Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Toyota Tundra vs. Chevrolet Silverado



  • dreasdaddreasdad Posts: 276
    E85 is not what its cracked up to be -cost more the gas in tyhe long run as mielage goes down by 30% when running on E85 so it has to be about a $1.00 cheaper a gallon before it makes sense.

    Pull up Consumer Reports study on E85
  • geo9geo9 Posts: 739
    TOY..........Snowplows can be installed on MOST trucks!
    But yet again what size plow???????????

    A small homesteader or light duty model ? Less than a big 8 footer? One with a rubber band instead of springs?
    (for tripping on either a full blade trip or foot trip model)
    This is where the Fisher differs from a Western, Meyers,
    Diamond etc..............
    And on and on......... You bet !!!!!!!!!!!

    Please note the different models that can and cannot be installed on a tundra or most models..............
    The ONLY Fisher plow that can be installed IS the tiny
    Homesteader model 7.4 ft. Useless in my working world.

    Just be reminded when you smoke that wonderkinds tranny,
    or transfer case and go to mr. dealer don't be suprised
    if warranty is denied because of snowplow related
    This is noted on several snowplowing sites and the
    "plowheads" know this and buy trucks accordingly.
    So besides the $6000 difference in a base GM or a
    base tundra model not to mention the blade size the
    tundra is NOT the truck of choice of most contractors.
    Maybe for Harry homeowner...But not in the real world !

    If it doesn't offer a snowplow prep. pkg. it is not
    equipped to do so no matter WHAT brand !
    So in my book its a weaker brand not up to the task !

    No matter the opinions of the salesfolks and non truck
    owners posting here...............
  • bingo3bingo3 Posts: 3
    New to list and have not read all posts BUT have started kicking tires of new pickups. Use the pick up to tow single and double PWC trailers, runabout boat and a 16' flatbed trailer (that being the only one that has trailer brakes) A detail read of the Tundra Owner's Manual limits trailers to 1,000 lbs w/o brakes. I looks at a 2002 S-10 and found the same limt. What does towing section of the Silverado owner's manual limit say?
  • dreasdaddreasdad Posts: 276
    I think you are looking at Tongue weight not trailer weight
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    Lot's or words here but little or no substance. Sounds typical.

    What the GM's have going for them is history, admittedly, and.....
    less towing capabilities - across the board,
    less standard safety features - across the board,
    less maneuverability,
    an 80's-90's vintage transmission - oh boy.

    Now the F150. Well they better have some massive surprise waiting to be sprung on the market because for the next 15 months the current F150 is the tailender.

    Will the Ram even survive this year? Snowplow package or not what if there is no 2009 model?

    The survivors will be the GM's and the T's.

    The Tundra will do just fine with it's advantages.
  • bingo3bingo3 Posts: 3
    No sir! If you look in the index in the back for "tow" then carefully read the towing instructions and limits, the Tundra (and Chev S-10 I looked at) limit a trailer to 1,000 pounds without trailer brakes. Nothing to do with tongue weight in that particular limit.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    2. GM is still ramping up with their drivetrains, they produce nearly 10X what Toyota will be producing in the 1/2 tons. So, going to the 6.2L and the 6-spd transmission will take some time. But by year's end, it WILL be available in all 1/2 tons, and then where is the tundra's so-called advantage?

    GM is going to produce 2 Million 1/2-ton trucks!!!?? Let me call my broker and sell short every GM stock in existence. They'll never climb out of that hole.

    4. GM already has 4 available engines, and once the 6.2's become available in all of the 1/2 tons, it will be 5. Much better choices and configurations available from GM. This will suit everyone's needs and maximize HP and fuel economy.

    This may actuall be a problem...and this is just the 1/2-ton market. Economies of scale seem to suffer in this system.

    5. GM offers Active Fuel Mgmnt and E85.
    AFM is another techno-bling-bling. The AFM from reports I've seen on GMI and Ts are at best a 5% improvement. See Edmunds analysis.

    E85 is unfortunately a bow to political pressure. It takes more than one gallon of dino fuel to produce one gallon of E85. Then the E85 gets worse fuel economy than dino fuel. That saves (?) what exactly? Actually I'm sorry to see that Toyota caved in and will offer it next year.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    This is correct. It's margin-of-safety CYA.

    Toyota says to use trailer brakes over 1000# Gross Trailer Wgt
    GM say to use trailer brakes over 2000# Gross Trailer Wgt.

    Next subject.
  • geo9geo9 Posts: 739
    I love those above posts of the upcoming non survival of
    Ford and Mopar trucks !!!!!!!!

    Seems the yota salesfolks WISH this might come true!

    The "wonderkind may get it right someday" brand is gonna
    steal those 1 million a year Ford buyers or the 250k +
    mopar buyers?????????????

    Not in my lifetime............In the 7 years of the tundra
    they have barely cracked 100k a year in sales !
    I don't think GM, Ford, or DCX is sweating the truck dept.!

    As a actual OWNER and truck BUYER...........I know better!
  • dreasdaddreasdad Posts: 276
    "they have barely cracked 100k a year in sales"

    Tundra sold 124,508 for 2006, 126,529 for 2005. Thats more than 100,000.Must be Chevy fuzzzy math.
    Drive down any major Highway in San Antonio where the Tundra is bult and every otrher bilboard is for a Chevy or Ford truck.

    They have already admitted they are concerned about competion thats why the Chevy is as good a truck as it is.
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    Since Chevy guys are eager to downplay the Tundra, what is really important to make a great (the greatest?) full-size truck?

    1. Jreagen, give us your 3 top attributes for any full-size truck buyer. Why should someone buy a Silverado/Tundra over a Colorado/Tacoma?

    2. If payload and towing numbers aren't that important, why is GMC using them in every ad? "Over 5 tons of towing! 2010 lbs of payload! The stronger, more powerful Sierra!"

    3. Why was the last Silvy better than the last Tundra?

    4. Why are the Ram and F-150 considered bottom-feeders at this point in time? Power? Towing? Payload?

    5. Did Chevy underestimate what the next Tundra would be? Is the 6.2 "Plan B"?

    I don't have a problem with the Silvy being better than the Tundra, it has been for several years, until now.

    Why is it better now? Or is it "just as good"?

  • blkhemiblkhemi Posts: 1,717
    While there is much-hype(with little fuzz) about the survival of the Ram or F-150, we may need to ask to that the same question involving the Tundra:

    Who is the king of kings in recalls last year AND '05 involving full-size pickups and SUV's? TOYOTA( twice over).

    And with the quality slipping south with the American-built Toyota vehicles, who's to say the Tundra won't be the equal of the degrading Toyota Camry. As I've admitted several times, I really like how Toyota has loosened up and came to the fight with a gun instead of a butter knife this go'round.

    But the Silverado is a tried and true, genuine pickup. The Tundra is generally playing catch up to the big leagers, including Nissan.

    As to the Silvy's engine lineup, it was said earlier this week that the 4.8L and 6.0L maybe exiting out of the lineup. With the 4.3L, 5.3L, and 6.2L, the Chevy should be the one to contend with, until the optional 5.8L 410hp HEMI gets here early next year(the 5.7L will remain however as the midlevel V8 engine).
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    AFM is not the future. It's marginal but if it costs little or nothing why not.

    E85? If you truly think this is the future then you have no appreciation of value. How is spending 1.3 gal to produce 1.0 gallon a good thing?

    The idea is to use less dino fuel, not more.

    Now if you said that B20 or B100 or Butanol, all home grown, is the future then I'm with you all the way. E85 is a boondoggle to ADM. It doesn't disturb the current oil oligopoly in the least and it also makes ADM the kingpin.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    Who is the king of kings in recalls last year AND '05 involving full-size pickups and SUV's? TOYOTA( twice over).

    This is false. Try again. [HINT: Try the chart from the Detroit News ]

    The T900's are the real thing. GM unfortunately cut corners on them to bring them out before the Tundra.

    This isn't a sprint to top of the sales charts. It's only about making money with good balance between sales and production. If 200K units generates good profits but 500K means no profits then it's more important to stay profitable. Volume will come with time. 20 years from now this will all look different.
  • maple2maple2 Posts: 177
    an 80's-90's vintage transmission - oh boy.

    Just because a transmission has been around for a long time does not mean it is old technology,only the # of gears remains the same. gm's 4 speed transmissions seem to hold up fine in their 2500 and 3500 series trucks. If toyota had such a truck, do you think they would trust this 6 speed tranny to stand up to the abuse it would see? If the tundra 6 speed turns out to be as reliable as the one in the camry would you still think it is the superior tranny just because it has 2 more gears?
  • maple2maple2 Posts: 177
    Volume will come with time. 20 years from now this will all look different.

    yes 20 years ago we were laughing at the t100. 20 years from now when the new toyota xxxxx is due to come out we will be laughing at the 2007 tundra

    Just kidding, but really, if toyota wants to go for the "meat of the market" why the 5.7 6sp? That is not the meat of the market most people want the smaller v8, as far as 1/2 tons go anyway. If they think that their 6 spd is so great they could have put it in their 4.7 lt and personaly i think it would have done better for them as the 4.7 is outgunned by the 5.3 so it could use the extra 2 gears to compensate and the 5.7 could still be a force to be reckoned with using the 5 spd (with some beefing up if required)
  • maple2maple2 Posts: 177
    This is correct. It's margin-of-safety CYA.

    Toyota says to use trailer brakes over 1000# Gross Trailer Wgt
    GM say to use trailer brakes over 2000# Gross Trailer Wgt.

    Next subject.

    Why so quick to brush this off as a non issue? Seems like a pretty big advantage for the general on this issue to me. Twice the rating. 1000# is not very much weight before you need trailer brakes. Sounds pretty lame to me, What happened to those big bad brakes on the tundra?
  • chrmdomechrmdome Posts: 107

    I will be picking up my 2007 Silverado tomorrow , Crew cab, 4x4 ,short box, Max Vortec 6.0 liter. I have reviewed the Chevy catalog and and it clearly states that the 2007 Silverado ( New body style ) has the 900 frame and can tow 10,500 lbs, the main reason for my purchase. The dealerships manager discussed the towing ability with me personally. You must be refering to the 2007 Silverado Classic, not the new body style. The new body style has the 900 frame. Ya, research...... The kicker here bucko is that you need the 6.0 liter motor AND the Maximum Trailering Package, which gives you a great suspension, better transmission and oil cooling and the necessary towing accessories such as shocks, wiring etc. but as I stated, it tows 10, 500 lbs.....Final analysis as I have stated many times, moot point, no argument. Either you are a Toyota guy or a Chevy guy... to each his own. I love my country and I buy American... ( oh ya a little German stuff too, but they build great stuff )

  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,993

    Congrats on buying the best. I just got my latest Motor Trend today in the mail and skimmed through it and the Silvy won against the Tundra in a comparo. ;)

    I was shocked at Motor Trend putting a GM truck above a Toyota. :surprise:

  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,993
    But the Tundra wasn't available for the truck of the year test pal and that magazine has a tradition of bashing domestics but as of late they are supporting GM's efforts. ;)


    P.S. y'all need to get your carspace pages off the ground so we can talk :P
  • ggesqggesq Posts: 701
    or does "sierra2007" sound alot like jreagan? :P

    Just joined edmunds too...hmmm....
  • ggesqggesq Posts: 701
    Can't we all just get along.. ;)
  • chrmdomechrmdome Posts: 107

    Ya.... I am really excited about my new truck. I have a 2002 Chevy Tahoe and it has been a great vehicle. I love it. I have always worked on my cars myself ( Since 1992, no car of mine has been to a mechanic , radiators, water pumps, fuel pumps , alternators etc, etc, I do it myself ). and Chevy has been great. But as I say, if ya love Chevy so be it.

    See ya, Chromedome
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,993
    That great. :) I don't have the patience to repair my own but my father does. ;)

    I hope to see pics of your new truck ;)

  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    BTW, the last Tundra may've been better than the last Silvy, as the Tundra beat it in more than one comparison.

    The Silvy will have the sales for awhile, a long while.

    Toyota just needs to chip away at the foundation, which is kinda crumbling anyway. :sick:

    Toyotas recalls are up.

    Sales are up more.

    It would be an accomplishment to catch GM is recalls, doh. The Silvy had 4 recalls last year on the '06, a truck they've been making for 10 years!

  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    The 4.7 is roughly the same as the other 4.x small V8's but it is probably outdated. It's been around since the late 90's and while it's been upgraded along the way it doesn't have all the technology of the 5.7.

    It's clear that the 5.7L is the engine Toyota wants to push; to wit, there's only a $1300 difference between the two, the 5.7L is far more capable, it gets about 10% better fuel economy and it requires less maintenance ( chain vs belt ).

    As with the Reg Cabs T is pushing the market by using price as it's tool.

    The 4.7L is not long for this world....and the V6 ( from any manufacturer ) shouldn't even be considered in this segment.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    I'm guessing it's lawyer input. CYA. Always err on the side of too much safety.
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    Toyota makes 4.0 eights that get close to 300HP; I'd expect a new 5L that gets 300+ HP and 20MPG in 2010.

    Toyota has trouble just keeping up with demand, at this point. They have a real problem!

  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    jr might have been banned for name-calling on the other thread so you might be right. We'll see soon.
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    Tryin' to call it the "Tough Box"

    Anyone else want to play Name That Tune?

    "The Lame Box"

    "Jack%$# in a Box"

    "The White Flag Edition"

    "Crying For Help Package"

    This is fun. :)

This discussion has been closed.