What selling more means is that they can't all be wrong. When Toyota decides to commit itself to making work trucks, I think more people will consider it. Until then, they may just be happy selling 1-200K a year if that much to the grocery getter crowd.
The import tuners have been yanking your chain with the better brakes theory. And it's pure entertainment to me, as they opine elsewhere ad nauseum about warping rotors, and here about the superiority of non abs and drum braking systems. It's really quite obvious. If it did stop 6 feet shorter in one test, (and it hasn't in every test) it attributes to a lighter truck with better Dunlop tires than the Firestone equipped Silverado. No way would I trade my long lasting, trouble free 4 wheel discs for what Tundra owners have come to accept, a pulsing brake pedal, rotor lathes, brake dust, pitting rims. Find the build quality in that!
I read something interesting today. I was bored at the store today and picked up the new Four wheeler magazine in it they tested the 2001 Tundra. Amazingly the reason they said not to buy it was if you intended to use the truck off road due to the lack of a traction aid device.
How quickly you seem to forgive and forget what GM did to you:
-They personally sold you a 2000 lemon -You had to buy a 2001 just to get rid of the 2000 -GM produced well over 10,000 defective ABS units, which they foisted on unsuspecting chevy truck lovers -Multiple injury/deaths due to these units -Firestone tires
My God man! What will it take for you to see the light! Your like those Japanese soldiers that were left behind on islands and kept fighting 20 years after the war ended.
Well, If you are planning on buying a Tundra vs a Silverado and you get into a minor fender bender.. Plan on paying more....
IIHS did four 5 mph crash tests.
Silverado Tundra Front into flat barrier $766.00 $1400.00 Rear into flat barrier $885.00 $1458.00 Front into angle barrier $2094.00 $2297.00 Rear into pole $516.00 $1889.00
Ok, SO everyone has heard that the IIHS has rated the Tundra better than the Silverado... Now let us look at the individual Injury component of their reports..
Silverado: INJURY MEASURES: GOOD Measures taken from the head, chest, and both legs indicate low risk of injury. Head acceleration from the shoulder belt housing contact was low.
Tundra: INJURY MEASURES: RIGHT LEG/FOOT MARGINAL Measures taken from the head and chest indicate low risk of injury. However, forces on the right tibia indicate the possibility of lower leg injury.
Note that the Silverado is rated Good compared to the Tundra's Marginal....
Now when it comes down to it... I would rather be safe and in one piece. Yes I would like my truck to look good but come on.. wouldn't we rather be safer?
"The heaviest thing I see most Silverados hauling is a sticker of Calvin weeing on ford"
That's not a very heavy load. How 'bout this Rwell:
Try that with your 2/5-Ton'dra and you'll need helper springs or airbags to maintain steering integrity Rwell! If you get confused about anything else just let me know!
Looking at your picture, I would guess it is towing less than 5000lb. I know it is a stretch to think a Shakerado can tow this much.
Truck Trend towed 5000lb with the both the Tundra and the Shakerado and preferred the Tundra. The Shakerado was no more capable and had a jackhammer rice to go along with it.
Let's face it - the Shakerado is totally outclassed by the Tundra.
I don't think that 5mph crashes are anything to brag about in any full size pickup. They were not designed for 5mph crashes. If you are concerned about 5mph crashes and routinely get in them, I would suggest getting a sedan.
You are confused about the IIHS offset crash test results. The Silverado was ranked MARGINAL, the Tundra was ranked GOOD. I hope this clears it up.
I went to a horse show this past weekend. A woman pulled up towing a 2 horse trailer with a Tundra extended cab 4X4. I asked her how she liked it and she said it was great. She also said that she had a Chevy 3/4 ton she left at home because she preferred the Tundra. Go figure!
Thanks for the GM clarification. Trailer 2400lbs plus car 3600lbs = 6000lbs. The owner carries another 500 lbs of equipment in the bed when he tows the car. Total load about 6500lbs and you will notice the lack of rear-end sag. According to the Truck Trend comparison the Tundra was riding nose-high while towing a 4800lb boat/trailer. They gave the Tundra the thumbs-up for towing camparison due to it's smooth ride and tighter turning but they said the GM pickup dared them to pull more. BTW-both trucks above are 1/2 tons and the rig with the car ain't mine (I wish it was!).
I don't blame the woman with the horse trailer. If she had a long trip the Tundra probably gave a much smoother ride. I've never rode in a newer 3/4 ton Chevy but given the stiffness of my 1500 I'm sure the 2500 feels like a tank when it's under a heavy load.
I posted those pictures for Rwell to see some GM trucks towing. Apparently he is more focused on window trash stickers than on towing/hauling etc and doesn't notice all the GM trucks which are passing him towing trailers! Since he sees all those stickers I assume he is lagging behind all the GM trucks he encounters! I never said the GM was a better tow vehicle! In fact it downright sucks for towing! Everybody knows the Tundra is built specifically for towing. I mean that's why it's rearend squats down lower than the front with a 4800lb trailer while the GM can pull 5500lb to 6000lb trailer and still ride level, right?! BTW-the 2400lb trailer is the manufacturer's claimed weight so it probably weighs closer to 2000lbs.
few months ago i was at my gf's softball game which was out in the country. Seen a tundra towing a horsetrailer much like you stated above. What got me is how it looked like a V going down the road (front of truck in the air front of trailer going towards the ground). The trailer really was to much for the truck. Behind that was a silverado and the same type of trailer. Silverado had NO sag and was straight as an arrow -
Both had 2 horses in the trailers.
Might have a better ride (if you say) but the trailer is causing alot of bad stress on the truck
Did you talk to the Chev owner? Was he/she able to climb out of the truck with his/her sore back? Did he/she leave a Shakerado 3/4 ton at home?
The fact is that Truck Trend preferred the Tundra for the towing part of their test. They know which truck is more capable. The Shakerado has those weak brakes and that flimsy three piece frame.
"Seen a tundra towing a horsetrailer" Ryan, if you are going to continue in college, you need to work on your grammar.
I see you have been beaten and have nothing better to say so you have to start critiquing my grammar and spelling. Have at it.
Heres one for you:
It dont take no rocket scientist to figure out the silverado is a much more complete truck which offers many more things than that there pickup truck you call a tundra.
Has anyone read the Sept issue of Four Wheeler? This issue has a very comprehensive Tundra offroad test. Very interesting. The authors commended the Tundra for it's engine power and ride but pretty much panned it for driving offroad. They said the high low-end power of the engine combined with no available traction aid (locking or LS) caused a overly-high amount of spinning and traction loss! Climbing loose dirt and rock hills caused the thing to come to a stop and it was necessary to back up and try again. Slight throttle input caused so much tire spin it was hard to keep the steering pointed straight! Oops! And this test truck was indeed a TRD with all the offroad goodies! Also said that when offroad speed increased "the frontend proved too soft, allowing the Tundra to bottom out regularly". They concluded that the suspension leaves something to be desired in the dirt! Thanks but I'll stick with my harsh riding GM truck. At least I can drive over rough road without bottoming out my suspension (yes that's why it's called a "truck")! There is a tradeoff for that cushy ride on the Tundra-should be easy to see now!
I SEEN YOU ASKED ABOUT how much the 285's raised the truck up
Well mine gained about an inch from the ground to the bottom of the fender flare and the front gained .7-.8" front the ground to the bottom of the fender flare.
The Tundra was compared to an offroad Shakerado in the May '00 issue of Motortrend. The Tundra won. The Tundra was compared to a Shakerado with a LS differential. The Toyota had an open differential and STILL won.
Truck Trend rated the off-road capability of the Tundra vs. the SHakerado. The Tundra won.
If you want to say how weak the Tundra is in an off-road test, just remember the the Shakerado is WEAKER!
This is now. Urbanundra loses, no traction. Hmmm...seems we've been telling you that, no locker. Besides, Motor Trend named Silverado HD Truck of the Year.
...I don't know which magazine to believe. Which publication has the most technical experience offroading? Motor Trend? Truck Trend? Four Wheeler? Pick up a copy of Four Wheeler and see what you think. They did a REAL offroad test and the Tundra TRD stunk. They were even brave enough to drive that Tundra TRD offroad with 700lbs in the bed!! The results: "Lot's of wheel spin with too many steering corrections to keep it pointed straight". Sounds like these guys risked their life in that portion of the test!! This is not complicated. Use the Tundra to cruise down to the strip mall and buy your week's worth of deer camp groceries. Use the GM to haul those groceries up the 2 mile broken mountain trail to the deer camp. Pretty simple.
Four Wheeler didn't test the Whimperado. They didn't test it because it isn't considered to be an off road vehicle.
It is hard to find any tests where the SHakerado is hitched to anything. This is because the shakerado is not intended to be worked.
The only comparison test I can find where the Shakerado is being worked, it lost. With weak brakes, and that flimsy three piece frame, it is no wonder.
"It is hard to find any tests where the SHakerado is hitched to anything. This is because the shakerado is not intended to be worked."
FUNNY How your magazine article (truck trend) said if you want a work truck then the silverado is for you and if you want a grocery go getter the tundra is for you
i dont disagree with that. What was their reasoning however? Turning radius. When you put the rear axle behind the ext cab it does give you an advatage but in my opinion makes the truck look bad.
So what if they could make u turns easier. Id rather have something that CAN and has proven to tow and haul not something that bottoms out with less weight
Truck Trend gace the Tundra thumbs up for towing because of it's turning capabilities (it's a smaller truck!). They said the Chevy practically begged for more while the 2/5 Ton-dra towed the same weight with it's trademark nose-high attitude! Hardly a victory to be proud of IMO!
"Four Wheeler didn't test the Whimperado. They didn't test it because it isn't considered to be an off road vehicle."
Heh! More confusion from the Tundra tots! Perhaps I can help: Apparently you missed the part where I said the Tundra regularly bottomed out it's front end while offroading UNLOADED. Bama-you were the guy who a few days ago was preaching the bit about how important front end ground clearance was up front. Guess what is happening up front to the GC when the suspension bottoms out regularly? And that's unloaded in a real-world test! Scares me to think about maybe hauling some weight over a rough road in a Tundra. Wow good luck on answering that one (I predict you won't). The Tundra IS intended to be an offroad truck? Hmmm...I guess that's why the geniuses at Toyota chose not to offer a rear locker or LSD. Instead they offer a worthless TRD sticker that fools people into thinking this truck is safe to go wheeling in and misrepresent the ground clearance! Well-read the Sept Four Wheeler issue for the low-down on both of these items.
new upcoming Chevy COLORADO VS TUNDRA, both are about same, use overhead cam motors, roughly same HP, ie 245 hp DOHC timing belt V8 vs 270 hp DOHC chain driven cam inline chevy six, both are ultra high tech. The Sierra is a full size, Tundra more of an intermediate like the Dakota. Also Nissan is coming out with a Tundra sized vehicle with V8, probably from a Q45 but tamer. Too bad Toyota does not use the DOHC 300 HP motor from Lexus instead of weaky squeaky 245 HP motor. Just an afterthought. Please no one take offense with "weaky squeaky" remark, just saying Toyota could have used the higher HP V8.
Do you know which other engine options GM will put in the new Colorado? Wondered if they might be able to put one of the Vortec V8s in there?
As far as the Tundra's engine, the drivetrain may be too weak in it to handle any more power than the current iforce V8 it has now. I will be interested to see Nissan's new pickup. Later
If you were going to take your choice of trucks across the U.S. (Boston To LA) and the odometer already has 150K, you have 1000 pound payload and towing a 3000 pound trailer,
what 1/2 ton truck would it be? (all the vehicles would be up to date on service)
Ford?
Chevy/GMC?
Dodge?
Toyota?
Be sure to check out the 40 MPH crash tests on the trucks if you haven't already.
I am thinking with 1000# in the bed and a 3000# trailer to bring cross country I want a 3/4 ton diesel. Something about lots of power and 20MPG makes it more reasonable.
Comments
What selling more means is that they can't all be wrong. When Toyota decides to commit itself to making work trucks, I think more people will consider it. Until then, they may just be happy selling 1-200K a year if that much to the grocery getter crowd.
-They personally sold you a 2000 lemon
-You had to buy a 2001 just to get rid of the 2000
-GM produced well over 10,000 defective ABS units, which they foisted on unsuspecting chevy truck lovers
-Multiple injury/deaths due to these units
-Firestone tires
My God man! What will it take for you to see the light! Your like those Japanese soldiers that were left behind on islands and kept fighting 20 years after the war ended.
"Multiple injury/deaths due to these units"
Where did you get your information on this?
If you are planning on buying a Tundra vs a Silverado and you get into a minor fender bender..
Plan on paying more....
IIHS did four 5 mph crash tests.
Silverado Tundra
Front into flat barrier $766.00 $1400.00
Rear into flat barrier $885.00 $1458.00
Front into angle barrier $2094.00 $2297.00
Rear into pole $516.00 $1889.00
Average for all four tests $1065.00 $1761.00
care to pay more for the average accident?
SO everyone has heard that the IIHS has rated the
Tundra better than the Silverado...
Now let us look at the individual Injury component
of their reports..
Silverado:
INJURY MEASURES: GOOD Measures taken from the head, chest, and both legs indicate low risk of injury. Head acceleration from the shoulder belt housing contact was low.
Tundra:
INJURY MEASURES: RIGHT LEG/FOOT MARGINAL Measures taken from the head and chest indicate low risk of injury. However, forces on the right tibia indicate the possibility of lower leg injury.
Note that the Silverado is rated Good compared to the Tundra's Marginal....
Now when it comes down to it...
I would rather be safe and in one piece. Yes I would like my truck to look good but come on..
wouldn't we rather be safer?
That's not a very heavy load. How 'bout this Rwell:
Try that with your 2/5-Ton'dra and you'll need helper springs or airbags to maintain steering integrity Rwell! If you get confused about anything else just let me know!
Truck Trend towed 5000lb with the both the Tundra and the Shakerado and preferred the Tundra. The Shakerado was no more capable and had a jackhammer rice to go along with it.
Let's face it - the Shakerado is totally outclassed by the Tundra.
Any comparisons made with Silverados also pertain to the Sierra. Sorry for the confusion.
You are confused about the IIHS offset crash test results. The Silverado was ranked MARGINAL, the Tundra was ranked GOOD. I hope this clears it up.
They gave the Tundra the thumbs-up for towing camparison due to it's smooth ride and tighter turning but they said the GM pickup dared them to pull more.
BTW-both trucks above are 1/2 tons and the rig with the car ain't mine (I wish it was!).
Assuming you are right (you said it was not your rig), the Tundra would still be a better tow vehicle.
Trailer Life magazine towed a 6500lb trailer through the Sierra Nevadas in mid summer and summed it up by saying.
"The Tundra towed as well as any of its Big3 counterparts"
Add a much better ride, 40% more warranty, cheaper price, better brakes, better gas mileage and there really is no comparison.
I never said the GM was a better tow vehicle! In fact it downright sucks for towing! Everybody knows the Tundra is built specifically for towing. I mean that's why it's rearend squats down lower than the front with a 4800lb trailer while the GM can pull 5500lb to 6000lb trailer and still ride level, right?!
BTW-the 2400lb trailer is the manufacturer's claimed weight so it probably weighs closer to 2000lbs.
The silverado had NO sag with the trailer + camaro.
Both had 2 horses in the trailers.
Might have a better ride (if you say) but the trailer is causing alot of bad stress on the truck
Ryan
Can you say blinded by prejudice?
You try to show this guy some facts and figures and
he spins it in some absurd ways©©©
1© Most accidents are minor fender benders that
happen in parking lots© The reason for the
5 mph crash tests©
2© If you look at the Kinematics ¥I am sorry that
is such a big word for you¤ the Silverado or
Sierra is safer© They were rated better in
the offset barrier test than the Tundra©
3© I don't care what you are driving, a 40 mph
offset crash does so much damage that your
insurance company is going to total your truck
anyway© At this point the areas the Silverado
were rated less than the Tundra are mute ones©
Come on get a brain and if you are going to look at facts, look at them in a REAL world scenario©
Not a TOY scenario© Toys are good for the back yard, leave the real trucks for the street and off-road©©©
Enough said©©©
The fact is that Truck Trend preferred the Tundra for the towing part of their test. They know which truck is more capable. The Shakerado has those weak brakes and that flimsy three piece frame.
"Seen a tundra towing a horsetrailer" Ryan, if you are going to continue in college, you need to work on your grammar.
Tundra YTD sales 49,344
Silverado YTD Sales 347,750
Sierra YTD Sales 96,213
Sounds to me that the Toy lovers are in a rather
small minority...
Heres one for you:
It dont take no rocket scientist to figure out the silverado is a much more complete truck which offers many more things than that there pickup truck you call a tundra.
They said the high low-end power of the engine combined with no available traction aid (locking or LS) caused a overly-high amount of spinning and traction loss! Climbing loose dirt and rock hills caused the thing to come to a stop and it was necessary to back up and try again. Slight throttle input caused so much tire spin it was hard to keep the steering pointed straight! Oops! And this test truck was indeed a TRD with all the offroad goodies!
Also said that when offroad speed increased "the frontend proved too soft, allowing the Tundra to bottom out regularly". They concluded that the suspension leaves something to be desired in the dirt!
Thanks but I'll stick with my harsh riding GM truck. At least I can drive over rough road without bottoming out my suspension (yes that's why it's called a "truck")! There is a tradeoff for that cushy ride on the Tundra-should be easy to see now!
Well mine gained about an inch from the ground to the bottom of the fender flare and the front gained .7-.8" front the ground to the bottom of the fender flare.
Truck Trend rated the off-road capability of the Tundra vs. the SHakerado. The Tundra won.
If you want to say how weak the Tundra is in an off-road test, just remember the the Shakerado is WEAKER!
They were even brave enough to drive that Tundra TRD offroad with 700lbs in the bed!! The results: "Lot's of wheel spin with too many steering corrections to keep it pointed straight". Sounds like these guys risked their life in that portion of the test!!
This is not complicated. Use the Tundra to cruise down to the strip mall and buy your week's worth of deer camp groceries. Use the GM to haul those groceries up the 2 mile broken mountain trail to the deer camp. Pretty simple.
It is hard to find any tests where the SHakerado is hitched to anything. This is because the shakerado is not intended to be worked.
The only comparison test I can find where the Shakerado is being worked, it lost. With weak brakes, and that flimsy three piece frame, it is no wonder.
FUNNY How your magazine article (truck trend) said if you want a work truck then the silverado is for you and if you want a grocery go getter the tundra is for you
Did you forget about that article?
Man! - the Chev pack has a short memory!
or how bout the testers fighting over the silverado when it was loaded down so they didnt have to drive the ready to launch into space tundra?
Bring back painful memories?
So what if they could make u turns easier. Id rather have something that CAN and has proven to tow and haul not something that bottoms out with less weight
Heh! More confusion from the Tundra tots! Perhaps I can help: Apparently you missed the part where I said the Tundra regularly bottomed out it's front end while offroading UNLOADED.
Bama-you were the guy who a few days ago was preaching the bit about how important front end ground clearance was up front. Guess what is happening up front to the GC when the suspension bottoms out regularly? And that's unloaded in a real-world test! Scares me to think about maybe hauling some weight over a rough road in a Tundra. Wow good luck on answering that one (I predict you won't).
The Tundra IS intended to be an offroad truck? Hmmm...I guess that's why the geniuses at Toyota chose not to offer a rear locker or LSD. Instead they offer a worthless TRD sticker that fools people into thinking this truck is safe to go wheeling in and misrepresent the ground clearance! Well-read the Sept Four Wheeler issue for the low-down on both of these items.
As far as the Tundra's engine, the drivetrain may be too weak in it to handle any more power than the current iforce V8 it has now. I will be interested to see Nissan's new pickup.
Later
what 1/2 ton truck would it be? (all the vehicles would be up to date on service)
Ford?
Chevy/GMC?
Dodge?
Toyota?
Be sure to check out the 40 MPH crash tests on the trucks if you haven't already.
http://www.highwaysafety.org/news_releases/2001/pr060401.htm
Chevy or ford would be my pick.