Please. Remember the Truck Trend shootout in the past summer issue? I'll remind you what it said. The Tundra bottomed out it's rear suspension with a wimpy 1350 lbs in the bed and rode along with it's nose pointed up in the air and it's handling suffered!!
The 3/02 issue of MT says the Tundra "doesn't like heavy loads" and the Toyota V8 "lacks torque and is a bit too mico-sized for serious hauling"! They gave the Toyota a "C" in power while the other three brands recieved "B"'s in power!
The Chevy 1500LD they compared it to (Truck Trend July/August) hauled something like 1700lbs easily and maintained proper handling and cornering.
Bama...that's what makes a truck a truck. Not a nice cushy ride and fast 1/4 mile time.
Sorry to digress here guys...but keep in mind who I'm arguing with.
Enough, already! As a "neutral" observer (although I plan to get an F250 this year), let me redirect to the topic for this Chevy/Toyota thing.
Tundra isn't ugly per se, but it's just this side of the F-150 for looking like a girl's truck. Er, sorry, I meant "a truck in touch with it's feminine side".
Silverado is average. Nothing too wimpy or exciting, but not nearly as box-like as older F series Fords.
BTW, regarding post above questioning the importance of 15 feet of braking difference -- if you drive a Toyota Echo, there's a HUGE difference between a full-size pickup stopping 2 feet shy of your rear bumper vs. having it's front axle on your roof!!! LOL
TJ: "Er, sorry, I meant "a truck in touch with it's feminine side".
Well - I would say a woman would want a truck with low ground clearance so she can get in and out and still retain her modesty. Uh-0H! the Shakerado has 3" less ground clearance than the Tundra? Oh-No - the Furd F250 has even less? They should be a big hit with women.
Better hurry up and get that Furd F250 before they make it into a Tonka toy. It would be a hassle to drive your new truck only at night to avoid being laughed at. At least you are buying a truck that can be worked (unlike the Chev.)
As far as braking goes - with 32ft more stopping distance than the Tundra, I think the Chev would end up with the Echo inside the cab - we all know they have "marginal" crashworthiness.
That same Truck Trend article rated the Tundra "Best in Class" 1/2 ton extended cab pickup. They preferred it for towing 5000lb. Could it be because of the Chev's weak brakes?
As far as 1/4 mile and 0 to 60 times goes - that has always been a metric for power in real world conditions. You can quote your owners manual and that doesn't mean a thing. When I am loaded with 1000lb and merging on the interstate, I want a truck that can accelerate.
Motor Trend rated the 1/2ton Tundra against a so-called "HD" Silverado with a 6L V8. The Tundra still outaccelerated it both loaded and unloaded. I think that Chev has obviously overrated its horsepower and torque. It would be interesting to see what would happen if they compared the Tundra 1/2 ton to a Chev 1/2ton with the 5.3L The results might be quite different.
As far as rankings go - the Tundra got 5 A's. The Chev one A. It is clear which truck they preferred overall.
I want to drive my truck up over yours if you don't shut your trap. Everything you have been saying is full of cr **, you need to grow up and shut up. As for your calling the silverado a 1/4 ton, its 1500+ lbs of payload, wouldn't that make it a 3/4 ton? Anyways, they stop on a dime, drive like a dream, and have great resale value. Along with a confortable cabin, great power and milage, and come in many different combinations to suit the needs of its owners.
Call that a wimpy truck, it will run circles around your truck with or without 2500 lbs in the bed, all while having the ability to pull 20K with ease.
The Tundra fills a need, but your actions and statements don't. If you can't improve the board and contrubute. Than leave and go take care of your truck, since it is the best there was ever made, or just don't post except for the Tundra topics, make you a deal, you stay out of the Silverado topics, and don't bash in the regular topics, and we will stay out of the tundra topics.
You need to calm down just a tad. I can (and have) back up every statement I have made. Childish name-calling does not promote meaningful discussion.
Hillybilly was feeling just a little insecure and started this Tundra vs. Chev thread. You will have to ask him why. I'm sorry if my pointing out a few facts has hurt your feelings.
I'm sure that your HD truck is a nice one. I honestly hope that Chev can get their act together and come up with a 1/2 ton truck that can compete with the Tundra.
Now, why don't we get this discussion back on topic and discuss ugly trucks?
Why do you think that Ford would name its new trucks after a Tonka toy? This doesn't seem like a wise marketing decision to me.
Why do most of the new domestic trucks look like something a cartoonist would design?
Ford is spending 1 - 1.5 billion on a F series redesign. For Ford's sake - let's hope they don't make it look like a transformer toy. It seems that nowadays the retro look is in (PT Cruiser, Thunderbird, etc.). Why don't they go back to some of the 50's designs and get away from the three box design that GM is so fond of.
>>>>I'm sure that your HD truck is a nice one. I honestly hope that Chev can get their act together and come up with a 1/2 ton truck that can compete with the Tundra.<<<<
Toyota's first full sized pickup EVER after the big 3 had the market to themselves for over half a century... and you're sayin you hope Chevy can come up with a competetive full sizer. Give a Toyota truck owner a V8 and a couple extra cubic feet of bed space and all of a sudden their heads get all big and they think they're on a level with the big boys.
Please stop embarrasing your silly self. Wanna talk quarter mile times now do we? Let's see what Edmunds found out about the Tundra vs GM's 5.3L concerning your so called "metric for power in real world conditions":
Wow-tough to stomach, eh? Here's more. The Truck Trend article also confirmed this. GET THIS BAMA...The GM 5.3L literally smoked the Tundra unloaded and loaded with 1000lbs in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile:
What were you saying about liking trucks that can still accelerate under load? If you really feel this way, you might wanna look into dumping that Toyota for a GM 1500!! As for your claim that GM overstates hp/torque, take a look at the dynoed hp/torque ratings for the Tundra...a measly 189 rearwheel HP!
Now, back on topic...at least the Tundra wins in one category hands down; It's the ugliest pickup on the road!! I think that same statement by me several posts ago is what offended BamaSpama into his current blubbering snit. Sorry if I bored or offended anyone.
4wd version, but awhile back when Sport Truck was doing some tests on 2wds, the 4.7 Dakota QC whupped 'em all. Not by much mind you but it was a tick quicker than a 5.3 GM Reg. cab SWB. No Lightning wasn't included.
You are talking performance numbers for these trucks like they were sports cars. 0-60 times and which truck outbrakes the other doesn't mean squat for a "truck" in the real world. Take your ranting somewhere else, this thread is about ugly trucks, not truck performance. And no, I do not agree that an exaggerated stopping distance is ugly.
While 0-60 may not matter much, braking distance does matter. I for one don't want to be rearended by a Chevy because they couldnt stop. But this is performance issue, so should be discussed somewhere else. "Tundra vs. Chevy", anyone?
But to some of us who use our trucks for commuting, and not towing or hauling performance IS important. And occasionally getting off the subject is perfectly ok as long it's not more us vs them crap.
Your Tundra is on the Center for Auto Safety list of the 25 worst vehicles for complaints made to the government by Americans having problems with their vehicles, no doubt due to multitude of problems caused by defective brakes. F150 is rated #1 for fewest complaints on the list of the 25 BEST vehicles. *************************************
Top 25 Best and Worst Vehicles The Center for Auto Safety analyzed complaints made to the government by Americans having problems with their vehicles. Below are the models that received the fewest complaints, and those that received the most. Models introduced in 2000 and 2001 are not represented due to a lack of data. Best (Fewest complaints) Worst (Most complaints) 1. Ford F-Series 1. Mazda MPV 2. BMW 3 Series 2. Kia Sportage 3. BMW 5 Series 3. Ford Excursion 4. Volkswagen Golf 4. Ford Windstar 5. Mazda Truck 5. Mercury Cougar 6. Volvo C70 6. Volvo S40 7. Volkswagen Beetle 7. Honda Passport 8. Nissan Sentra 8. Honda S2000 9. Infiniti G20 9. Mitsubishi Eclipse 10. Acura RL 10. Isuzu Rodeo 11. Saab 9-5 11. Ford Explorer 12. Chevrolet Prizm 12. Land Rover Range Rover 13. Toyota Corolla 13. Audi A6 14. Infiniti QX4 14. Hyundai Tiburon 15. Nissan Altima 15. Honda Odyssey 16. Lexus RX300 16. Lincoln LS 17. Nissan Maxima 17. Jeep Grand Cherokee 18. Acura TL 18. Volkswagen Passat 19. Saab 9-3 19. Buick LeSabre 20. Pontiac Bonneville 20. Suzuki Grand Vitara 21. Mazda Millenia 21. Chevrolet Blazer 22. Mazda 626 22. Chevrolet Impala 23. Lincoln Town Car 23. Toyota Tundra 24. Ford Focus 24. Dodge Dakota 25. Honda Accord 25. Dodge Neon
I know I can't believe I hit enter after the typo, after noticing it I just said forget it. Oh well, I'm not the best typist, and I figured you'd get it anyway, at least I didn't hit the "p".
about typo's by _________a, it means nada. wasn't even worth the reply. we know you're cool. too bad this forum still has a nimrod that has nothing better to do than to antagonize everyone.
As a Toyota supporter for many years, I must say im disappointed to think that Toyota would want to copy the flareside, an american truck design. I really cant even say that theres hope for that idea, and I think they should stick with something closer to what they currently have. The flaresides in any model win my vote for ugliest truck I strongly disagree with those in here that view the current Tundra as the ugliest truck on road. It certainly may not be the prettiest but nowhere near the ugliest as far as i'm concerned. I also happen to think that the chev trucks aren't ugly either, just an opinion. The truck that first comes to mind as being ugly is the Nissan Frontier crew cab THING for lack of better words. A few years back it was pretty much the first of its kind to have that full size truck look with a toy box for a bed look. The plastic wheel wells finish adding to the horrendous look of the Frontier. But as luck would have it, people bought the thing. This translated into a positive in the eyes of Nissan as well as other truck manufacturers looking to be trend-setters. So now what do we have ??? Just about every truck manufacturer with some from of crew cab / short bed look ... Frontier, Tacoma, Ford sport-trac or something to that effect just to name a few. Avalanche, Aztec, Rendevous, Escalade are just a few examples of models that don't seem visually pleasing with a majority of people. Time will tell where they go from here.
I have never been a fan of stepsides either. I couldn't understand why anyone would sacrifice bed size for styling. At least Toyota did keep the bed the same size. They really have to lose those hideous tail lights though.
When Toyota's Senior Vice President and General Manager, Don Esmond, introduced the 2003 Tundra Stepside Concept at the Chicago Auto Show he made it clear that Toyota is, "...aiming for the heart and soul of the US auto industry - full size pickups" with this latest Tundra iteration.
I'd say their aim is off just a little. Looks like Toyota just shot itself in the foot (tire)!!! As for the reference about making it more masculine, I'd say they girlyfied it even more. I thought the 2003 Rado was ugly, but this makes it look like a work of art.
"I couldn't understand why anyone would sacrifice bed size for styling."
Oddly enough, I find myself agreeing with you. I don't mind the looks of some reg cab stepsides, but from a functionality aspect it seems like too much of a sacrifice to me to lose the extra bedspace.
The S10 and Ranger stepsides are pretty good loking, IMO. Regular cab models only, of course!
like it....sorta. I do like stepsides, and sportsides, and flaresides. Yes they do look better on a reg. cab. I've had a few. I was never real fond of the Tundra front end and if those tail lights were just a tad smaller. It ain't bad. But not great. Hey the bed is big enough for a set of clubs!
makes me glad i own a Rado...........honestly don't understand where the nissan and toyota designers are going with designs that had potential, but seems they are listening to ???????????
Now that has to be the ugliest thought i've ever seen. Suddenly the Avalanche and others seem modest lol. Someone over at Nissan with a brain better put that design on ice.
Thanks scOrpiO,for posting what is clearly the world's ugliest truck.If people hadn't bought that hideous Frontier this never would have happened.The concept truck looks like a "transformer" version of the Dodge Ram.Maybe they could put a stepside on it and there would be no competition for the "Ugly Truck Award" kip
That new Silverado is beyond ugly. The Tundra stepside looks like a Playmate of the Year next to that Silverado. Mark my words that Chevy is going to lose a great number of buyers with this new truck. The GMC doesn't look that bad, but man I cannot believe they would really take this route. I like the truck that's out now, and if they go to something like this, I truly believe sales are going to be hurt.
2003 Silverado looks great! They took the best features of the TrailBlazer, great front end and radio on the steering wheel, and allowed the smooth lines of the Silverado to remain, i.e. de-avalanched.
I'm just neutral on the looks of the new Silverado. The new design will neither make me rush out to buy a new one soon nor would it keep me from buying a new one if I was in the market for one!
The new dashboard on the other hand looks great. It looks a little more stylized and sporty than the 2002s but not cute and gimmicky like the Tundra's. Did you notice some of the photos look like the climate control system panel has a digital display? Looks cool!
I don't think the new body design will really hurt or help sales. It's still more conservative than the Dodge or Ford, and not soft and curvy like the Tundra's sheet metal.
You guys read too many auto rags. You're starting to talk like them. If you ask me there isn't a whole heck of a lot of difference between the look of the Tundra, F150, Chevy or Dodge fullsize trucks. Sure they have different grills and tail lights but other than that (and certain repeated quality issues with the American trucks) a truck is a truck is a truck. Cab up front bed in back. They are all roughly the same size shape and dimensions (in the same class of course).
The avalanche and those ugly exploder sport-tracs being the exception to the rule. Those ugly beasts are more novelty items. Once the novelty wears off they will go the way of the edsel, aztek and other abominations of automotive design. I can't figure out why those ugly beasts appeal to anyone in the first place. Maybe it's part of the dumbing down of America. You know, the idiots on TV that sit there and let their burger drip all over them while they eat like slobs. Yeah, that's a REAL American there. Makes you proud doesn't it?
Hill-I'm curious, what is "cute and gimmicky" about the Tundra dashboard? It is pretty straight forward, well laid out and utilitarian as far as I can tell. I don't see anything on it that says "cute and gimmicky." Maybe you were thinking of the Toyota Echo?
Toyota Echo? No...I'm fairly certain it's the Tundra I was referring to, although I could see where one might confuse the two runts at first glance. Here; take a look:
See the overemphasized oval shaped control cluster and that curvy "visor" that protrudes over the instrument cluster? To me, it looks cute and overstylized. Kind of what you'd expect in a sports-car. Also, gotta love that huge red hazard light(?) button that screams at you from the center of the dash. What's up with that?
Plain, simple and maybe even boring. Most of the panels are square and flat. Looks perfect for a truck to me. So there's my explanation on my opinion of the dashboards of these two trucks, as best as I can express it.
Now, why do use the word "shakerado" each time you want to mention a GM pickup? Since a number of Tundras are experiencing "shaking while braking" issues, is it proper to call them shakerados also? Enlighten us, F1....
Still, I don't see anything cute or overstylized about the Tundra dash. The red hazard button is so you can find it easily. Ever try to find the harard button on some cars? The look of the Tundra interior is sleak and pleasing to look at in my opinion.
The Chevy dash is too busy looking if you ask me. Too many small buttons and knobs placed close together. I personally don't like the ergonomics of many GM car/truck interiors.
Also, that console in the center reaching up to the dash looks more like something you would find in a car-much more so than the Tundra dash.
I had a brake vibration in my truck around 10k miles. It was very slight and more noticeable when braking from freeway speeds. I took it to the dealership and they fixed it. I now have slightly under 30k miles on it and the problem has not resurfaced.
Funny that you call the Tundra a runt. Dimensionally, it is within inches of all the big three 1/2 ton extend-a-cab trucks. I would call the Ranger, Tacoma, Frontier and S-10 runts.
Why do I call the Silverado a shakerado? Same reason I call the Explorer an Exploder. It fits.
I can't really knock Ford vehicles too much though. I've owned two Fords and both were excellent vehicles. I seriously considered the F150 when I bought my Tundra. That was the only American truck I considered though.
A good friend of mine has an Explorer and even he calls it the Exploder. He has a good sense of humor.
All you happy Tundra owners, more power to you. But, wow, what a defensive bunch! f1jules and bamatundra, are you guys twins?
I gave this board a few days without visiting to see if it would settle down into a fun topic, with everyone taking good-natured turns at bashing their least favorites. But the two Turdras here have ruined it.
This is all just opinions, guys. I personally like the F250 look, but not the F150. But a few funny jabs at either would be funny. So, my opinion is that the Tundra LOOKS GIRLY, bama and f1jules, and nothing you can say about sizes, dash boards, ground clearance, and brakes will change my mind. Yes, those are all important things in making a buying decision, but read this topic's name. There are plenty of other boards to discuss those other things, I suggest you go visit them.
I'll spend my time elsewhere. To all of you willing to keep listening to whiny, defensive Tundra owners, good luck!
These are numbers as posted by edmunds. When saying that these trucks are within a few inches of each other you must be comparing to the Dodge Dakota cause its not a few inches between the Chevy and the Tundra. Funny thing...the wheelbase of the Dakota is greater than that of a Tundra. What is Toyota trying to do? Fool the unsuspecting buyer?
Well, length of course would exhibit the largest difference. Overall though if you look at the interior room, bed length, width etc. the Tundra is not that much smaller than the big 3. A few inches, yes, I'm sticking to that figure.
Hmm, when a chevy owner blasts the Tundra's styling it's just opinion and "a fun topic, with everyone taking good-natured turns at bashing their least favorites" But when a Tundra owner does the exact same thing it's "I'll spend my time elsewhere. To all of you willing to keep listening to whiny, defensive Tundra owners, good luck"
I guess you are just incapable of dealing with someone with a differing opinion. Must be nice to be right all the time. You must have lots of friends.
Hey seelig-I happen to like girls, why do you bash girls? Must be some kind of sexual preference thing I guess.
"Also, that console in the center reaching up to the dash looks more like something you would find in a car-much more so than the Tundra dash."
Well I can agree with you on that center console. In addition to not looking right, I think it takes up too much space. My Silverado has a the split bench seat all the way across with the smaller fold-up storage console in the middle. Nice if you want to seat 3 people up front.
And I like the look of F250s alot also, but not the look of the F150. I'm guessing of Ford would exhibit some marketing sense and copy that style to the F150s, sales would increase appeciably.
"And I like the look of F250s alot also, but not the look of the F150. I'm guessing of Ford would exhibit some marketing sense and copy that style to the F150s, sales would increase appeciably."
How can you go any higher than #1 selling vehicle in America though?
I also like the F250. If I had any need for a truck with the capabilities of the F250 that's what I would buy.
Comments
Please. Remember the Truck Trend shootout in the past summer issue? I'll remind you what it said. The Tundra bottomed out it's rear suspension with a wimpy 1350 lbs in the bed and rode along with it's nose pointed up in the air and it's handling suffered!!
The 3/02 issue of MT says the Tundra "doesn't like heavy loads" and the Toyota V8 "lacks torque and is a bit too mico-sized for serious hauling"! They gave the Toyota a "C" in power while the other three brands recieved "B"'s in power!
The Chevy 1500LD they compared it to (Truck Trend July/August) hauled something like 1700lbs easily and maintained proper handling and cornering.
Bama...that's what makes a truck a truck. Not a nice cushy ride and fast 1/4 mile time.
Sorry to digress here guys...but keep in mind who I'm arguing with.
GM:
"At least pretty has something to do with Ugly. It's the opposite last time I checked."
Does this mean if the topic was black trucks we should be talking about white trucks? You are not making a lot of sense here. LMAO
Edmunds tested the brakes unloaded. As we all know, when you put a load in Chev's .25ton it takes 162ft to stop. Now that is UGLY!
Tundra isn't ugly per se, but it's just this side of the F-150 for looking like a girl's truck. Er, sorry, I meant "a truck in touch with it's feminine side".
Silverado is average. Nothing too wimpy or exciting, but not nearly as box-like as older F series Fords.
BTW, regarding post above questioning the importance of 15 feet of braking difference -- if you drive a Toyota Echo, there's a HUGE difference between a full-size pickup stopping 2 feet shy of your rear bumper vs. having it's front axle on your roof!!! LOL
Well - I would say a woman would want a truck with low ground clearance so she can get in and out and still retain her modesty. Uh-0H! the Shakerado has 3" less ground clearance than the Tundra? Oh-No - the Furd F250 has even less? They should be a big hit with women.
Better hurry up and get that Furd F250 before they make it into a Tonka toy. It would be a hassle to drive your new truck only at night to avoid being laughed at. At least you are buying a truck that can be worked (unlike the Chev.)
As far as braking goes - with 32ft more stopping distance than the Tundra, I think the Chev would end up with the Echo inside the cab - we all know they have "marginal" crashworthiness.
As far as 1/4 mile and 0 to 60 times goes - that has always been a metric for power in real world conditions. You can quote your owners manual and that doesn't mean a thing. When I am loaded with 1000lb and merging on the interstate, I want a truck that can accelerate.
Motor Trend rated the 1/2ton Tundra against a so-called "HD" Silverado with a 6L V8. The Tundra still outaccelerated it both loaded and unloaded. I think that Chev has obviously overrated its horsepower and torque. It would be interesting to see what would happen if they compared the Tundra 1/2 ton to a Chev 1/2ton with the 5.3L The results might be quite different.
As far as rankings go - the Tundra got 5 A's. The Chev one A. It is clear which truck they preferred overall.
My version
2002 GMC Ext Cab 4x4 SLE 2500HD Duramax/Allison/Eaton with 33" tires.
Call that a wimpy truck, it will run circles around your truck with or without 2500 lbs in the bed, all while having the ability to pull 20K with ease.
The Tundra fills a need, but your actions and statements don't. If you can't improve the board and contrubute. Than leave and go take care of your truck, since it is the best there was ever made, or just don't post except for the Tundra topics, make you a deal, you stay out of the Silverado topics, and don't bash in the regular topics, and we will stay out of the tundra topics.
Hunter
Hillybilly was feeling just a little insecure and started this Tundra vs. Chev thread. You will have to ask him why. I'm sorry if my pointing out a few facts has hurt your feelings.
I'm sure that your HD truck is a nice one. I honestly hope that Chev can get their act together and come up with a 1/2 ton truck that can compete with the Tundra.
Now, why don't we get this discussion back on topic and discuss ugly trucks?
Why do you think that Ford would name its new trucks after a Tonka toy? This doesn't seem like a wise marketing decision to me.
Why do most of the new domestic trucks look like something a cartoonist would design?
Ford is spending 1 - 1.5 billion on a F series redesign. For Ford's sake - let's hope they don't make it look like a transformer toy. It seems that nowadays the retro look is in (PT Cruiser, Thunderbird, etc.). Why don't they go back to some of the 50's designs and get away from the three box design that GM is so fond of.
Toyota's first full sized pickup EVER after the big 3 had the market to themselves for over half a century... and you're sayin you hope Chevy can come up with a competetive full sizer. Give a Toyota truck owner a V8 and a couple extra cubic feet of bed space and all of a sudden their heads get all big and they think they're on a level with the big boys.
http://www.edmunds.com/reviews/comparison/articles/43902/page015.html
Wow-tough to stomach, eh? Here's more. The Truck Trend article also confirmed this. GET THIS BAMA...The GM 5.3L literally smoked the Tundra unloaded and loaded with 1000lbs in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile:
http://www.trucktrend.com/editorial/article_popup.jsp?id=30189&sidebar=1
What were you saying about liking trucks that can still accelerate under load? If you really feel this way, you might wanna look into dumping that Toyota for a GM 1500!! As for your claim that GM overstates hp/torque, take a look at the dynoed hp/torque ratings for the Tundra...a measly 189 rearwheel HP!
Now, back on topic...at least the Tundra wins in one category hands down; It's the ugliest pickup on the road!! I think that same statement by me several posts ago is what offended BamaSpama into his current blubbering snit. Sorry if I bored or offended anyone.
*************************************
Top 25 Best and Worst Vehicles
The Center for Auto Safety analyzed complaints made to the government by Americans having problems with their vehicles. Below are the models that received the fewest complaints, and those that received the most. Models introduced in 2000 and 2001 are not represented due to a lack of data.
Best (Fewest complaints) Worst (Most complaints)
1. Ford F-Series 1. Mazda MPV
2. BMW 3 Series 2. Kia Sportage
3. BMW 5 Series 3. Ford Excursion
4. Volkswagen Golf 4. Ford Windstar
5. Mazda Truck 5. Mercury Cougar
6. Volvo C70 6. Volvo S40
7. Volkswagen Beetle 7. Honda Passport
8. Nissan Sentra 8. Honda S2000
9. Infiniti G20 9. Mitsubishi Eclipse
10. Acura RL 10. Isuzu Rodeo
11. Saab 9-5 11. Ford Explorer
12. Chevrolet Prizm 12. Land Rover Range Rover
13. Toyota Corolla 13. Audi A6
14. Infiniti QX4 14. Hyundai Tiburon
15. Nissan Altima 15. Honda Odyssey
16. Lexus RX300 16. Lincoln LS
17. Nissan Maxima 17. Jeep Grand Cherokee
18. Acura TL 18. Volkswagen Passat
19. Saab 9-3 19. Buick LeSabre
20. Pontiac Bonneville 20. Suzuki Grand Vitara
21. Mazda Millenia 21. Chevrolet Blazer
22. Mazda 626 22. Chevrolet Impala
23. Lincoln Town Car 23. Toyota Tundra
24. Ford Focus 24. Dodge Dakota
25. Honda Accord 25. Dodge Neon
WHAAAAA WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA WHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!
Did your mommies forget to change you dirty diapers?
BTW-"trucks with dents, rust, and a cab full of coffee cups and old shotgun shells have character.." No, they have low resale value.
wasn't even worth the reply.
we know you're cool.
too bad this forum still has a nimrod that has nothing better to do than to antagonize everyone.
http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/autoshows/chicago2002/toyota/stepside1.html
Check out those cartoon-looking tail lights!
thanks Hill
The truck that first comes to mind as being ugly is the Nissan Frontier crew cab THING for lack of better words. A few years back it was pretty much the first of its kind to have that full size truck look with a toy box for a bed look. The plastic wheel wells finish adding to the horrendous look of the Frontier. But as luck would have it, people bought the thing. This translated into a positive in the eyes of Nissan as well as other truck manufacturers looking to be trend-setters. So now what do we have ??? Just about every truck manufacturer with some from of crew cab / short bed look ... Frontier, Tacoma, Ford sport-trac or something to that effect just to name a few.
Avalanche, Aztec, Rendevous, Escalade are just a few examples of models that don't seem visually pleasing with a majority of people. Time will tell where they go from here.
Actually, in agreement with Scorpio, it may not look bad at all in a reg cab 4wd.
Maybe in a few years, you will reach puberty.
Deadsilverado: "too bad this forum still has a nimrod that has nothing better to do than to antagonize everyone."
You could always go back to your engine sludge topics. LMFAO!
I'd say their aim is off just a little. Looks like Toyota just shot itself in the foot (tire)!!! As for the reference about making it more masculine, I'd say they girlyfied it even more. I thought the 2003 Rado was ugly, but this makes it look like a work of art.
Oddly enough, I find myself agreeing with you. I don't mind the looks of some reg cab stepsides, but from a functionality aspect it seems like too much of a sacrifice to me to lose the extra bedspace.
The S10 and Ranger stepsides are pretty good loking, IMO. Regular cab models only, of course!
Lets hope it doesnt become reality.
They have one good idea on it, though, the bed extending out like that. But the exterior is plain scary.
kip
Year next to that Silverado. Mark my words that Chevy is going to lose a great number of buyers with this new truck. The GMC doesn't look that bad, but man I cannot believe they would really take this route. I like the truck that's out now, and if they go to something like this, I truly believe sales are going to be hurt.
The new dashboard on the other hand looks great. It looks a little more stylized and sporty than the 2002s but not cute and gimmicky like the Tundra's. Did you notice some of the photos look like the climate control system panel has a digital display? Looks cool!
I don't think the new body design will really hurt or help sales. It's still more conservative than the Dodge or Ford, and not soft and curvy like the Tundra's sheet metal.
The avalanche and those ugly exploder sport-tracs being the exception to the rule. Those ugly beasts are more novelty items. Once the novelty wears off they will go the way of the edsel, aztek and other abominations of automotive design. I can't figure out why those ugly beasts appeal to anyone in the first place. Maybe it's part of the dumbing down of America. You know, the idiots on TV that sit there and let their burger drip all over them while they eat like slobs. Yeah, that's a REAL American there. Makes you proud doesn't it?
Hill-I'm curious, what is "cute and gimmicky" about the Tundra dashboard? It is pretty straight forward, well laid out and utilitarian as far as I can tell. I don't see anything on it that says "cute and gimmicky." Maybe you were thinking of the Toyota Echo?
http://www.toyota.com/images/shop/vehicles/gallery/tundra/interior/photo_1.jpg
See the overemphasized oval shaped control cluster and that curvy "visor" that protrudes over the instrument cluster? To me, it looks cute and overstylized. Kind of what you'd expect in a sports-car. Also, gotta love that huge red hazard light(?) button that screams at you from the center of the dash. What's up with that?
On the other hand take a look at the Chevy 1500:
http://www.chevrolet.com/silverado/images/main/instrument_minor.jpg
Plain, simple and maybe even boring. Most of the panels are square and flat. Looks perfect for a truck to me. So there's my explanation on my opinion of the dashboards of these two trucks, as best as I can express it.
Now, why do use the word "shakerado" each time you want to mention a GM pickup? Since a number of Tundras are experiencing "shaking while braking" issues, is it proper to call them shakerados also? Enlighten us, F1....
The Chevy dash is too busy looking if you ask me. Too many small buttons and knobs placed close together. I personally don't like the ergonomics of many GM car/truck interiors.
Also, that console in the center reaching up to the dash looks more like something you would find in a car-much more so than the Tundra dash.
I had a brake vibration in my truck around 10k miles. It was very slight and more noticeable when braking from freeway speeds. I took it to the dealership and they fixed it. I now have slightly under 30k miles on it and the problem has not resurfaced.
Funny that you call the Tundra a runt. Dimensionally, it is within inches of all the big three 1/2 ton extend-a-cab trucks. I would call the Ranger, Tacoma, Frontier and S-10 runts.
Why do I call the Silverado a shakerado? Same reason I call the Explorer an Exploder. It fits.
A good friend of mine has an Explorer and even he calls it the Exploder. He has a good sense of humor.
I gave this board a few days without visiting to see if it would settle down into a fun topic, with everyone taking good-natured turns at bashing their least favorites. But the two Turdras here have ruined it.
This is all just opinions, guys. I personally like the F250 look, but not the F150. But a few funny jabs at either would be funny. So, my opinion is that the Tundra LOOKS GIRLY, bama and f1jules, and nothing you can say about sizes, dash boards, ground clearance, and brakes will change my mind. Yes, those are all important things in making a buying decision, but read this topic's name. There are plenty of other boards to discuss those other things, I suggest you go visit them.
I'll spend my time elsewhere. To all of you willing to keep listening to whiny, defensive Tundra owners, good luck!
Silverado
Length: 227.7
width: 78.5
Height: 73.9
Wheelbase 143.5
Weight: 4910
Tundra
Length: 217.5
width: 75.2
height: 71.3
wheelbase: 128.3
weight: 4518
Dodge Dakota
length: 215
width: 71.5
height: 68.6
wheelbase: 131
weight: 4423
These are numbers as posted by edmunds. When saying that these trucks are within a few inches of each other you must be comparing to the Dodge Dakota cause its not a few inches between the Chevy and the Tundra. Funny thing...the wheelbase of the Dakota is greater than that of a Tundra. What is Toyota trying to do? Fool the unsuspecting buyer?
Hmm, when a chevy owner blasts the Tundra's styling it's just opinion and "a fun topic, with everyone taking good-natured turns at bashing their least favorites" But when a Tundra owner does the exact same thing it's "I'll spend my time elsewhere. To all of you willing to keep listening to whiny, defensive Tundra owners, good luck"
I guess you are just incapable of dealing with someone with a differing opinion. Must be nice to be right all the time. You must have lots of friends.
Hey seelig-I happen to like girls, why do you bash girls? Must be some kind of sexual preference thing I guess.
Well I can agree with you on that center console. In addition to not looking right, I think it takes up too much space. My Silverado has a the split bench seat all the way across with the smaller fold-up storage console in the middle. Nice if you want to seat 3 people up front.
And I like the look of F250s alot also, but not the look of the F150. I'm guessing of Ford would exhibit some marketing sense and copy that style to the F150s, sales would increase appeciably.
How can you go any higher than #1 selling vehicle in America though?
I also like the F250. If I had any need for a truck with the capabilities of the F250 that's what I would buy.