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



  • blkhemiblkhemi Posts: 1,717
    I told you a while back that I think the Tacoma is best in it's class. Hands down. And this in addition to the Dakota being able to tow more, haul more, and is a bunch more spacious. You see, I can break from the mold, you obviously are JB Welded to yours.

    But not the Tundra. Not by a country mile.

    You say it's the best truck do to it's extensive list of accolades and comparo wins and the like.

    Yet the Silverado has more of all of them. These are facts. Check them for you self. And to boot, back to the comparos, your favorite auto mag put a 4 year old Nissan over the Tundra. I mean how much faith do you hold in these people? Oh, that's right , because they let your LS be a back-door winner in a couple of comparos.

    BTW: Didn't Foreman win the title? Something that one truck will never know what it feels like, sorta like Spinks. Oh so close, buy far, far, FAR away...
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    Leave him alone already! :mad:

    Somebody has to drive the weaker/slower truck, so you'll know when a Tundra is on the scene!

    You should really be thanking him. ;)

    Now apologize!

    Darned if I didn't notice it before. Check out the scoreboard above. Consumer Ratings.....9.4.....

  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    If you can't discuss the trucks without taking potshots at each other on the way, please don't post any longer. If you want to trash-talk, find another website - it's not gonna happen here.

    If we have to close this discussion again, it may not re-open.

    kcram - Pickups Host
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    Let's all be friends and shake.

    Deal? No more slapfighting.

  • ggesqggesq Posts: 701
    One thing I would like to see from all manufacturers (including Toyota) do is follow GM's example in offering a 100k warranty. Extending the warranty benefits all ;)

    On a different but related note, a local Toyota dealer offers an unlimited mileage warranty on all new Toyotas. However, I have yet to check for myself the "fine print."
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    Some makers need them, some don't. You won't see a $2k rebate on a Porsche Cayman anytime soon.

    Nor will you see all makers lengthen warranties. You do what it takes to make the deal.

    Some need to do more. :(

  • vmax2007vmax2007 Posts: 46
    Deal, as long as you stop bashing me, I will stop bashing you.

    Now, when you say "Some need to do more", are you implying GM "needs" to do this? Well, maybe they feel they do, but if they weren't confident in their vehicles and were taking a huge risk of losing money, they would NOT have done it. They know they CAN do it, so why not? Bottom line though is most people will not put on 100K miles in 5 yrs. I would rather have seen a 8 yr 100K warranty. But that is a little unrealistic for any mfr. Except Hyundai, but they don't make trucks, which get used harder.

    C'mon, let's get this comparo re-fired up again. I want to know real reasons from you Toyota guys on why you think the Tundra is a better truck. Yeah, yeah, I know about the extra 26 hp (5.7 vs 6.0)...and the 0-60 times...blah, blah, blah. Let's talk about realistic everyday stuff.

    I'll start:
    1. Rear Locker
    2. OnStar
    3. AutoTrac transfer case (a proven design feature used since 1999)
    4. about a million config options: 3 cab sizes, 3 box sizes, 5 engine choices, 2 interiors, 3.42, 3.73 and 4.10 rear ends.
    5. Rainsense wipers. (no more adjusting intermittent wipers based on rain intensity.)
    6. Heated Washer fluid. (a real treat here in MN)
    7. Interior refinement: No exposed seat brackets in front or rear.
    8. Remote Start, is this available on Tundra?
    9. AFM. Jury is still out on real-world benefits, but it's still worth mentioning.
    10. E85...Ditto, but again, if/when it becomes a viable feature, GM will be that much further ahead of the game as far as refinement of the option.
    11. Overall fuel economy across the line of available engines.
    12. Inferior frame design on Tundra.
    13. HDs are available NOW.
    14. 6 speed trannys are available on a limited basis, much more readily available next year. No, this is not an advantage, but it certainly makes the Tundra's advantage here short-lived.
    11. 6.2 liter has more power and torque, so when comparing "available" engines, Tundra loses. Again, these will be more widely available next year.
    12. Better rear cab access on ext cabs vs DCs.

    Not sure about Tundra, but my GMC has more "Bells and Whistles" than I ever even realized. Climate control is very intuitive and automatic. Ditto on the memory seats with easy exit feature. Lane change blinker feature. Yes, I realize these are all "little" things, but they add up and are used on an everyday basis. Unlike 0-60 times. The GM truck is extremely refined and luxurious. Seats are the MOST comfortable seats I have ever sat in. And this includes the Tundra (I sat in the DC, front and back, at the Auto Show). Interior controls are all within easy reach and the steering wheel controls (cruise and audio) are VERY well laid out and easy to use. Much better than even my Chev Impala's.

    Now, your turn...
  • ggesqggesq Posts: 701
    jreagan, welcome back. glad to see you again. :surprise:

    hint- here's what gave it away- you live in MN, you just joined edmunds 3-13-07, you comment on the owner's forum, you have an Impala and you make the same arguments. ;) :P
  • 1offroader1offroader Posts: 208

    See my post a few pages back on AFM. It really works. I noticed that my mpg went from 17-19 in V-8 mode to 24-26 in V-4 mode. The trick is to keep it in V-4 mode as much as possible, which is not possible in hilly terrain. As soon as you start to climb a slight grade, or need to pass, the engine goes back into V-8 mode and mpg drops. You can watch all this happen on the Driver Information Center. However, on a 335 mi. trip at 70 mph I got 18.2 mpg overall. With the a/c on the whole way.

    My concern is not whether it works (it works quite well), but whether it will be reliable in the long run.

    I wish GM would offer a manual 'lock' in the V-4 mode so that the driver could choose the econo mode when driving conditions allow. MPG could potentially go WAY up.

    I wish a Tundra owner would do a similar test and post the results. I'm guessing it's significantly less than 18 mpg. The laws of physics cannot be repealed - those cubic inches MUST be fed. The AFM cuts cubic inches by 50% when it is engaged, hence the superior fuel economy of the Silverado.

    At $3.00+/gallon, I'll take every mpg I can get.

  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    I see a lot of bells and whistles on your list, and the depth of the GM line-up can only be rivaled by Ford.

    Toyota, obviously, isn't trying to sell every truck buyer on the market. They want to hit the heart, then grow from there.

    It could be 10 years before Toyota has a line-up including HD and diesel. That apparently is secondary to Toyota, as more 1/2 tons are sold, and are easier to develop.

    Toyota's first job is to build a legitimate full-size truck, that is fully-competitive with any domestic trucks core models.

    Toyota has never done this before. So let's start from there.

    Part 2 is to get the truck plant running at close to full-capacity, building the truck as planned, and having as few kinks as possible, which would be a mighty achievement, given everything is brand-new.

    Then they can start to fill in the spaces. Full-size trucks need more customization than other vehicles. Some buyers want luxury. Some want more off-road parts. Some want more strength. Toyota will be able to sell more parts after a couple of years on the market.

    This will be a long year for Toyota, but if they can do it without major issues, they can sell more than 200k next year.

    It seems Toyota targeted off-raod ability, towing capacity, engine and transmission, interior room, bed volume, engine availablity (even the RC can get the top engine), and braking ability.

    Has Toyota hit it's mark in building a full-size truck? One good enough to get conquest sales, at least initially. Can they get the ball rolling?

    I think they've got their game face on, and this is a high priority for Toyota, and it shows.

    I think the lack of Tundras on lots is due to heavy quality controls. Toyota doesn't want recalls and such to hurt the vehicle at the start.

    I think they'd be happy selling 150k this year, with no major building issues.

    Toyota cannot afford to be perceived as weak or small. The truck will be marketed accordingly. I believe the truck can do anything any other domestic can do, some things better. Being plush and genteel didn't help the last truck, so they'll attack from another angle, and see what they hit.

  • vmax2007vmax2007 Posts: 46
    I agree that it works, I have watched it on my DIC as well. But I do not have enough miles on it to determine the real-world effects on mpg. It only seems to go into 4 mode while decelerating. But I have not had it on any freeway trips yet. So, your info is promising, thanks!
  • vmax2007vmax2007 Posts: 46
    Doc, doc, doc,

    Finally, once you calm down, your posts get MUCH better. I agree with most of what you just said, that is a first. But, based on that, how can you say..generally speaking..that the Tundra is the leader when it's still in it's infancy getting it's 1/2 ton to the lots with all of the gaps filled in?

    Yeah, they may want to hit the heart, but they are going to have to go through a bullet-proof vest to get there. This is a tough segment to break into. They should know that by now after the T-100 fiasco, and the last Tundra wasn't much better. they have their hands full, but this is by far their best far.
  • pmuscepmusce Posts: 132
    "The point is Tundra is the best Half-Ton.

    Silverado is best at HD/Diesel.

    Oops....wait a minute!

    2008 Super Duty! 24k towing. Curses!

    Ok....Chevy can be 2nd Best at 1/2 ton. 2nd Best at HD/Diesel.

    I guess when Chevy "ponies up", funny you should mention that, then you can make your argument. "

    Amazing how can pick the best 1/2 ton and HD/Diesel from your computer. Have you ever driven a 2008 Super Duty? (By the way I think the Super Duty is a great truck. I'm in no position to say whether its better than a 3500HD Silverado). Have you ever driven any Full Size pickup? If you want think the Tundra is the best 1/2 ton, go ahead and think it but don't proclaim it like its a fact. The market has spoken loud and clear and the GTM900's are king.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    Well then by default, you must admit to the same for the Tundra. The "planned" 200k units Toyota anticipates on moving won't scratch the 450k of the Rams, the close to 900k of the Silverado, and the near 950k of the F-150, a vehicle that was eclipsed by the Silverado last month and is on track for the same this month?

    Your numbers are off somewhat. I don't think you've been keeping up with news reports.

    The Ram may struggle to reach 350K units.
    The F150 may struggle to reach 800K units.
    The GM twins should reach almost 1 Million.
    The Tundra should hit 150K this year ( ramp up ).
  • pmuscepmusce Posts: 132
    "The big three have not produced a decent truck since GM's 1972 models."

    That's the most ignorant statement on this forum. You lose all credibility when you post a nonsense comment like that.

    "Why didn't they do it from the start? Toyota puts their best foot forward so then the rest of them decide clean up their act?"

    So let me understand your reasoning. You think GM should have ramped up there new 6-speed from 0 to 900,000 in one year (what they would need to supply all GMT900's), but you have no problem with the fact that Toyota is only offering the 6-speed on the 5.7 V8 version of the Tundra. If Toyota always puts there best foot forward, why do the V6 and 4.7 V8 Tundra's not have 6 speeds?
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    And the BoatTrailering mag which is something real truckers refer to, chose the Tundra over all the others.

    CAR and Driver is somewhat suspect in analyzing trucks for how trucks should be used.

    I'll go with BoatTrailering. You can stay with CAR and Driver if that rows your boat.

    Bring it.
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    If you want think the Tundra is the best 1/2 ton, go ahead and think it but don't proclaim it like its a fact. The market has spoken loud and clear and the GTM900's are king.

    From what I've seen of the truck, in person, sitting in it, and all the reviews, from owners, and testers, the Tundra is at least as good as a 6.0L Silvy, which is fine with me.

    GMT900 sales will, and always will be at or near the top.

    But Toyota may have struck "Deep Impact". Phase 1 is complete.

    Tundra may be benchmarked my Ford and Dodge for their '09 trucks, so all I can do is agree with Edmunds on their decision.

  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    Tundra doesn't have to sell 700-900k to be a grand slam success.

    Depends on their goals. But if they want to surpass the big 3, they will have to.

    The sales volume doesn't matter because obviously they just can't produce more than maybe 250K units. The only thing that matters is keeping the volume growing in small steps and keeping the line profitable. Nothing else matters.
  • pmuscepmusce Posts: 132
    "Tundra may be benchmarked my Ford and Dodge for their '09 trucks, so all I can do is agree with Edmunds on their decision."

    Yeah, I'm sure Ford wants to tear away all those people flocking to Toyota dealerships to buy Tundra's. Why would they want to benchmark the GMT900's? GM is only on pace to sell 850,000+. You must be right.

    "GMT900 sales will, and always will be at or near the top."

    You got that right.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    I went to a web page that explained the ratings. 5 stars means 10% or less chance of serious injury. 4 stars means 11%-20% chance of serious injury. So, let's say that the Silverado was 10% and the Tundra was 20% (the highest for each vehicle). The Tundra has TWICE the chance of serious injury for its driver and front passenger.

    Unless you get T-boned then the T900's and F150's without side airbags are sure to create more passenger injuries than the Tundra.

    Tundra owners will have a sore chest. F150 and T900 owners may be in the morgue. There sure is a significant discrepancy here. As pointed out previously OnStar is of no use if you're in heaven.
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    The initial sale is not necessarily what Tundra is here to do.

    Toyota also wants the owners best friend to hear about the truck, the girlfriend whoi drives a Focus. It's conquest sales that Toyota really wants.

    I think if they can get to 75-100k a year, they will be thrilled! It will have a domino effect, and generate secondary income off of the initial sale. Tundra traffic may fund other projects, and just the buzz can bring in fresh traffic that will help Toyota as a whole.

    I think they can get 75k conquest sales a year, by next year.

  • bostnwhalrbostnwhalr Posts: 128
    Personally, I think that the Silverado and Tundra each offer their own advantages and disadvantages.

    Previous Tundras have been very reliable in comparison to the domestic competition. However, I'd be surprised if Toyota is able to achieve similar reliability ratings for the first year or two given the fact that the 2007 Tundra is a new design being manufactured in a new plant with a new engine and transmission. Nissan certainly bombed (reliability wise) with the Titan.

    Having said that, GM loyalists can't deny that Toyota has made significant inroads in almost every segment they compete in. Look at the market share gains of Toyota and losses at GM over the past 20+ years.

    Take the minivans. Remember the "Toyota Van" from 1984. Horrible! The Previa? Very weird but very reliable. Now, the second generation Sienna is the top minivan (along with the Honda Odyssey) in every comparison test. The GM minivans? Worst reliability and now discontinued (along with Ford's Freestar).

    How about the compact/midsize truck segment that GM and Ford used to dominate with their Rangers and S-10s? Does anyone honestly feel the Colorado/Canyon are competitive against the Tacoma? Around here in New England, I see mostly Tacomas and Frontiers along with a smattering of Dakotas. VERY few Colorados.

    I'm not suggesting that Toyota will dominate the Full-Size Truck segment. However, Toyota knows how to compete in markets they go after. This will put further margin pressure on Ford and GM in this segment. Their response should be to figure out what people want and delivery.

    Having said this, I do think that GM has turned a corner. Their reliability is getting there and their new designs are very promising (Acadia/Outlook/Enclave, Aura/2008 Malibu, Suburban, Silverado, 2008 CTS). Time will tell....
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    GM seems to have turned around their product and quality, management.

    They are not capable of "stopping" Toyota. Only Toyota can do that.

    Toyota is in a hunting position where they can just prey upon the wekest link, if you will, and take sales from GM, Ford, or Chrysler. Whenever somoone drops the ball, they can be the X-factor, and convert them.

    It is comforting to a market that sees the domestics with quite a checkered past. It is threatening to the the domestics, who have to jump over quite a perception hurdle in order to compete with a Teflon Don, if you will.

    What Toyota is really doeing is changing the face of American cars, one car, or truck, at a time.

    There was a time when Arnold Schwarzenegger was laughed at for wanting to be a movie star. Now he's much more than that.

    It's a beautiful story, with real conseqences (sic) here, and worldwide. :surprise:

    I don't know what'll happen to Chrysler and Ford, but GM seems to be up and running, but Toyota has a head of steam, and Tundra may be the final baton in this race.

    Toyota is fast, and patient. A deadly combination.

    Can't wait to see the ending!

  • obyoneobyone Posts: 8,054
    You have got to be kidding?

    Toyota couldn't have said it better about propaganda...sheesh.

    What's interesting is that the bulk of the Tundra sales are coming from owners of the first generation Tundras. Once that runs its course we will see how the Tundra sales will hold up. Till then the rest is speculation.
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    Great minds think alike! ;)

    Good night all.

  • beliasbelias Posts: 316
    Just caught up again with this forum. Interesting tests going on in this area with Toyota dealers buying up Ford, Chevy, Dodge and Nissan trucks and letting you compare them right there at their dealership. I think that would be good for GM and Ford to do as well.
    No point in making the argument that Tundra sales are going to first gen Tundra owners. Not only is that a good thing for Toyota, but GM, Ford, and Dodge would loose 3/4s of their sales if previous gen buyers didn't buy from them again. That is loyalty and every company aspires to keeping it.
    When I went to the Chevy dealer, the new Silverado was selling well, but he had a lot full of previous gen Silverados sitting there too. Not sure how many were taken on trade for the new ones, but no doubt that they had no shortage of them on the lots.
  • beliasbelias Posts: 316
    BTW, welcome back jreagan... :D
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    As has been noted here many times. What happens in these first months is of no consequence at all. You may very well be right about the first sales but from posts on Ts and here it seems that there are a vocal group ( minority ? ) of former Big 3 owners who are also switching because theyve been unhappy with their current vehicles.

    Unless Chrysler/Dodge and secondarily Ford resolve their corporate issues quickly two of the former Big 3 may be in for a tough time. Both GM and Toyota would benefit from a signigicant downsizing or disappearance of either.

    10 years from now there will be at least two plants building Tundras at the rate of 300-500K units annually. If the market allows it ( no major extraneous forces ) then they should all be profitable.

    That's the only goal of this entire effort.
This discussion has been closed.