Toyota Tundra vs. Chevrolet Silverado

framer_rube · February 2007

That is a good tell belias... but can them forien ones hold up to workin farms and such? Not interested in doo-dads and chrome now, we need ones with haul that last longer. And them magazines tell nothing on em, lookin for folks who work em, not write on em. Is that new tundra another t100 one, or can it be worked on that farm? This is how we measure that value on them ones now! Has any folks worked em yet? How bout that fella with that corn farm? Good luck on this one now!

belias · February 2007

I see your point and that is what I was trying to say; all the 1/2 ton trucks are fully capable of being great work trucks, but none are "real" trucks. Real trucks are 3/4 ton and 1 ton trucks. But I would say that even those trucks 15 years ago were not as strong as most 1/2 ton trucks today... so, although we can argue back and forth about which truck is better, the reality is that in terms of capability, all are very good. It really comes down to preference in terms of design, quality, reliability, etc.. that will make the purchase choice.

geo9 · February 2007

Remember toyota doesn't sell shares of its "stock"
here in the USA. They are too (for a better word)
sneaky or hiding something! Or not wanting to conform
to US stock rules, SEC regs. etc etc........

What you purchase is a American Depository Receipt !
Which "represents" 2 shares of toyota stock.........

Hmmmmm........So when folks post how much higher yota
"stock" price is than GM, Ford, DC they don't have a
clue !
Did you know toyotas average "dividend" is 21 CENTS
per share SEMI-ANNUALLY ?????????

Search toyota.com they tell ya or call your friendly stock
broker...............

geo9 · February 2007

Rube........Can't work that toyota here in snow country !
That less than "full size" truck don't offer a snow plow
prep. pkg. (WITH A FULL WARRANTY) like them hardworkin'
1/2 ton ones from Ford or GM..............

Seems those peewee ones ain't made for workin' here in
snow country !

I am sure Franklin will agree on that one now ! :P

kdhspyder · February 2007

As if this were on topic...

But if the value of the shares goes up and up and up and up and ..... can I draw you a clearer picture? I have no interest in dividends anyway. Most of my holdings have no dividends at all.

I am certain that you will be very happy in your 1990's-vintage truck than one of these confangled new ones. Settling for a lesser product is always an option. That's the beauty of this market. There are choices for everyone.

clarkkent · February 2007

JERRY SPRINGER DRIVES A TRUCK?

I DIDN'T THINK HE COULD EVEN SPELL IT!

CK

belias · February 2007

I'm not sure what the heck you're talking about, you can buy their stock just as easily as anybody else's... Toyota is listed as TM (Toyota Motors) on the NYSE. No problem with dividends when their shares earned $7.18/share last year. Here is the listing, click on "more detail" to read for yourself...
http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=TM

belias · February 2007

Wow, ok, well I guess you're showing how deluded your claims are. My little dodge omni and toyota celica were more than enough to get me through Manitoba, Canada winters when I lived there a few years ago. Half-ton trucks then didn't have even half the power that they do now and you think that this truck which is LARGER than the domestics can't do it? LOL!! Give me a break!
Look, do yourself a favor and make an objective comparison. These type of uninformed claims only serve to make the Big 3 disillusion themselves into thinking that they don't need to do anymore to get better. That is why they are loosing market share. You aren't serving their interest by trying to cover up the obvious to everyone. Like it or not most every manufacturer respects that this new truck is large, well-built, and has a strong engine and good interior. Trying to claim that it can't make it through snow is unbelievably short-sighted. Jeeps have been doing it for decades (and they've NEVER offered a snow-plow on their vehicles) and 99% of the truck-driving population does not get a snow plow as they can manage quite fine without it.
Those that have it either a) live on a farm where they need to use it (if they already don't have a plow hooked-up to one of their tractors), or b) have a side business where they help clear parking lots and private roads during the winter. I lived in a farming community for over 20 years and rarely (if ever) saw a truck in a parking lot at work/school with a snow plow on it. That is in a place that gets a bitterly cold 6-months-of-the-year winter in central Canada.
Get a dose of reality here will ya? You don't need ANY truck, much less a full-size 4x4 1/2 ton truck to get through snow... I can do that with any regular two-wheel drive car and have been doing it for the last 20 years. Unless you have had winters worse than central Canada, I would like to see your reasoning on this...

member12 · February 2007

I am sorry to point this out. I have been lurking for a while and I just can't get over how silly this comparison has gotten
Does anyone on this board actually tow more than a bass boat? I am just curious, because both Chevy and Toyota guys keep bringing up tow ratings.

Real truck guys will agree: No one in their right mind would make a habit of towing more than 7 or 8 thousand lbs with a half-ton truck. I wouldn't tow that kind of weight without trailer brakes, distributing hitch, and a diesel motor....and I don't see many of those installed on 1/2 trucks.

And the payload capacity? A bail of hay or load of dirt is about the only thing that could approach the max payload of the 1/2 ton Silverado and the Tundra and still actually fit in the bed...and I don't think 1/2 truck buyers tend to do that sort of work for two reasons: someone who is paying 30 large or more for a truck isn't going to be the type to shovel dirt from a pickup nor let a bail of hay bend his bed-rails.

These trucks are for those with light towing/hauling needs but want to brag about being the best. Once most of you can get past that...then you'd probably find the 4.7L Tundra and 5.3L Silverado to be very attractive vehicles. If they can't do what you want to do...then you need to think about an F250 or Silverado HD or the soon to be Tundra HD.

Just my $0.02.

belias · February 2007

Exactly!! I agree, those in the "know" understand that real trucks don't start until you get into 3/4 ton and 1 ton pickups.

andy82471 · February 2007

Personally, I think the 5.3L Silverado is the way to go if you have to choose between that and the 4.7 Tundra. Not only is the Silvy more powerful, it will tow more and get better gas mileage. I am bit disappointed Toyota didn't improve the current 4.7L engine. I personally would have expected the engine to be enlarged to around 5.0L and horsepower to be bumped up to 300 to 320 HP and torque around 340 to 350. Not too many people buy the top of the line engine choice.

ktpkloss · February 2007

well...i'm one of these "not real truck drivers" i won't be hauling dirt nor hay....but i need something to pull a 2 horse trailer (give or take CGVW of 6000-7000 lbs)... i think only top engine configuration from 1/2 ton trucks will make me feel comfortable...

kdhspyder · February 2007

It's a good point you make member12 ( and welcome btw ). Until now all the serious towing has been done by diesel which is logical and correct given what the 1/2 tonner's are.

However the diesels are generally $5000-$8000 more than the gassers.

What if, with this new vehicle, it really can tow 9500-10500# all day long like a HD diesel but at a $6000 discount? It will take time, several years, to find out if it can or not but if this new Tundra and the 6.0L Silvy/Sierra with the Max Trailering Option might be new varieties of what was a limited segment for the last 30-40 years.

The workhorses for the two biggies in this segment during this period were the 5.4L and the 5.3L 1/2-tonners. From a capability and profitability pov both Ford and Chevy would rather see the buyers move up to the HD diesels so there is little incentive to make the workhorses anything more than they are strong, durable, slow light duty trucks that can haul about 3/4 of a ton or tow about 6000# safely.

As you correctly note, above that 'Get a diesel'....and spend $6000 more.

But if GM and Toyota can offer a real 1/2-tonner that can tow 10000# safely and carry a half ton at the same time...and save $6000 then they have a competitive advantage.

belias · February 2007

That's good! Not trying to burst anybody's bubble, but the point of "real trucks" was not to diminish the 1/2 ton trucks, but to put everyone's bragging rights in perspective. It is almost like debating which light-weight boxer is the strongest in the world. The winner can be said to be the best in his weight class, but that doesn't mean they are the strongest or the best... there are heavy and super-heavy weight fighters as well.
So, with all the comparisons being made here (especially with regard to payload and towing), it is hard to give any real credence to individual claims since there are trucks that do WAY more in both areas than any 1/2 ton truck will do.
That said, everybody's needs will vary. I personally think that the vast majority of people buying 1/2 ton trucks buy them for many reasons other than towing/payload capacity. Most people concerned with maximizing those capabilities go to 3/4 ton and 1 ton trucks as their capacities in these areas far exceed what 1/2 ton trucks can do.
1/2 ton truck drivers may be more interested in ride quality, interior amenities and comforts, overall power, gas mileage, etc. Whereas the primary benefits of going with 3/4 ot 1 ton trucks are in towing and payload. The vast majority of those buyers is because they want more payload and towing than what a 1/2 ton truck can deliver, not because the interior has anything more to offer than what a 1/2 ton provides (in fact it is more often the opposite).

geo9 · February 2007

Toyota DOES NOT trade stock shares in the USA
Here ya go for explanation: http://www.toyota.com/about/shareholder/index.html?s_van=GM_TN_ABOUT_SHAREHOLDER-

Please note there is NO dividend amount listed....Hmmmm!

Also note earnings per share IS NOT dividends paid to
holders of these ADMs traded in the USA.

geo9 · February 2007

Heres another link to actual dividends paid PER ADM
(Which equals 2 shares) for 1 year...........
A BIG $1.21.5 bucks.................

Sure NOT a investment for the fast wealth builder !
http://www.toyota.com/about/shareholder/images/2005factsheet.pdf

KCRam · February 2007

Discuss the trucks - if you want to discuss corporate issues, head to the Automotive News and Views Board. Any further posts that are not regarding the comparison of the trucks will be removed.

kcram - Pickups Host

belias · February 2007

OK, so basically we're forced to buy shares in groups of "two" and there may be different rules governing ownership of these than regular common stock.
However, I still don't see what this has to do with the quality of their truck and supporting the American economy.
Toyota has a number of plants here and the new Tundra is built here by Americans! If it does well and the sales are good, that is going to support those people that work for Toyota right here in America and people that invest in Toyota will enjoy the benefits too.
My point before about supporting American companies is that it isn't as clear cut as it was 40 years ago. The Big3 don't really have much production here anymore... it is done in Canada and Mexico and then assembled here for the majority of their models, while "foreign" companies have plants that actually produce automobiles here.
Getting back to the truck comparison, if you make an objective comparison, you will not only make a better buying decision in the end, you will also understand your vehicle's strengths and weaknesses. For example, if I had a business plowing snow and I needed a truck that could do that now, than maybe the new Tundra won't do because it isn't available yet. However, maybe I need a lot of rear-seat room and the Tundra's max cab would be a better choice for me. The problem arises when I make a claim such as not wanting to get that vehicle because it is Japanese and can't compete with American equivalents. That is a blanket statement and not even an accurate one. Rather than close my options, I should investigate it, see how it performs and make an informed decision. That way, when I go to an "American" manufacturer to try their vehicle, I have a real way to compare its features. I can even tell the salesperson that the other truck had these features... a,b,c, and I would like to see d and e in a future model. They take those requests (along with many other forms of feedback) and run it by marketing and engineering. That is one big and important way of improving their vehicles over time. Without that, they get farther and farther behind. That is why the Big 3 got hammered starting in the mid 70s... they ignored the competition thinking they were far superior without being able to evaluate and gauge what people wanted. By the time they figured out how important it was, they had already lost a significant portion of their business. Foreign companies dominate the car/wagon market and much of the luxury vehicle markets as well. If the Big 3 want to avoid the same results in the truck market, they need to continue to address the needs of the customers rather than just rest on their laurels and hope that continued brand loyalty will bring in business. There are new generations of buyers that are not brand loyal that are going to make or break their business based on real factors... not just a name.

member12 · February 2007

Thanks for the welcome.

Maybe you are right, but I still don't know if I'd feel comfortable with that kind of weight in a 1/2 ton truck....diesel or not. I don't have to tow that kind of weight anymore, so I will probably wind up in a 1/2 ton truck or maybe even a mid-size truck (too bad none have a fuel economy advantage over the full sizers).

It just seems silly that the Toyota guys are claiming this and the Chevy guys are claiming that. The truth that I see is that most of those stats are so close that it doesn't matter. Both seem so capable (and pricey) anyways...but I still wouldn't want a 1/2 ton doing a 3/4 ton's job. I know they are rated at high towing and payload....but you know they are both struggling to the point of being dangerous.

As for personal preference: I've had great luck with GM full size trucks and Toyota's smaller cars. I'd probably get the Silverado or Sierra because of certain things that I value:
-pretty decent fuel economy for a full size truck
-reputation of durable drivetrains..I just wish the six speeds were out on more than the Denali line. I'll have to wait until 2008 I guess.
-attractive interior. The tundra's isn't bad, but I kind of like the simplicity of the mid-level GM truck dash. I have never been one to like the aluminum looking plastic or woodgrain.
-While the Tundra is attractive, the hood and grill sort of bother me. I love the GMC and the Chevy is growing on me a lot.
-I'd rather not buy a Toyota branded vehicle. I don't like the bark-eating stigma of the Prius and other Hybrids, and see no reason to buy a Japanese truck when the American trucks are as good or better.
-100,000 mile warranty makes me more comfortable with all the new technology in this truck, like Displacement on Demand, Flex Fuel technology, etc.
-It's been my experience that GM trucks will run fine on the cheapest, crappiest gasoline (maybe even hangover-pee...never tried it ;-)). It's not always possible to fill up and the cleanest, newest stations.

That said..a friend of mine just got a Frontier crew cab. Nissan might deserve my consideration when the time comes. They are very nice. Of the japanese car companys, Nissan is definately my favorite.

rorr · February 2007

"...but I still wouldn't want a 1/2 ton doing a 3/4 ton's job."

Just for my own edumication - just what IS the difference between a "1/2 ton" and a "3/4 ton".

I used to think it was just payload but since all of the "1/2 ton" trucks mentioned can easily carry 1500lbs., why aren't they 3/4 ton?

Also, if we're talking pure towing/hauling: are the current crop of GM and Toyota "1/2 ton" trucks all that less capable than a 3/4 ton from 6-8 years ago?

thegraduate · February 2007

Remember toyota doesn't sell shares of its "stock"
here in the USA. They are too (for a better word)
sneaky or hiding something! Or not wanting to conform
to US stock rules, SEC regs. etc etc........

What you purchase is a American Depository Receipt !
Which "represents" 2 shares of toyota stock.........

Hmmmmm........So when folks post how much higher yota
"stock" price is than GM, Ford, DC they don't have a
clue !
Did you know toyotas average "dividend" is 21 CENTS
per share SEMI-ANNUALLY ?????????

Search toyota.com they tell ya or call your friendly stock
broker...............

What you are posting doesn't belong in a truck vs. truck comparison, as the host kcram said. Sounds more like "news and views."

EDIT: Just saw kcram's second warning about not posting that stuff here, and how any more like it will be deleted. So, never mind!

greenteam · February 2007

as i understand the ratings.. the difference between a half ton and bigger is the fact that the rear axle housing on the 1/2 ton is not attached to the wheel, therefore all the weight is transferred to the rear axle itself.. in 3/4 ton the housing is attached allowing for more weight to be supporet by the rear..

lazygoodan · February 2007

Your facts are totally wrong.
"The Big3 don't really have much production here anymore... it is done in Canada and Mexico and then assembled here for the majority of their models, while "foreign" companies have plants that actually produce automobiles here."
Totally inaccurate. Look at the facts:
There was just an article in the paper that the domestics employ 35 people for every 1000 vehicles they produce in the US, while the foreign companies employ 14 for every 1000. GM alone produces full-size pickups in Flint, MI, Fort Wayne, IN, and Pontiac MI. Also, they produce full-size SUV's in Arlinton, TX and Janesville, WI. Toyota has one plant in Princeton, IN and one plant in San Antonio, TX (in case you lost count, that 5 to 2 in favor of GM).

Another totally false statement
"Foreign companies dominate the car/wagon market and much of the luxury vehicle markets as well."
Last time I checked, GM sold more cars than Toyota in the US. According to Toyota.com, in the US last year (2006)Lexus sold 183,037 cars last year and Toyota sold 1,275,119 cars last year. Scion sales were 61,306, but they count the xB as a truck. Even if you count xB sales, that's a total of 1,519,462 CARS sold by Toyota.
GM sold 1,625,376 cars in the US total. I don't see the domination here....
Oh, yes! It's in Trucks.
Toyota sold 944,971 trucks, and Lexus sold 139,397 trucks.
GM sold 2,765,809 trucks. THAT's domination.

greenteam · February 2007

this is all moot because the new tundra can and will do the same work as the big 3.. just wait it is coming..

framer_rube · February 2007

We work that farm in SC, so we don't need no snow plows and such. What is needed is one with haul. We haul them tabacco trains now, sometimes 7 or 8 of them ones nose to tail. Been workin that 52, but that one is gettin older now. Lookin to see if folks is workin them tundra ones yet. Heard one fella tell of workin that corn farm. What was the use of it now? We also pull a massey now and again, so that one needs to haul and tow and last longer. Is them tundra ones for workin? Any one got anything to tell on them ones? What of the big3 ones? How are them ones doin these days? Not lookin for stock tips, just if them ones haul or not. Whay say? Good luck on this one now!

obyone · February 2007

what that pumpkin looks like on that new Tundra.....

geo9 · February 2007

NO limited slip OR factory trailer hitch on them 07 tundras!
Them pewees can't WORK.................

geo9 · February 2007

Its like old times !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Chevy vs. toyota ! Your here along with Rube again.........
Heck...All we need now is ol' Babs and Quad for the GM crew
and not forget our old pal Bama Tundra rootin' for the
pink team !!!!!!!!!! :shades:

Lets not forget the host hovering over the delete and ban
buttons! :sick:

dave40 · February 2007

AWESOME DAVE40 Reporting for Duty....
Them Tundras for real 381hp

framer_rube · February 2007

Dave40, how is them new tundra ones on haulin mules and such? Got any good tells on these newer ones? Heard of any folk workin them ones yet? Lookin for folks who has worked them. Any one got a picture of them pumkins? Would like to do that compare of pumpkins and trannys and such. Is that runnin gear from that t100 one again? Needin to know if them ones lack haul, or can hold up now. This one is for that farm, so must be long lastin and hard workin. Don't be needin no limited ones now, thats for sure! Good luck on this one now!

belias · February 2007

Uh, no, I'm not wrong, you just didn't read what I wrote. Taking two companies and comparing them isn't what I stated; "foreign companies dominate the car/wagon market and much of the luxury vehicle markets as well...". Last time I checked that meant more than just Toyota vs. GM. But go ahead and keep making that kind of comparison... in two or three years, it will be in Toyota's favor anyway. Everyone knows that GM is the biggest automaker in the world. But, check what I wrote again. You're also including fleet sales to rental companies in the totals. The reason that those aren't counted is because these are rental companies that are either currently or formly owned by the Big3 auto makers (that is why you almost never find a foreign car at your local Hertz, Avis, Enterprise, or Dollar rental companies). Even forgetting those numbers it isn't close. See info below:
Foreign companies as a total do sell more cars than the Big3. Here is a more recent quote from Yahoo finance:

"In total, based on the results Ward's compiled, the "Big 3" sold 51.8% of all new units in January 2007, down 530 basis points (5.3 "percentage" points) from the 57% share (of all new vehicle sales) they held in January 2006. GM's share fell 3.2 percentage points (from last January) to account for only 22.5% of all new vehicle sales in the month. Ford also lost share, down nearly three percentage points (from last January) to only account for 14.8% of the industry volumes."

All you need to do is use your own figures for the percentage of trucks vs cars to see that foreign companies have dominated this sector for a long time now. This isn't news. The foreign brands have been a distant second in trucks. That's why when you take their total sales, they are much higher than the foreign brands. However, truck sales for Dodge account for 2/3 of all sales, for Ford, it is something close to that, but not as much, and for GM, by your own stated figures it looks to be close to 63%. Toyota and many other foreign companies are more like 67%/33% car/truck sales. That is why foreign companies outsell the Big3 in car sales here in NA... even WITH the fleet sales to rental companies included in the Big3's numbers.
As for the production numbers, again, you didn't READ what I said. In case you haven't noticed, look at the sticker on the inside of your car door and see how much of the vehicle is actually PRODUCED here. You'll be lucky if you see anything close to 50%. I checked out an Avalanche and 75% of it was built in Canada/Mexico. And while there are certainly a large number of people employed here, they are doing much more assembly work than production work. Why does this matter? Because production work benefits the businesses that supply the plants with raw materials and parts. Assembly only benefits the actual plants because the majority of the parts aren't coming from local markets. Even though there are far fewer actual plants (never mind how large/small or efficient they may be) from foreign companies here, they are actually producing the vehicles, not just assembly (though they do some of that too). And unlike the Big3, they are growing, not shrinking... check out this from Bloomberg.com on Feb. 1st/07:

"GM and Ford ``are finally taking the medicine and cutting their sales to rental-fleet companies,'' said John Casesa, an analyst at Casesa Strategic Advisors in New York. ``These are low-margin sales. Those cars go to Hertz and Avis, then come back and wind up as used cars, undermining the selling of new cars.''

The January results showed the price in sales and market share that the U.S. automakers may have to pay to sustain profits. Last year, GM and Ford announced plans to close a combined 28 plants and other facilities in North America as they align their production base with shrinking consumer demand.

...

GM, Ford and Chrysler are trimming sales to so-called fleet customers to help stem losses. Ford last week reported a $12.7 billion loss for 2006, its worst year ever. GM lost more than $13 billion in the seven quarters through last Sept. 30. Chrysler lost $1.5 billion in the third quarter of last year.

`Last Chance'

GM and Ford ``have one last chance'' to fix the business, Casesa said.

``These companies have used fleets as ways to dump cars and keep the factories running,'' Casesa said. ``Up until now, they have said we really can't fire people, but they're rethinking that strategy.''

GM cut January sales to rental companies almost 40 percent to 56,000 vehicles from 90,000 a year earlier, sales analyst Paul Ballew said on a conference call. Ford said it had a 65 percent reduction.

Chrysler sales chief Steve Landry also has said he wants to reduce sales to fleet customers."

Unless you call that progress I would say that it is imperative for the Big3 to give the Tundra and other products that are coming in the future to threaten their dominant truck market share a decent look over instead of just blowing it off like they did to cars in the mid 70s.

By blindly defending their current way of producing and selling vehicles, all the Big3 are doing is giving more room for the foreign companies to eat into their market share. Remember, in 1975 the Big3 accounted for more than 9 out of every 10 vehicles sold in the U.S. They're no where near that now and it is getting worse by the minute. Their one strong-hold is in trucks and they had better start taking companies like Toyota and Nissan seriously. Pretty soon, those companies may end up digging deeper into 3/4 ton and 1 ton variants and if the Big3 don't keep pushing the envelope and staying a step ahead of them, they will continue to loose business.
That is why I think people on this board should make a fair comparison. I have no problem looking at the new Chevy truck and saying that it is a great truck. Nor do I have a problem saying that about the Toyota. I think both are better than Ford and Dodge currently. Choosing between the Tundra and the Chevy is difficult just based on the numbers, but I won't exclude either just because there is the perception that one is supporting another country. Toyota is actually producing this truck here in NA with suppliers from NA. I think it is worth a trip to the Chevy dealer to see what the sticker says about production content on their new truck. I just hope it won't be like the Avalanche. I would rather my money go to the good folks of this country that work hard and do their jobs. But I also want a good product. You can't go wrong with either truck, but someone saying that they wouldn't get the Tundra because it is "foreign" has not done their homework on how Toyota operates. There is hardly anything foreign about it...
Long post...

belias · February 2007

geo9
Completely wrong on both counts. Limited slip differential is STANDARD on all Tundra models and the trailer hitch is BUILT INTO the frame. The Limited slip differential is the first item specified on their list:

http://www.toyota.com/tundra/models.html

Go through the "Tundra Experience" part to see the how the trailer hitch is built into the frame of the vehicle.

lazygoodan · February 2007

Yes, I agree that I should have included all the manufacturers car sales -- not comparing GM and Toyota. In fact, I wish I'd left that part out.

My main point was that GM is more domestic than Toyota any way you slice it. You CANNOT make the case that Toyota is an American company, regardless of what their propaganda says. GM pays more taxes, employs more Americans, and has higher content in their vehicles than Toyota.

The Big 3 still employ 8 out of every 10 auto workers in the US. The Big 3 buy 80% of all the auto parts built in the US every year ($171B vs. $50B for foreigners). The average domestic car contains 78% US content, vs. 48% for foreign cars. The Big 3 still build 7 out of every 10 cars made in the US. Since 1980, the Big 3 have invested 6 times as much in the US as all other automakers combined ($206B vs. $33B).

rockylee · February 2007

So far, Edmunds is the only comparo I'm aware of. Are there others?

-Yes

Links please. I don't doubt you, but when you say that links are always nice to back you up. Plus I can't recall any other hands on comparisons from reputable sites. Edmunds is about as reputable as it gets at least on the internet.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070125/VIDEO0302/70124056/1014- /

http://www.u-ka.cn/en/02/102054.html

http://www.carforums.net/printthread.php?t=42231

http://www.auho.com/forum/showthread.php?t=63

http://www.newcartestdrive.com/toty-2007.cfm

Is this enough or do you want more ? :surprise:

Sorry, but any truck that starts with a MSRP of $40,000+ is a luxury truck.

Dude, if it had a Toyota emblem on it you'd have no problem boasting about it. GMC, isn't a luxury brand thus the Denali isn't a luxury truck. Again the Cadillac Slade EXT fits that bill. The Denali, is a trim line-up not a luxury brand.

500hp sounds very impressive, but it also sounds like a domestic fan's wishful thinking. We'll have to wait and see. You'll have to keep a thousand lbs in the bed just to keep traction upon acceleration. Nope the 5.7 isn't proven, but the 4.7 and other legendary Toyota truck engines like the 22RE are proven. Toyota has earned the benefit of the doubt. GM has taken advantage of their customers for so long with inferior products especially their trucks (from the 80s-90s) from my direct experience that they'll have to prove themselves first.

500 hp. is just a rumor right now. I'm not going to put much stock into it yet. 400 hp. from the 6.2 VVT V8 is real and will for sure happen this fall according to Motor Trend. GM, had among the most reliable Trucks in the 1980's and 90's and is why you see so many 350's still running today. My father has almost 250K on his 98' Silvy Z-71 5.7 "350"

I think some of you like to live 20 years or so ago in the past with bad GM cars. The Full-Size Trucks have been pretty damn reliable.

Come on, Edmunds has positive reviews about GM products when they deserve it like the new Silverado and the new Saturn Aura for instance. Did you know that GM is Edmunds biggest advertiser? Do you hear me say Edmunds is biased in favor of these two products because of payola. Nope, I think they deserved the praise they received from Edmunds. The bottom line is no publication can afford to praise an unworthy product. Publications can't get away with that stuff and risk credibility. Customers are to savy and see through it. No credibility, no readers, no ad revenue, no job. It just doesn't pay in the long run except in the music industry where your selling to 16 year olds. They're stupid. Car buying adults are not.

Well I gave my facts and you know them already. The edmunds comparo was a apples to oranges comparo because of the trim levels. Hell they had to strip down a Titan, also to make the appearance look bigger. Toyota, does a lot of advertising on this site also.

If the 5.7 has sludge issues, I myself will call for Toyota to be driven from US shores.

Is that just sludge issues or does that include other recalls ?

Just as a side note, I have relatives that own a Camry from the sludge period. They believe in changing a car's oil every 20K whether it needs it or not. That Camry still runs great at 140K with no sludge issues. They beat that thing on and off road and use it as a ranch vehicle. Amazing.

Is this suppose to prove to me how superior engineering is done ????? I could find plenty of other people that had sludge issues that babied their camry's. :confuse:

It's not just the review. The powertrain can't be denied. They are facts that can't be denied. They can be denied, but only by people in denial (not the river). I don't think they need to be repeated ad nauseum

Is the power difference really that significant ????

We are talking about 14 hp. difference. The major difference is the 6-speed auto if you ask me. GM, can't get their hands on enough of them at the moment.

Okay, now that just hurt.

You take one comparo and label it as fact. I dispute it with credible reasons why the comparo is flawed and you dispute it. I have no problem with you liking the Tundra, but would respect you more if you at least admit the test should of had similar trim levels. Giving a Tundra, a leather lined with gadgets interior vs a stripped Silverado and Titan IMHO is a apples to oranges comparo. The Tundra, is of course going to look nicer. It also would of been nice having a CrewMax Tundra, in the test with prices. The current Tundra got hammered by Angus McKenzie in Motor Trend over high MSRP's in March issue.

What? you think Toyota wouldn't spring for a tape measure for their engineers and they made the last Tundra, parked it next to a Ford or Chevy and said "Dang they're bigger than us, and they have bigger engines too. Toyota's only fault was making a truck that they thought did the job and it did do the job. Their only mistake was not taking into account the "Super Size" mentality of the american consumer and the fact that domestics would discount thousands of dollars off of MSRP off their monster trucks. They under estimated the american thirst for more than they'll ever use or need. Personally, I'm convinced that Japanese executives look at the new Tundra and almost burst out laughing saying "Well, if that's what they want give it to them". I just don't think they comprehend the need for that much power and size the segment demands. If I hear one more time about the needs of the american construction worker, I'll hurl. I have news for people, all those building supplies are delivered by the supply companies, not by 3/4, 0ne ton trucks. Most of the contractors, sub contractors I see at the sites are using any vehicle that gets the job done ie, Tacomas, older Toy trucks, vans, beater little trucks as well as a sprinkling of full size trucks that typically never have more than a couple of hundred lbs in the bed.

Well here in Truck Country they use modern equipment for construction. I'm not sure where you live but in Michigan and Texas the majority of folks still tow, haul, with a modern pick-up truck. They mostly use 3/4-1 ton diesels for the jobs. Vans, won't cut it in our mud. I'm yet to see a Tundra used by a farmer or oil fields down here in Texas. I also have never seen a non-domestic at a building site. I suppose where you live it's different and major buildings aren't going up ????

Come on, the hate was there for asian imports long before the Japanese put on the big belt buckle, cowboy hat and said Yee Haw! They supply thousands of american jobs, feed and put thousands of american kids through college, take billions of their profits that people say go to japan and pump those billions back into building factories on american soil supplying more american jobs. They are more Ameri

rockylee · February 2007

lazygoodan,

I guess they will ignore those facts also..... :confuse:

BTW-Good Post !

Rocky

rockylee · February 2007

Continue..........

Come on, the hate was there for asian imports long before the Japanese put on the big belt buckle, cowboy hat and said Yee Haw! They supply thousands of american jobs, feed and put thousands of american kids through college, take billions of their profits that people say go to japan and pump those billions back into building factories on american soil supplying more american jobs. They are more American than most Americans. They can be as American as they want to be. I'll give them the spurs and chaps myself. I just hope they can continue to produce reliable products with american hands assembling them, because in this society where the work ethic is in short supply I sometimes doubt it.

Well I don't root for the away team. GM and Ford are my home teams. Sure they have off-shored some business and yes I have a problem with that. However when you have politicans that are trader's and subsidize foreign company's over american company's and that's when I start having a problem. I respect that they give jobs to americans but they have done more harm than good with their presence. The currency manipulation issue might finally get noticed by the new 110th congress. We still have some trader's in congress that I'd love to see go. Some of which is in my party mainly from the left coast. My point of my reply is you can continue to root for the away team and that's fine but I personally don't want my tax dollars going to them.

Toyota, provides no personal benefit to me being here. General Motor's does. GM, also still provides income to many members of my family.

Toyota, has 2 dealerships in my local area while GM, has at least 20 off the top of my head thus having a bigger impact on my local economy here in the Panhandle. I have no doubt here in the Panhadle I will see at a mininum 15-20 new GM full-size trucks for every 1 Toyota Tundra. This is truck country gearhead1 and is one reason why I was interviewed by a WSJ reporter over this topic.

Rocky

belias · February 2007

Well, I would agree that GM is more of a domestic company than Toyota. However, GM is becoming less domestic and Toyota is becoming more domestic, so it is only a matter of time before this isn't much of an issue.

I would totally argue against the U.S. content for GM vehicles. I'll need to do a search again, but I do remember reading that every year for the past 12 years, a greater percentage of parts comes from foreign companies or vendors with foreign suppliers.
As for your employment numbers, that is UAW based workers only. Include non-unionized workers and the numbers change dramatically. Latest numbers show that the Big 3 barely make 50% of all vehicles currently, not 70% as you claimed (that number is more than 15 years old). Counting investment from 1980 is just silly. If you're going to do that, than we should include things like total number of recalls since 1980, total layoffs and plant closures since 1980, ROI since 1980, etc. etc. Also, you need to define "investment". That number could easily include forced retirement packages and the like.
In any case, this is a truck comparison. Trucks like the Avalanche have far less NA content than foreign content. I wish I could check what it is for the Silveraldo. But there is no question that this Tundra is an American vehicle. Taking numbers from 26 years ago to try to discredit a legitimate contender in the truck arena only feeds the fact that people loyal to the Big3 feel threatened.
The reality is that products are going to leapfrog each other almost every year with something new and innovative. So, this is possibly a year for the Tundra and the Silverado. No need to worry if you're a Chevy fan. If you are a Ford or Dodge fan, you better start worrying.
My generation (born in early 70's to early 80's) are not as brand loyal as the generation of people who grew up going to "Ford" only or "Chevy" only bars and restaurants. We like a good product and something that is a solid build.
I don't care about financial numbers except to see if a company is stable. That is something I would have expected fans of the Big3 to leave out since it is currently a sore spot in their overall business.
I would summize that trying to argue the dominance of the Big3 based on historical numbers is a complete disaster. Anyway you work it, they are worse off now than they were 10 or 20 years ago. So, lets just get to the comparision that is really needed here.
Out of all the features in the new Chevy and the new Tundra, which do you think has a meaningful advantage over the other? Give a list if you've got it, but it has to be based on FACT. That means you need to actually read info on both vehicles and make a fair comparison. And by meaningful, I don't mean one truck has a 10-stage intermittent wiper instead of an 8-stage. Meaningful as in I think that there are more bed/cab choices for the Chevy than the Tundra or that the Tundra's CrewMax offers an exceptionally large cab.
The Chevy starts at $18,760, the Tundra starts at $22,290. This is definitely an advantage for Chevy and especially for contractor sales. OK, somebody make another fact-based comparison.

kdhspyder · February 2007

You post things about which you know nothing. Or, you truly have no reading ability. It's all on the web you just need to be smart enough to find it. Hint: Try Toyota's website.

All Tundras come standard with Auto LSD.

All V8's come standard with the Tow Package, Class IV hitch ( this is new this week ).

farmer-rube: You need a new truck and you need a towin' truck.
Here are the most popular cab/chassis configurations and the Max Towing Capacity of each of the six competitors..

Big V8's....Tundra...Silverado...Sierra...F150...Ram...Titan
2WD Vehicles
RC Std Bed... 10400...8200...8200...8500,,,9100... Not Avail
RC Long Bed.. 10800...8000...8000...11000...8900...Not Avail
DC Std Bed.... 10600...7700...10300...9500...8700...9500
DC Long Bed.. 10500...7500...7500...9500...8550...Not Avail
Crew Sht Bed. 10400...7600...10200...9500...8600...9400

4WD Vehicles
RC Std Bed... 10100...8900...8900...8200...8800...Not Avail
RC Long Bed.. 10500...8900...8900...9500...8650...Not Avail
DC Std Bed.... 10300...8500...10500...9300...8500...9500
DC Long Bed.. 10200...8300...8300...9300...8250...Not Avail
Crew Sht Bed. 10100...8500...10500...9200...8300...9400

All the Tundras can tow ..And.. they are the only ones to give you a 6 speed tranny with a 4.30 rear end. If you need better than that then you need a diesel. It's standard class IV hitch is twice as big as the F150's and it's rear ring gear is 10.5" to the F150's 9.5".

The 2007 Sierra, in some configurations is the only one on the same level as the 2007 Tundra, the others are a grade or two back.

belias · February 2007

Great post! Good hard numbers should at least put to bed the concerns for towing/hauling for the tundra and silveraldo.
Now, I wonder what criteria people will come up with to show advantages/disadvantages of the Tundra/Silveraldo!

geo9 · February 2007

Please check this Edmunds link and comparo. on the
Rado and tundra...........
NO hitch or locker. Heck N/A means NOT avail. right?
Possibly Edmunds is incorrect?
Perhaps you must buy the MOST EXPENSIVE
tundra in the lineup to get these options which are avail.
on ALL of the Silverado line up................
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/nvc/edmunds/VehicleComparison?styleid=100814223&styl- - - eid=100840256&maxvehicles=5&refid=&op=3&tab=features

Also note the PRICES AND the Features that are STANDARD on
the Silverado and either the tundra
doesn't offer or must be purchased on a more expensive "package".....................

belias · February 2007

I think you're better off going to Chevy and Toyota's web sites for accurate information. Not that Edmund's is bad but keep in mind that both of these trucks are new and obviously information can be easily misrepresented.
On Toyota's trucks, trailer hitch is standard on all V-8s and it is attached to the frame of the vehicle as well. Limited slip differential is standard on all Tundras.
For future reference, go to the actual manufacturer's web site. Why on earth would you rely on specs produced by others instead?
As for the comparison, there are literally hundreds of different ways to compare because of all of the bed lengths, cab options, etc.
They both seem to compare quite well to each other and I honestly can't see much for price difference except that the Tundra starts at a higher price (though includes more with it).
So again, take something specific and see where either truck has an advantage. Here is an obvious one; the Tundra has a 6-speed transmission on its 5.7L engine as opposed to Chevy's 4-speed transmission.
Find something like that and see what you can produce.

ggesq · February 2007

has deteriorated into talking about OT stuff e.g. the Denali and how Edmunds' is biased, name calling and how many workers are employed by GM and Toyota. :sick:

framer_rube · February 2007

We are looking for one with haul to work farm. Folks is postin lots of paper facts on them tundra ones, but we are lookin for them folks that is worked them some. Anyone workin em have something to tell on them ones? How bout that fella with that corn farm? Did you work that tundra at that corn farm? Did it haul and not break? Has anyone looked up under them new ones to see if they have them t100 pumkins? Not interested in what them magazines have to tell, need some one to use them eyes for this one now. So, is anyone workin em, and if so, what say? Give us a tell on how them ones worked. Good luck on this one now!

belias · February 2007

You know, as I read many of these posts, it seems to me that geo9 is straddling the line of being a troll. Typically trolls just post inflammatory remarks, misrepresent information, and really just poke at people and not deal with the issues at hand to create controversy and stir up debate. Not sure if he is all-the-way there though, but I know that name-calling and references to a person's sexual orientation (or at least the insunation of it) are certainly points in favor of making that argument.
Truly though, I think there is just a lack of ability to criticize the Tundra based on its merits. Lets face it, most manufacturers would love to take that truck and put their own badges on it. But that doesn't mean its perfect, its got good competition from the Silverado. I just don't see the Silveraldo being better in any category so far except starting price. At best it is equal to the Tundra given what we know about both vehicles. That is good for everyone concerned.

rorr · February 2007

"Please check this Edmunds link and comparo. on the
Rado and tundra...........
NO hitch or locker. Heck N/A means NOT avail. right? "

Wow.

You don't know the difference between a locking differential and a limited slip differential? Because previously, you said the Tundra doesn't have a limited slip.

Yes, Edmunds is wrong about the hitch. The towing package (which, as I understand is standard on the V8 models) includes a hitch RECEIVER. Maybe Toyota doesn't inlude the actual hitch and ball. Big whoop. Probably because there are several sizes and drops available depending on what the owner intends to tow and the fact that one can get a hitch at WalMart for around $10.

belias · February 2007

Hey framer_rube,
You've been asking the same questions and making the same statements as far back as you've posted in this forum. What the heck can somebody say? No, the "pumpkin" isn't from the T100 (that was mentioned about a dozen times already), it is 10.5" in diameter and is all-new from Toyota. I don't know how many times the payload/towing information can possibly be posted before you actually read and acknowledge it. Even if somebody has used the Tundra for hauling, what kind of time-frame would be meaningful to you anyway? The truck is barely out and few people have had the chance to fully evaluate it or use it to its potential. You can only estimate from reviews and specs as to what it can possibly do. However, judging from the fact that it has outperformed other challenges in most areas, I think it is safe to say that, at the very least, it appears to be as good or better than most every truck out there. You could do much worse with Dodge, Nissan, and even some Ford models...

framer_rube · February 2007

How is folks to work them ones without that hitch? Is that factory givin that hint here? Wonder if that warrenty on them ones is voided out if that hitch is added to them. How is folks to haul without that hitch? This is a mystery for sure now... any folks know? Good luck on this one now!

rorr · February 2007

Since the new Tundra has just now gone on sale, I don't think you'll find "them folks that is worked them some". Try checking in again in 6 months.

"Has anyone looked up under them new ones to see if they have them t100 pumkins?"

The T100 used a 8.2" rear. The new Tundra has a 9.5" rear on the V6 and small V8 models; the 5.7l V8 has a larger 10.5" rear. I doubt that either a 9.5" or 10.5" ring/pinion will fit in a pumpkin made for a 8.2" rear.

framer_rube · February 2007

Thanks for that reply on them ones Belias... but was lookin for folks who is workin em, not readin on em. We work that farm with these trucks, so we need one that works well, not reads well in them magazines. As for them pumpkins, was lookin for folks who is really eye balled them ones. Heard tells on them older tundra only to find out that them ones was using that t100 drivetrains. Don't need to be tricked on this one now, thats for sure! Have you measured them ones up and eye balled em? If so, give us a tell, but not lookin for no book readin on this one now. Lookin for folks who is workin them ones, don't need no book measurements now. Good luck on this one now!

rorr · February 2007

"How is folks to work them ones without that hitch?"

Get a grip.

The Tundra includes a 2" receiver hitch. Do you have any clue as to the number of available hitches/ball combinations to fit a 2" receiver hitch? Which one should Toyota offer?

Just out of curiousity: can someone specify which hitch drop and ball is included on the Chevy/GMC?

Toyota Tundra vs. Chevrolet Silverado

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles