Sierra or Tundra
picturethis
Member Posts: 16
I think I've finally narrowed my choice down to the Sierra or the Tundra. The truck I desire will be 2X4, extended-cab, short-bed, V-8.
I know the Tundra is a smaller truck but it would meet my needs fine, so the size difference is moot.
What I need is a comparison from those who are familiar with both trucks, but who are unbiased by brand loyalty. Too many threads turn into soap-operas and "brand-bash-a-thons".
If you chose the Sierra over the Tundra, or the Tundra over the Sierra, please tell me WHY?
If you chose the Sierra because it has a larger bed, great. That is something I can understand. But not because "Toyota suks"-- that is NOT an argument I can believe.
Thanks in advance for your advice and thoughts.
I know the Tundra is a smaller truck but it would meet my needs fine, so the size difference is moot.
What I need is a comparison from those who are familiar with both trucks, but who are unbiased by brand loyalty. Too many threads turn into soap-operas and "brand-bash-a-thons".
If you chose the Sierra over the Tundra, or the Tundra over the Sierra, please tell me WHY?
If you chose the Sierra because it has a larger bed, great. That is something I can understand. But not because "Toyota suks"-- that is NOT an argument I can believe.
Thanks in advance for your advice and thoughts.
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
mainly because of the ext cab room and probably another good reason was the 5.3 V-8 and because chevrolet is proven with their trucks. They have been making trucks a long time.
Test drive them both (with passengers also you will be hauling around) do some reaserch and buy what you think will suit you best
Ryan
-Eric
I gather that the pricing situation has changed, but the back seat room has not. My 12 year old son is 5'5" and growing. He would not be able to handle the back seat for more than 30 minutes in the Tundra.
The back seat is big enough that I have had my two adult daughters and my 6'3" son-in-law in it together while running around town without problems.
If you are going to have more than 2 people in the truckwith any regularity, go with the Sierra.
Peter
The Tundra was introduced in year 2000, the GMC in 1999. So how did Toyota have more time to work thru the problems?
Bought new in 93 and sold in 94 for 1000 more than purchase price
Bought new in 94 and sold in 99 for 3000 less than purchase price
93 Toyota truck
94 Toyota T100
The weak point in the Tundra is that while "rated" for a higher load, the rear springs really flatten out when you load it. But the upside to this is that it has a *really* nice ride inroad AND off road ride. No one else compares in ride quality. Even when loaded, the Sierra is still a bumpier ride.
The Tundra is a VERY sophisticated ride and to be honest it's more like a truck built by nexus (but a nexus would have better options). If you were going to drive 100+ miles - hands down you'd prefer to do it in a Tundra. Even with the TRY package (a must I think, and not for off road reasons - it improves everything) it's smoother than my girl friend's baby mercedes for everything put a mild washboard surface. I'd much rather ride in it for a trip than her C220. I don't know why, but the shocks on my Tundra don't absorb the fast washboard type bumps done at high speed (on the freeway) like her Mercedes (but then again, isn't it kind of absurd to compare the two considering one is a truck and one is a luxury car?) still it's better than most cars and for just about every other road surface, my truck wins (isn't that a shock?) and it's a better (even quieter) vehicle to take a trip in. Around the city, I'd probably rather ride in her mercedes due to much easier parking and quick handling. Roaring around the city with the power of a v-8 is nice on everything but your pocket book.
For towing, either one is fine unless you're going with more than a 4-5 thousand pound boat regulary - I'd take the Sierra for that.
There is a very accurate article written in the july\august issue of Truck Trends on the two.
Bottom line: If you want an extraordinarily nice riding truck mostly for commuting with some towing, weekend loading, and you're not transporting adults in the back, the Tundra is the way to go. You'll love the quiet, comfortable ride. And you'll love the lack of trips to the dealer. Oh, gas mileage is about 15 average. Rated at 13 or 14 to 17. But in reality, I think it's more like 14 to 18 or 19 tops (with the 265-70/16 tires). Smaller tires will get better gas mileage. Too, this is with California emmision gas, you'll get better than this if you aren't using the blended gas (most of the country)
If you are definitely going to be loading your bed with 1,000 plus pounds (this is a pretty good load on the Tundra, just starting for the Sierra) or are going to be towing 6-7 thousand pound trailers, or you are definitely going to be moving adult sized people in back regularly, go with the sierra.
Hope this helps. From a reliability standpoint, the Tundra is going to be better. Towing doesn't cause quite so much a hit on the gas mileage on the Tundra for some reason. The sierra loses a few more mpg (from normal) when towing comparible loads.
Read the Truck Trends article comparing the two trucks of the year. It's accurate and might help your decision. Driving both is the thing you should do. The only thing you can't test drive is off road (Tundra's outstanding) and loading. Tundra's okay, Sierras better for loading, but the Tundra will give you the better ride under medium loading conditions and less under any conditions.
That's why I took the Tundra - ride quality. That and they have less problems than the other guys in the long run. The back seat is too tight for passengers though unless they're kids. But the room they took from the rear passengers, they gave to the people up front. So I think of the major 4 trucks, you actually have more leg room for the driver and passenger up front. The two up front have a VERY comfortable ride. The back is temporary adult or kid riding only.
Alan
Looked at the GMC SIerra X Cab with the Sportside. Cab space is good enough, far more ponies, and aftermarket friendly. I just don't like the blocky exterior appearance at all. It's truly a workhorse truck vs. the Tundra is a consumer's truck.
Basically, if toyota massaged those rear seats, or better yet, made a crew cab version, it will make more sales. It might not make die hard chevy/ford/dodge fans go to it, but I would.
I bet your 6 yr old would disagree with you. Poor thing hope they dont have to ride back there to often. Also they do grow up and get bigger.
"From a reliability standpoint, the Tundra is going to be better."
And how do you figure? Facts to back this up?
There are plenty of OLD sierras still out there on the road. How do we know the tundras will do the same?
Ryan
Ryanbab, it is apparent that you did not read my post well. I said that my kid was COMPLETELY UNCOMFORTABLE.
"Tundra is a consumer's truck."
Consumer's truck as in recreational activities and very light duty. There are no heavy duties, dualies, power strokes, mega motors, diesels right? True, all of the others can be liveable, but Tundra beats it in the ride category, for the front passengers, of course.
BAsically, the press is praising the tundra in terms of its engine and everyday liveability.
Obviously if the tundra cant accomondate rear passengers then it is not a "consumers" vehicle.
btw, if you see my "profile", you will see where i've been soliciting. there's a gm vehicle in there...
Yea i seen you posting in the Avalanche topic. Thats why i started to wonder.
Ryan
I saw a yellow sierra regular cab with the sportside or flairside on a platform one day. It looked real cool, and that's when i started liking the sportside models.. .
The Avalanche makes that New Hummer H2O Concept(Watered down Hummer) look like a chump.
While not all posts are problems - I would say both topics have the same ratio of real problems to total posts.
Read Tundra Solutions. While Tundras have problems - they have the lowest rate of problems and are the most reliable truck out there. Consumer Reports does statistics on reliability and report failure rates. They rated the Tundra "better than average". They rated the GMs "Much worse than average".
The '99 Chev is rated a used vehicle to avoid by Consumer Reports.
The most dependable 1/2 ton full size pickup is the '96 T100. This is the result of a 5 year study by J.D. Power.
The Tundra brakes stop shorter when the Tundra was loaded with 1350lb. than the GM which was empty! (Source - Trucktrend magazine)
BTW, thinking of trading yours in for a newer, safer, tundra?
Peter
99 and 00 GMC and Chevy trucks are considered "New Model year" As a rule I NEVER consider buying a new model year truck.
Initial reviews on the 2001 GM line trucks have touted that the build "problems" have been taken care of. From what I have seen this is true.
Did someone say "electrical problems?" What electrical problems?
Personally I didn't even consider a TOY. For just that reason.. Tinniness, small, and in general, looked like it wanted to be a full size truck.
I just purchased a replacement for my 97 GMC Sierra Ext Cab 2wd. It had over 150,000 miles and a flawless track record. Loved it. For further maint reasons and future mileage. I decided to move up.
Went and bought a 2001 Silverado. Good incentives and excellent truck with no hint of the earlier problems in 99 and 00..
Just my opinion...
Too bad it's not on the Sierra. I don't like the silverado's face
Why should it? it already has the most powerful brakes on any 1/2 ton pickup. I hate having to watch for Shakerados in my rear view mirror. Those bowties are a [non-permissible content removed] to pick out of my tow hitch.
How are you going to make that Hyundai of yours stop shorter?
first don't trust CR, they poll their readers, who are generally anti domestic, don't do something that biased.
anyway-another thing you might want to consider when deciding which truck to buy is to look at the options you want-a lot of things like different suspensions/locking rear diff, etc aren't available on the tundra, and some options like towing hitch are hundreds of $'s more expensive on the tundra.
also the Silverado with the 5.3L gets better gas milege than the tundra 4.7L. Also in the latest truck trend test tundra vs Chevrolet the silverado (same as sierra) went 0-60 better and went through the slalom faster (ie the silverado handles corners better)
also you will be interested in knowning that intellichoice picked the Sierra ext cab 2wd as the best value for pickup truck over $22,000 with an excellent value rating. (insufficient data on the tundra yet) but insurance costs will be higher on the tundra, fuel, and financing.
"first don't trust CR, they poll their readers, who are generally anti domestic"
Why should american car buyers be anti-domestic? Could it be that they are tired of paying too much for the same domestic junk? If I could have found a comparable domestic truck - I would have bought it. I am actually biased towards US products. I just won't spend my hard earned cash on an inferior product no matter who makes it. This is the essence of capitalism.
CTF:
"the Silverado with the 5.3L gets better gas milege than the tundra 4.7L"
Actually - the Truck Trend comparison article you referenced said that the Tundra got 1mpg better mileage unloaded and 3mpg better loaded. Go figure!
CTF:
"silverado (same as sierra) went 0-60 better and went through the slalom faster"
It went .2 sec faster in the quarter (B.F.D.) It also did marginally better in the slalom, but had a punishing ride.
The Tundra was rated better off-road, better in the sand, better value (The Chev cost $2400 more with less options) and had a better ride. It has far more powerful brakes (The Tundra stopped shorter loaded with 1350lb than the Chev did empty!)
It won 7 out of the ten categories Truck Trend ranked. The Tundra was rated by the same magazine "Best in Class" Full Size extended cab pickup.
The Tundra will also have better resale (it's a Toyota - need I say more?) and be cheaper to insure(The IIHS gave the Tundra the best rating in the offset crash test. The Chev got a "marginal" rating - the second worst.)
The Tundra is also cheaper while offering 40% more powertrain warranty.
BTW did you not notice that this guy wanted differnt peoples opinions not you arguing everything to make it go your way in some convoluted way. Everything I said was the truth and meant to help this guy, not to provide you with some way to argue your same old stuff.
Truly amazing! Same statement you call American autos junk and then say you're biased towards US products? I'll one-up you Bama. The Tundra is overblown & overpriced when you compare it to the amount of performance and options you give up when choosing it over a Big3 pickup.
Oh yeah I forgot. Less is better with the Tundra apologist crowd!! Truck Trend says it's a great vehicle for trips to the grocery store but a minvan can do that for alot less $$!
No - actually everything you said was YOUR OPINION. I don't have a problem with you expressing your opinion, but you can expect other people (such as me) to question your opinion.
You said that the Chev gets better mileage. I pointed out that the source you quoted said the Tundra has better mileage.
You claimed that the Chev would be cheaper to insure. The IIHS (Insurance Institute of Highway safety) rated the Tundra more crashworthy.
You said that Consumer Reports was biased against domestic vehicles. That is your opinion. What facts do you have to back up such a rash statement?
You claimed the Chev has better resale. What facts do you have to back this up? In general, my experience has been that Toyota resale is better than domestics. That is my opinion.
on gas milege I used EPA numbers
and I never said Chev had better resale, if I did I'm unaware
Both vehicles serve the purpose of the customer that puts their money down. I prefer the toyota because of the looks, and prefer the GMC/Chevy because of the rear seat space and more horse. I chose none for my final decision. . I read those Motor and Truck Trend books, too. Chevy is a workhorse because of the strength, Toyota is more of a play truck.
And not all imports are built well. Anything from the Volkswagen camp have problems within the first year, Toyota has head gaskets that crack early, and their fabric on the seats rip. BMW's notorious for electrical problems (My wife can vouch: the's a 3 bmw vet). Want to go on?
bamatundra, If you want information on a car, truck or mommy wagon, get the advice from the PROFESSIONALS. Auto Journalists! Not a Consumer Journalists! Consumer Reports exist because of the public not wanting to research extensively on a product. And no, they are not biased towards Domestics, but they sure keep to their favourites because of the POLLS, not do extensive road tests like Motor Trend and Truck Trend. They spend a couple of hours in a vehicle and turn it back, then give their OPIONION off of a couple of hours. At least the other magazines can give you a thorough reason why this is a good or bad pick. The Ford Taurus, Windstar, Chevy Malibu have been "recommended" vehicles for a while now. CR is against SUV's and pickups, too, except the 4Runner. The 4Runner is now obsolete, because there are far better 4x4's out there now. But no one knows that if they are still relying on Consumer Reports!
The Tundra has better brakes, powertrain, build quality, off-road capability, etc. Unfortunately, unknowing, easily persuaded consumers buy-off on that "like a rock" hype. If selling more makes a car better...that escort must be better than a lexus.