-September 2024 Special Lease Deals-
2024 Chevy Blazer EV lease from Bayway Auto Group Click here
2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee lease from Mark Dodge Click here
2025 Ram 1500 Factory Order Discounts from Mark Dodge Click here
2024 Chevy Blazer EV lease from Bayway Auto Group Click here
2024 Jeep Grand Cherokee lease from Mark Dodge Click here
2025 Ram 1500 Factory Order Discounts from Mark Dodge Click here
HONEST OPINIONS: Are Toyota's Pickups Just as Good as The Big Three?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Compared to the inside of my Tundra the Chev seems inferior. The instrument and gauge read outs are scattered all over the place and the dash itself is a big square (no style whatsoever). Although some more serious offroaders may prefer it, it still had a floor mounted 4WD shifter!
The heat and radio controls are almost too small to contol when you're driving (meaning you'll have to take your eyes off of the road to see them), and I hate Chev seats. It feels like you're sitting in a big rig or something. They are way too high and are not as comfortable as the Tundras or that of a F150s.
I paid less for my Tundra and I got more than what this truck was equipped with with.
On the outside the truck looked great, and the room in the Extended Cab was beyond anything the other trucks offered, but I'd take my Tundra any day over the Chevrolet (although this would be my second choice in a truck).
And this size thing is getting a bit silly. Someone said they parked their Silverado next to a Tundra and the Tundra looked like an S10. Whatever. My friend has a 1997 Chev Extended Cab 1 Ton dually 4X4 and my truck beside it still doesn't look that small. In fact side by side my truck actually sits higher overall (I can see my roof over the top of his truck).
Sit in the front seats of a Tundra, F150, Ram or Silverado and you will see little difference.
My other friend who owns the F150 drove my 4.7 liter V8 and he couldn't believe the power. He said it would blow the doors off of his 5.4 liter truck which is a very fast truck in its own right.
Wait until Toyota builds a larger 5.0 liter plus V8 engine...
ndahi12
You've made some interesting comments about people not supporting their statements. Well here's one for you:
#189 of 189 personally, by ndahi12 Nov 19, 2001 (08:13 pm)
I would go w/o ABS. I like to modulate my own brakes. I never liked ABS and I race cars for a hobby.
Also if you do not intend to go off road, then do not get a 4X4. Get a 4X2 with a limited slip. That is what I did and I need my truck for towing once a month and as a daily driver.
The more complicated the truck becmomes the more stuff will breka on it. That is why I did not get the ABS and the 4X4. Why do I need more options that I do not use (4X4) and have not proved their effectivness (ABS)
I can understand why you wouldn't want the 4X4...what I can't understand is your statement regarding the ABS. Please explain your position and logic used in determining that you would not get ABS. Any links to support your position on this?
Pluto
I would if I could. I only have access to GM TSB's.
I WOULD LOVE to have a big Chevy truck, but the quality issues just scare me away. There's just too much published evidence, plus my own experience and everybody else's experience in my family and circle of friends, to give Chevy a chance. I've never really been pro-Ford, but honestly, after all my reading and research, I think I would go for a Ford F-250 PSD before I would consider a Chevy. That's how turned off I am by Chevy right now.
Please consider this. You guys just love to shred the Toyota but don't seem to acknowledge the Tundra is Toyota's FIRST attempt in this market nich - V8 trucks. Remember Chevy and Ford's first attempt into the compact car niche in the gas-crunch 1970s? Do names like Vega, Maverick, Pacer, Mustang II etc. ring a bell? Can you not admit the Tundra is a much better first-attempt into a market than these vehicles?
also, what do you classify T100 into? wasn't it their "first attempt" into the full-size truck class? are you not counting it? the Tundra is actually their second attempt in this class. who cares what size engine it has. a full-size attempt is a full-size attempt. also, interesting to note that no one has commented on hillbilly bob's comments on parts sharing between the tacoma and tundra. like someone else said earlier, the tundra's bed is just a little bit longer than a tacoma. and the tundra's GVWR is just a bit more than a maximum Ranger's. its just a carified truck that can't really work when brought the task. its just too dang small and light, which probably explains its advantages in acceleration over the 5.4. id check the weight of each, but i really could care. someone else do it.
that response was to you (as well as other people and some magazines) complaining about the Silverados square interior or a shift on the floor transfer case standard, or the outside looks actually looking like a truck. Thats what some truck people like, and since silverado sales have skyrocketed over the last couple years its obvious lots of people do. The new Camry isn't much a departure from the old one but I personally haven't seen anyone complaining about that.
Can't help you with the Tundra's specs. I'm tired of that game.
chevytruck_fan, I have something for you to consider. Wasn't the Tundra introduced in 1999? In 1999, and well before 1999, the Big 3 had been producing all those leather-clad, push-button 4WD yuppie trucks and SUVS you despise so much. Then the Tundra pops into the market in 1999, and suddenly you blame everything that's wrong with today's trucks and SUVs on the Tundra. Now how does that make any sense?
One more thing. Do you know why there's so many of those leather-clad, push-button 4WD, cupholder equipped yuppie trucks and SUVs? THEY EXIST BECAUSE YOU - AMERICANS - DEMAND THEM!!!!!! If you traveled abroad, you would realize no other nation shares America's love affair with these vehicles. And Americans had been demanding them LONG before the Tundra reared its ugly head. If anything, Toyota introduced their Tundra to compete in this market which had long before been created by GMC, Ford and yuppie-truck-loving consumers.
Quit distorting the truth and blaming Toyota for all your perceived "wrongs" with today's trucks and SUVs.
Some folks derive their status in society from the "bigger is better" theory. Even if bigger is not refined, reliable, or well thought out.....the fact that its huge and "tough" looking is all some people need to add to validate their own self perceptions.
This is really the only reason why most people buy SUV's. It's the "mine is bigger than your" theory. The USA is really the only country that seems to universally equate size with status.
Now as far as pickups go, however.....size can matter for hauling, and doing tough work related jobs. There's no doubt about that. But 95% of people who buy pickups never stress the limits of what the pickup can do anyways. Living in an ag area most of my life, I can confirm this...farmers even use trucks more for status and tax write offs than they do for serious hauling. If they did, they'd buy more 3/4 and 1 tons than the leather clad half tons. Its all about show. One of my friends who's family is into ranching and farming even confirms this. His family buys trucks based on needs, not for show and often they try to find used Ford and Dodge trucks that are the heavy duty models and don't have alot of the interior glitz. Basic utility and solid powertrains and chassis is what they look for. So in that sense maybe a Toyota is not yet appropriate (serious hard core utility needs), but for the other 95% who seem compelled to have a truck to bring home potting soil from the home depot every other weekend, and occasionally tow the trailer full of crap to the relatives place for the garage sale.....the Toyota should more than serve people's needs. Anything beyond that is just for the "mine is bigger than yours" ego factor.
If they really served the needs of 95%, they should have the market cornered. Perhaps it's not the hardcore utility needs buyers find lacking, but the simple lack of decent back seat space, or 4 wheel disc brakes.
Braking: The Tundra outbrakes the EMPTY Chev while the Tundra is loaded with 1350lb. 'Nuff said. This says to me that you can't "WORK" a Chev unless you want to take your life in your hands.
Towing: The Tundra loaded with a 7000lb trailer outaccelerrated a Ford F150 with the biggest engine available (5.4L) loaded similarly. Where is the beef?
Hauling: While the Shakerado has a punishing suspension which allows slightly more (~100lb) more hauling, Why would anyone put up with the Chev's Hyundai quality? Why would you put up with a weak truck with 40% less warranty (Weakerado) when you can get a quality truck (Tundra) Cheaper?
The tindra brakes, undersized, with multiple TSB's for replacement of warping rotors, new pad materials, out of round drums, and subject of numerous consumer complaints to NTHSB, and an old fashioned mechanical proportioning valve, don't have the durability or reliability to sustain good braking performance for more than a few thousand miles. They are scheduled for update/replacement with 4 wheel disc brakes (like Sequoia has now) when tundra gets a facelift in 2004.
The Silverado brakes have a brake pad design life of 100,000 miles, an electronic proportioning valve, stopping a larger, heavier truck with much less brake wear. The tindra if it does stop quicker when new, (and I doubt it), does it with inferior brakes, less weight, but better oem tires.
when i met Matt a little over a week ago, i learned more about the pads and brakes on these new chevies than you would believe. apparently, after changing the pads out to american made pads, the stopping power of the chevy is totally different.
like i said, with the brake problems that the Tundra is having, and now the apparent Sludge problem, amongst other problems that are now showing up, it's no wonder that most if not all Tundra owners are on the bitter side. you surely can't get rid of the beast, as no one wants one. most folks looking for a second hand pickup are looking for something that can be worked, and for a good deal. which also means that Tundra owners would lose a bundle when trying to resell.
I'm sure seeing a LOT of rusted up American trucks here in Texas. Perhaps an explanation is that after people are so satisfied with their old Toyota, they buy another one after 5-7 years?
When I drive in friends 97 Chev it is jittering all over the road. It feels like it going to tear itself apart...
He bought the thing about a month and a half ago and thus far this is what he had to do -
New fuel pump..
new injectors...
new Leaf springs...
new headlight wiring...
Chev quality... Yeah O.K...
My friends 99 F150 with about 30 thousand miles...
Just repaired - 2 headgaskets...
Electric lock assembally...
Air conditioner...
Driver side window...
Ford Quality... Yeah O.K...
I don't care if my Tundra is built with Toyota Echo parts, because in the end it still works... I'm in the construction business, and I work my truck pretty hard (I don't beat it but I do use it as a truck) and I would not buy anything else... Nothing...
It is my sixth Toyota truck... I could still be driving number 1 but I like to get a new(er) one every couple of years just for a change...
I have had a 1983 Toyota 4X4, a 1990 4X4 V6, a 1993 Toyota Xtracab V6, a 1993 Toyota T100 4X4 SR5, a 1999 Toyota Tacoma 4X4 Xtracab V6 and I now have a 2001 Toyota Tundra 4X4 SR5 V8...
All of them were great trucks, and besides getting my headgaskets done on my 1990 other than regular maintenance the trucks were near flawless. All of my friends drive trucks, from one with an 1984 Chev 1/2 ton, to another with the 97 Chev dually, to another with the 99 F-150 to another with a 1994 Chev 3/4 ton diesel 4X4.
As stubborn as they all are, none of them can criticize the reliability and build quality, and overall toughness of my trucks. They learned (some reluctantly) that Toyota trucks are one of the, if not the, best trucks on the road today...
Based upon the solidity and the way the Cressida was built, I'd seriously consider a Tundra over a Ford or Chevy.....unless I wanted a very serious work truck that I was going to put lots of miles on it quickly.....not keep it for 16 years like our Cressida.
By the way, the Cressida's handled all those runs to the Home Depot just beautifully (only really need the truck to get mulch and pull the boat).
BTW, your comment:
My friends 99 F150 with about 30 thousand miles...
Just repaired - 2 headgaskets...
Electric lock assembally...
Air conditioner...
Driver side window...
How is it that two headgaskets need repair? And how do you repair a head gasket?....
Good luck on this one now!!
good luck on this one now!
Let's see: 2 (count them) 2 intermediate shafts. Leaking differential, engine knock, and these are just the things you have admitted. The Chev pack must admit that their 1/2 ton is the runt of the litter.
The Chev pack thinks this is totally normal - LOW EXPECTATIONS.
I expected better and have had a flawless Tundra for the last two years.
let's all be honest here for a minute. i personally feel that none of the makes mentioned here are better or worse, as they have all had there share of problems. i had a Tacoma that was flawless right up to the time i traded it, and the '01 chevy i have now has been flawless. my '00 chevy has had a steering shaft replaced and is now exhibiting a 1-2 upshift that is unacceptable, but will get rectified, and if not, GM was kind enough to extend my warranty to 100K.
with that said, i feel we ought to keep the backstabbing to a minimum, and give the original poster some useful info......
good luck on this one now!
BTW, you are so right about Honda being able to build a better truck, cause guess what kind of parts it will employ......
good luck
O.K...
Better???
They changed the two of them... One above one side of the four cylinders and the other above the other four... Pretty difficult to figure out I know... Man o man...
I just traded in my 99 Tacoma (3 weeks ago), and that is a much better point of reference. He got his F150 shortly after I bought my Tacoma and they roughly had the same amount of kilos on them. I did nothing to my Tacoma until the day I traded it in other than change the oil, flushed the rad, greased the driveshaft, regular maintenance stuff.
I just shake my head when I hear things like this happening to domestic owners. I'm not saying Toyotas are all this and that, but just from my own experience and watching what is happening all around me, I truly believe in terms of reliability, longevity and overall quality that Toyota pickups/vehicles are better.
That's why J.D Powers rates the Tundra best in its Full-size trucks. That's why Consumer Reports recommends the Tundra as the Full-size truck to buy...
Obviously if you need to haul or carry something a bit more, than you go with a 3/4 or 1 ton, which Toyota does not yet offer. Realisitcally, Toyota had no idea how people were going to react to the Tundra, and for them to introduce everything from 1/2 ton to 1 ton dually models would have been a major gamble. The Tundra is slowly gaining more recognition, and no one is being an idiot and saying it sells anywhere near the amount Ford sells F150s, but did anyone really expect all the Ford, Chevy and Dodge owners to sell their trucks and immediately go and buy a Toyota? Of course not, and neither did Toyota.
You will see Heavy Duty Tundras come along, and it will without a doubt grow a bit in size. You will also see a larger V8 in the next couple of years. The Tundra line will progress.
Another thing. When I did have my Tacoma and was looking at getting another truck how come every car dealer "wanted" my truck. I was looking at several Chev and GMC Z71s (I do like these trucks and they were my second choice), and I wasn't even out of my Tacoma, and there was a dealer in front me asking me about my Tacoma, telling me they could give me a "real good deal". Chev dealers who only praised my truck.
I even looked at a used 1999 GMC Z71 loaded with all the options but it had almost double the kilos my Tacoma had. The dealer asked me why I wanted to trade my Toyota in on this truck. Realisitically, comparing truck to truck, and what each had, the GMC was twice the truck my Tacoma was and it truly was a beautiful machine, but the dealer knew, like so many of us know, that the Toyota means so much. He knew that he could have probably sold my Tacoma the next day.
Another reason I bought the Tundra...
At least I stand out in a crowd... I 'm not just another domestic truck going that everyone else has. Whatever the reason, whatever the excuse, I like being a bit unique.
I can also assure you, if my previous '99 Silverado was even 1/10 the lemon you'd like to dream it was, I wouldn't be a repeat customer. Simple as that.
2001 Silverado HD Motor Trend Truck of the Year
and now...
GMC Envoy, Motor Trend 2002 SUV of the Year. Beat out Mercedes, Toyota, Lexus, Jeep, Mercury, Subaru, Land Rover, etc.
I read an interview of some GMC (female) executive who said the whole "professional grade" image was to try to equate the GMC trucks to have the same status as yuppies equate with professional kitchen appliances like Viking ranges, etc. You know, try to fool Bim and Buffy into thinking their GMC Yukon is as heavy duty as their over engineered megazillion BTU stainless steel range.
In other words...its just brand marketing. The actual GMC product isn't superior realy to any other trucks out there. Not bottom feeder, certainly not top of the heap.
And judging by the acclaim, GM seems to have gotten the DOHC thingy right on the first attempt, since they preferred its 270 hp engine and drivertrain the best. Also praised its offroad capability.
You give it the smallest engine lineup.
You offer the fewest configurations.
You give it the lowest tow rating.
You give it drum brakes and make abs extra cost option.
You share drivetrain parts with its compact sibling.
You support it with the worst dealer network for customer satisfaction in the industry.
You picture it with Howdy Doody.
Give it this tagline:
Have we gone too far? Or have others not gone far enough?
ROFLMAO! That's cheesie...
Just curious, when's the last time the Toyota guys said their vehicles were as reliable as a Chevy or Ford? NEVER.
Toyota is NOTED for quality and reliability, the others ADVERTISE it (Chevy = longest lasting....and Ford = Quality is job #1).
I, and many others, place more value on quality, durability and reliability than options most people won't even use to their potential, like an additional 1000lbs towing or rear-seat in an extended cab truck.
It seems to me the folks who truly need a heavy-duty working truck have no choice but to put up with their problematic Chevys and Fords. I feel nothing but sympathy for you.
Now why would anyone want a truck like that? Don't believe me? Here's the link:
http://www.nhtsa.com/NCAP/Cars/1999Pkup.html
You were luckier than you thought when you dumped that casket........
quad,
GM's 1st attempt has not been flawless on the Envoy line. They had a steering TSB that required TOWING to the nearest dealer, and there's been a few complaints of engine knock (damaged cylinder sleeve)on the new powerplant. A few have posted that they received new motors.
We've gone with the metric system...
For that gentleman who couldn't figure out that kilos stands for kilometers...
The Tundra is rated the safest truck of all full-size trucks. I know you've heard this before. That weak little Toyota frame and metal must not be good enough though... Makes you wonder dosen't it.. Look at the Chev, Ford and Dodge... They look like they're made of paper...
What a joke...
http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/news/iihs_crash_results.html
As for the Tacoma...
Check here - http://www.highwaysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/98003.htm#5
And then click on the vehicles that are the highest and lowest rated. The highest is the Tacoma which means overall it is safer. The lowest is the Dakota...
Oil business, with toyota pickups, people in my family that are in the oil business have had suburbans or the latest is a dodge pickup.