ( minority ? ) of former Big 3 owners who are also switching because theyve been unhappy with their current vehicles.

    Unless Chrysler/Dodge and secondarily Ford resolve their corporate issues quickly two of the former Big 3 may be in for a tough time. Both GM and Toyota would benefit from a signigicant downsizing or disappearance of either.

    10 years from now there will be at least two plants building Tundras at the rate of 300-500K units annually. If the market allows it ( no major extraneous forces ) then they should all be profitable.

    That's the only goal of this entire effort.
  • beliasbelias Member Posts: 316
    BTW, the official moniker now is the "Detroit 3" as Toyota is considered bigger than all but GM.
    As for sales, it looks like this may be the first year that the Silverado takes the sales-lead from Ford... February numbers were higher for the Silverado than the F150 and it looks like that may continue for much of the year...
  • benderofbowsbenderofbows Member Posts: 542
    We went to the NC Auto Expo this weekend. As expected, GM and Toyota were the two major presences, with a whole building shared between them (Toyota on one side and GM on the other). This gave all attendees the ability to compare the two trucks almost side-by-side, as far as walkaround, window stickers, and sitting inside.

    The two companies differed in their driving experiences. As soon as you entered the building, GM had a few young ladies signing people up for test drives which left from just outside. For trucks they had one Silverado, one Tahoe and one Avalanche for attendees to take for a drive on surrounding roads. The problem was they could only fit in 2 or 3 appointments per truck per hour so most people were passing when they learned they had to wait for a truck.

    Toyota, however, took the show. In the parking lot just outside they had brought in dump trucks full of dirt and used bulldozers and backhoes to construct massive off-road obstacles (including muddy ruts, 30-degree banked turns, offset "speed bumps," log pyramids and a huge, steep hill. They had several FJ Cruisers, Tacomas and Tundras looping the course, and every few minutes another attendee got his turn to drive over the obstacles with a Toyota rep riding shotgun. This approach allowed many more people to get behind the wheel of the trucks, and since all the action was creating quite a spectacle right in the parking lot, people didn't mind waiting in line for their turn. The Tundra was amazing! I was impressed not only by the interior but by its capabilities as well.

    I came away with a much less favorable impression of the Silverado (although I did not wait around for the lonely one they had available to drive). The interiors of the various models and configurations I sat in were better than older GM trucks but were still sorely lacking in some areas (I took pictures and will post them soon). Mis-matched panels, poor designs, obvious quality issues which were not the result of them being on the show floor, and materials which were unpleasant to the touch (and the fake woodgrain on the GMC was terrible).

    I think Toyota will see much more benefit from the show than GM will.

    What was Ford doing? Well, they were signing people up for $75 prepaid Visa cards if they'll just go test drive a vehicle at one of their dealers... Desperation, anyone?
  • 5literstang5literstang Member Posts: 1
    Hi all, I have looked over both trucks.I am an ASE certified tech.My shop is next door to an auto customizing/detailing business.They have had new Silverados and Tundras that they have detailed after our winter storms rolled thru.I can honestly say that I was most impressed with the new Silverado,I am a Ford guy primarily,however that Silverado was gorgeous and fantastically assembled.Much improved over previous efforts.The guys at the shop also liked the Silverado better.Apparantly one employee had a previous Tundra and it wasn't a very good truck so he was a little bit skeptical of the new one.I felt that the interior was somewhat disappointing compared to the Silverado.The Tundra seemed to have a much cheaper look and feel to it imho. Frame looks weaker in comparison but I really don't know that.I hope to drive both very soon.
  • poncho167poncho167 Member Posts: 1,178
    The new Toyota is not bad for what it is but it did come up short against the domestic trucks. Even when comparing it to the current Ford and Dodge trucks it is still not there yet.

    The Toyota has a sub-par interior, poor handling and ride, very weak chassis with missing frame cross members, and a new engine that has longevity/reliability in question.

    Toyota is probably one more redesign before it has what the domestics have but by the time they get there it will be too late.

    Toyota is already having trouble selling the Tundra's and have started with the incentives. Also they have dropped plans at this point for the heavy duty version.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    All four of these statements are at best one opinion and at worst not factual at all. But having an opinion, even when not based on facts, is the right of anyone.

    Your first statement is so far offbase as to make all the rest suspect. But hey it's yours.
  • vmax2007vmax2007 Member Posts: 46
    I knew two anti-Toyota posts in a row would bring the Toyota bugs out of the woodwork. Just remember kdh, your opinion is no better than anyone else's. In fact, from what I have read, your opinions are probably the least credible, since they are obviously influenced by the fact that you are a salesman. Not by personal experience.
  • blkhemiblkhemi Member Posts: 1,717
    Thanks for the update in the numbers.

    Taking a second look, that Ram redo can't come soon enough.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Welcome back jreagan..aka vortexmax2007... in a poor disguise.

    Fact are just that. Even beginning to compare the poor F150 and Ram to any of the top three is just 'offbase'. That's where the OP's statements get put into the shredder. Everyone, including the managements of Ford and Dodge, know that these two are fourth and fifth rate at best right now.

    BTW you know that you'll be canned again when your blood pressure gets the best of you and you go off on one of your rants. How's your new truck btw? ;)
  • vmax2007vmax2007 Member Posts: 46
    Welcome back jreagan..aka vortexmax2007

    Why do you call me jreagan? I have seen that a few times now??? :confuse:

    Obviously, you are mistaking me for someone else. Not sure why though?
  • vmax2007vmax2007 Member Posts: 46
    Everyone, including the managements of Ford and Dodge, know that these two are fourth and fifth rate at best right now.

    Do you really believe this? I really don't think anyone at Ford (or Dodge) would say or even think this.
  • 1offroader1offroader Member Posts: 208
    Unless you get T-boned then the T900's and F150's without side airbags are sure to create more passenger injuries than the Tundra.

    Then that's the fault of the truck owners who didn't purchase the side air bags.

    Tundra owners will have a sore chest. F150 and T900 owners may be in the morgue.

    In a frontal crash, the Tundra owners may be crippled, or in the morgue, while the Silverado owners walk away. Thems are the facts, says NHTSA.

    Keep in mind, in the front crash test there is a 3-way TIE for first between Dodge, Ford, and Chevy. That means the Tundra placed DEAD LAST, not second, in that particular test. Unless, of course, the Nissan was worse. The article I read didn't mention the Titan.

    How do Tundra owners feel about being DEAD LAST in the front crash safety department?

    Comments, anyone?

    1offroader
  • vmax2007vmax2007 Member Posts: 46
    Maybe if they put in a few more airbags??? Would that help? Nevermind the quality of the airbags, quantity seems to be most important to Toyota fans.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    geo9, Is that really true the Tundra only got 4-stars :surprise:

    Rocky
  • pmuscepmusce Member Posts: 132
    "All four of these statements are at best one opinion and at worst not factual at all. But having an opinion, even when not based on facts, is the right of anyone.

    Your first statement is so far offbase as to make all the rest suspect. But hey it's yours."

    kdhspyder, I agree with you that the statement the other posted stated are mostly opinion, but I also heard the HD version of the Tundra has been put on hold. Do you, drfill or belias have any information on this?
  • geo9geo9 Member Posts: 735
    YUP!
    That superior "wonderkind" truck only took 4 stars in
    the frontal impact tests while the "lesser" trucks got
    5 star ratings ! I believe they only tested the reg.
    cab models only?

    The excuses sure have flown since then !!!!!!!! :cry:
  • 1offroader1offroader Member Posts: 208
    To be fair, geo9, 4 stars isn't "poor". It's just behind Dodge, Ford, Chevy, and GM. And maybe Nissan, too.

    I'd still rather be in a crash in the Tundra than most any car.

    1offroader
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484

    It will be in 2010.

    I wouldn't put it by Toyota to start that rumor to throw the domestics off. Toyota can keep a secret better than any priest!

    They have to see if the Tundra does, in fact, gain a real foothold in the market.

    If they can sell 200k+ next year, expect to see an HD 18-24 months thereafter. Maybe 50k units. They have many diesels in use outside the US, and Hino will help build them, although any engine producer would kill to work with Toyota on such a project.

    Just speculation. That's what I'd do. ;)

    DrFill
  • rshollandrsholland Member Posts: 19,788
    Exactly. 4 star mean 11% – 20% risk of serious injusy. 5 star means 10% or less.

    http://www.autoobserver.com/2007/03/silverado_5_tun.html

    Bob
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    LOL, that is actually kind of funny that the best engineered by the GODS (Toyota) super truck only got 4-stars :D I guess all those so-called standard airbags aren't going to help you much when your chest caves in with the 5.7 sitting in your lap. :P

    Rocky
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    In a frontal crash, the Tundra owners may be crippled, or in the morgue, while the Silverado owners walk away. Thems are the facts, says NHTSA.

    No that's not what the NHTSA says at all in it's tests. If you looked at the results you'd see why.

    5 stars means that the occupants have up to a 10% risk of injury,
    4 stars means that the occupants have from an 11-20% risk of injury.
    If the GMT900's are a 10% risk and the Tundra is an 11% risk is that anything to even discuss.

    The NHTSA gives some values from their own risk matrix which creates this scoring. But they don't explain what each of the values means. The biggest differences seem to be in the deceleration values. Under the NHTSA tests the Tundra occupants might experience more deceleration forces in the chest which seems to be a seatbelt issue.

    The risks of injury to the driver's head in both is very very close.
    The risks of injury to the passengers head is greater in the Tundra - according to the Govt test.

    One thing about the NHTSA tests is that they give no explanations of why the scores are what they are. The IIHS goes into detail in what creates one score or another.

    I'll defer judgement til the IIHS speaks up. Their test is in fact harder and they test more ways.
    Frontal @ 40 mph and 40% offset
    Side Impacts...not done at all by the Govt
    Rear Impacts...also not done at all by the Govt.

    As to the prior post about drivers choosing to get airbags I agree 100%.
    ...except for the fact that any F150 buyer wanting to protect himself and his family is O-o-L because he can't get Side Airbags at any price.
    ...except for the poor buyer who only wants a Reg Cab Silverado or Sierra, he too cant get side airbags either - at any price.

    That's a whole group of 2nd class citizens, Reg Cab buyers, who even if they wanted the protection are being told 'Nope, ya can't have it.'

    Now should the Tundra have gotten better scores. Absolutely. There's no excuse in today technology not to ace the simple NHTSA test. Does this mean the truck is unsafe, no way. If this is your criteria and you stick by it then you have to recommend that no one ever buy an F150 or a Reg Cab T900. These don't even offer the most basic side protection that nearly all new designed vehicles have.

    This might not be a real big issue that GMT900 ( and especially Ford ) fans want to get to deeply involved in.
  • iqbaldhillon2iqbaldhillon2 Member Posts: 116
    I got this from Toyota.com
    Toyota Tundra Double Cab w/ 5.7 L 2x4 vs.
    Chevy Silverado Extended Cab w/ 5.3 L 2x4

    $28,110 $31,500
    Toyota Advantage Summary
    Below is a summary of all Toyota advantages in this vehicle comparison.


    Pricing Tundra Silverado 1500
    MSRP $28,110 $31,500
    Destination Charge $645 $900
    Colors Tundra Silverado 1500
    Exterior Color Chips 11 Available 9 Available
    Base Engine
    Tundra Silverado 1500
    Base Engine Displacement 5.7 liters 5.3 liters
    Valvetrain 32 Valves
    double overhead cam (DOHC) 16 Valves
    overhead valves (OHV)
    Horsepower 381 hp @ 5600 rpm 315 hp @ 5200 rpm
    Torque 401 ft-lbs. @ 3600 rpm 338 ft-lbs. @ 4400 rpm
    Truck Features Tundra Silverado 1500
    Bumpers chrome painted
    Running Boards step - Optional Not Available
    Seating Tundra Silverado 1500
    Total Seating Capacity 6 5
    Comfort Tundra Silverado 1500
    Reading Lights front and rear reading lights front reading lights
    Safety Features Tundra Silverado 1500
    Brakes - Rear ventilated disc drum
    Braking Assist Standard Not Available
    Traction Control Standard Not Available
    Stability Control Standard Optional
    Head Air Bag front and rear front and rear - Optional
    Side Air Bag dual front Not Available
    Front Center Seatbelt Type 3-point belt Not Available
    Child Safety Locks Standard Not Available
    Rear Headrests 3 2
    Parking Assist front and rear parking sensors - Optional rear parking sensors - Optional
    Handling Tundra Silverado 1500
    Turning Circle 44 ft. 46.9 ft.
    Hauling
    Tundra Silverado 1500
    Max. Payload Capacity 1755 lbs. 1603 lbs.
    Max. Towing Capacity 10600 lbs. 10300 lbs.
    Range in Miles Toyota
    Advantages Tundra Silverado 1500
    City 422 mi. 416 mi.
    Fuel Data Tundra Silverado 1500
    Fuel Tank Capacity 26.4 gal. 26 gal.
    Exterior Tundra Silverado 1500
    Height 75.8 in. 73.9 in.
    Wheel Base 145.7 in. 143.5 in.
    Ground Clearance 10.2 in. 8.9 in.
    Interior Toyota
    Advantages Tundra Silverado 1500
    Front Shoulder Room 66.6 in. 65.2 in.
    Rear Shoulder Room 65.7 in. 65.3 in.
    Front Hip Room 63 in. 62.5 in.
    Rear Hip Room 62.6 in. 61.9 in.
    Front Leg Room 42.5 in. 41.3 in.
    Rear Leg Room 34.7 in. 34.3 in.
    Maximum Seating 6 5

    Turning Circle 44 ft. 46.9 ft.

    EPA Mileage Estimates Tundra Silverado 1500
    City 16 mpg. 16 mpg.
    Highway 20 mpg. 22 mpg.

    Range in Miles Tundra Silverado 1500
    City 422 mi. 416 mi.
    Highway 528 mi. 572 mi.

    Both trucks are HOTT right now! My local Toyota dealeship sold around 350 '07 Tundra's from Feb. 19- March 19. Chevy sold around 420 '07 Silverado's. Toyota's catching up! :)
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    I was surprised when I read this on GMI and here so I asked the question myself.

    That info was a 'throwaway line' in an article about Nissan dropping the HD versions.

    The reply was that the diesel is still on track and nothing has changed. Typically it's nearly impossible to get a straight answer out of Toyota until they are good and ready.

    Until I see something in print directly attributable to someone in a responsible position at Toyota the answer is 'Can't say for sure.'
  • rubendogrubendog Member Posts: 7
    Not sure we can believe those Toyota specs since it was on the toyota site. I mean, is the toyota really better in every single thing?

    Probably not.

    I notice that they left off heated washer fluid and easy to remove spin on oil filter. Both of those have been cited here as advantages for GM. There are probably others.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Do you really believe this? I really don't think anyone at Ford (or Dodge) would say or even think this.

    Hi jreagan .. vmax2007... next alias

    Obviously you don't understand how business and marketing work hand in hand. Pricing is the tool by which companies express themselves to buyers.

    Mercedes comes into the market and promotes itself with world class luxury and engineering. To express this elite status to the buyers it then states 'We'd like all you college grads who are just starting out to get behind the wheel of our excellence so we're offering you ZERO down-ZERO interest-ZERO payments for 1 year, ..... Dude.'

    Similarly if either Ford or Dodge managements truly believed that they had class leading trucks then they'd be promoting the elite status over the lowly Tundra and GMT900's by refraining from getting down in the gutter and slugging it out with low prices to the rabble.

    Well the actual situations are that Mercedes has no interest in offering any kind of incentives to people without significant resources... and
    Ford and Dodge managements know that if they aren't the lowest priced vehicles in the market that they'll never get enough buyers in the door to get to breakeven.

    Those are just the facts. The pricing levels are set by the the managements of each company. It's not a mistake that the F150 and the Ram are the two lowest in price. The Queen of England didn't set the incentives and the price levels the respective Sales Departments did.
  • 1offroader1offroader Member Posts: 208
    5 stars means that the occupants have up to a 10% risk of injury, 4 stars means that the occupants have from an 11-20% risk of injury. If the GMT900's are a 10% risk and the Tundra is an 11% risk is that anything to even discuss.

    kdh you seem to be very selective in your choice of numbers. In my previous post I used the WORST case for each vehicle - 10% vs. 20% risk of injury - in order to be conservative. However, for some reason you chose 10% vs. 11% - the WORST case for the GM vs. the BEST case for the Tundra. Now, why would you do that??? Let me guess...perhaps to put the WORST spin on the Silverado vs. the BEST possible spin on the Tundra? If that makes you feel better about the test results, well, golly, who are we to argue with your innermost need to do that?

    But just to be fair (You want to be fair, don't you? Of course you do, kdh!) - two can play that game. I'll choose 1% risk for the Silverado, vs. 20% risk for the Tundra - both of these numbers are within the NHTSA range, correct? Only this time, we'll turn the tables on you and choose the BEST number for the Silverado vs. the WORST number for the Tundra. Now, the odds of serious injury are 20 TIMES WORSE for the Tundra. Once you start playing games with the numbers, you can't stop it just because you find it inconvenient. Now, to be honest, I don't believe my 1% vs. 20% any more than I believe your 10% vs. the 11%. I'm just playing your game.

    Re: side air bags on the standard cab models - I agree. You might be surprised by that. They should be AVAILABLE, and I predict they will be - and maybe even sooner than the Tundra is able to make 5 stars in the front crash test.

    As far as your conclusion - I openly agreed on at least two previous posts - the Tundra is NOT unsafe. It just isn't the best. It's just LAST. Which, in this case, isn't terrible. It's just not as safe as it should be, which you agree with. This has got to hurt, esp. after Tundra fans have invested so much emotionally on the (totally unsubstantiated) theory that Toyota Co. is much more concerned over its customers' safety than Detroit. Unfortunately, Toyota has not been paying attention to the Tundra fans on this board in that respect.

    Hey, Tokyo, can you hear us now?

    1offroader
  • drfilldrfill Member Posts: 2,484
    Can I yawn any louder?

    What happens when Tundra aces the IIHS test, a much harder test?

    The only people who get hurt in a full-size truck are the ones who don't wear seat belts. Natural Selection.

    It's not like they built the thing with gas tanks outside the frame rails or something..... :blush:

    DrFill
  • toykickstoykicks Member Posts: 95
    You know what i've noticed. The Silverados #s on safercar.gov are all mixed up. Regular cab weighs more then the crew cab? Crew cab weighs less then the ext. cab? ok? femure loads higher on ext. cab vs crew cab? Reg cab pictures not up for the silvy but both extended and crew cab pictures are? Tundra only has 1 crash picture up which is the regular cab. Site states people shouldnt compare vehicles ratings which weigh more then 250-/+ pounds. Talk about accuracy No photos no videos just #s which dont even go with the vehicle tested.

    image

    image

    image


    Its kinda hard to believe that the reg cab got the same Femur & chest deceleration loads as the ext cab silverado. Also weigh exactly the same which is BS. They spend thousands on crashing these vehicles and cant get any pictures up for the regular cab or DC or crew tundras :surprise: ? They need to fix that quick Government crash tests have been bashed for this in the past. No wonder why people dont trust Government crash tests they can be inaccurate compared to highway crash tests. A lot of vehicles which do well on nhtsa have done bad in Highway crash tests which show video footage when theyre crashed.

    Judging from those pictures GM made a pretty sold truck. Wonder how highway crash tests end up for these trucks since theyre crashed at a higher rate of speed.
  • pmuscepmusce Member Posts: 132
    "It will be in 2010.

    I wouldn't put it by Toyota to start that rumor to throw the domestics off. Toyota can keep a secret better than any priest!

    They have to see if the Tundra does, in fact, gain a real foothold in the market.

    If they can sell 200k+ next year, expect to see an HD 18-24 months thereafter. Maybe 50k units. They have many diesels in use outside the US, and Hino will help build them, although any engine producer would kill to work with Toyota on such a project.

    Just speculation. That's what I'd do. "

    Are you saying you know for sure that it is a go for 2010 or are you just speculating? Not sure why you think Toyota needs to throw the domestics off when they all play in this market already.
  • beliasbelias Member Posts: 316
    You do make a good point 1offroader. Nobody is arguing that there is a difference, but I think it best to go right down the middle to give both the benefit of the doubt. That leaves the Silverado at 5% and the Tundra at 15%. What kdhspyder was trying to illustrate was that it may be that the difference was not significant, that's all, but either way it is a disappointment for Toyota for sure.
    However, I believe the article pointing out the test results also said that less than 2% of vehicle accidents are actually full head-on collisions and that most accidents are off-set head-on collisions, rear-end collisions, t-bones, and rollovers. So, while the difference between the 5-star and 4-star ratings for the Silverado and Tundra may be significant for some, if you actually look at those affected, it is not a good representation of real-life accidents. Now, if the Tundra does not do as well in the other types of safety tests, then they will definitely have their work cut out for them in terms of needing improvement.
    Right now, this is a minor setback for Toyota. We'll see what happens when the other safety tests are conducted.
  • beliasbelias Member Posts: 316
    We call you jreagan because your MO is the easiest one to detect. The first two posts made that obvious and all you needed to do was have your IP address drop and then pick up a new one from the DHCP pool of available IP addresses.
    Also, in case you hadn't noticed all your posts are in the late afternoon / early evening which means that it is likely that you have not figured out how to do this at work yet. ;)
    In any case, welcome back jreagan/vmax2007!
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles