Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Half-ton Pickups - The full field
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Direct comparison? Did you not read the details of this comparison? 5.3 with 3.73's is "direct comparison" to 5.7 with 4.30's? Um, Ok, whatever you say. If they wanted to be fair, why didn't they choose to compare the 6.0 with 4.10's. that would be closer to a direct comparison. Right?
Explain this away.
DrFill
Ford F-Series
481,146 -11.9% YTD
August 2007: 69,220
August 2006: 76,804
Chevrolet Silverado
425,379 -2.2% YTD
August 2007: 67,486
August 2006: 51,185
Dodge Ram
246,878 -1.0% YTD
August 2007: 32,309
August 2006: 34,177
GMC Sierra
138,759 -2.4% YTD
August 2007: 23,574
August 2006: 17,564
Toyota Tundra
124,909 +57.5% YTD
August 2007: 18,919
August 2006: 11,173
Consider it "explained away"...
DrFill
Sorry dude, but comparing the measly 150-200K Tundra's to the Big 3's sales numbers is a lost cause. The big 3 sell more trucks in one month than Toyota sells Tundra's in an entire year. Face it, until Toyota offers more than 1 half ton with a choice of 3 engines, it is not even in the same game as the big 3.
No.
It had nothing to do with the HD's, those were factored out. The problem is adding in the previous 2006 1/2 ton version sales, which at this point seems like the preferred version. The Sierra's numbers are inflated. :surprise:
The new Tundra is outselling the new Sierra.
And the Sierra was out for months before the Tundra got here. Sierra was fully ramped-up, and should've steamrolled the fledgling Tundra! Where's the word-of-mouth? Where's the momentum?
Where's the love? :confuse:
It's at your local Toyota store!
DrFill
What truck do you think a Sierra buyer would have bought if the Sierra was not available? Which truck do you think a Silvy buyer would have bought if a Silvy was not available? I rest my case.
Let's talk sales numbers when Toyota sells as many 1/2 tons as GM/F/D and at least has more than one 1/2 ton truck in their line-up. Bringing a Tundra into the American truck segment is like a little league baseball player bringing his ball and glove to a MLB game and asking if he can play too. :P
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2007/01/toyota_sludge_settlement.html
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/10/toyota_quality.html
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/07/toyota_recalls_reax.html
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/07/toyota_recall_probe.html
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/07/toyota_recalls.html
"We view GM as a great entity, from which we have a lot to learn," Watanabe said, adding Toyota wanted to maintain its 22-year-old, California-based car assembly plant which it operates with GM. "We want to keep this relationship going."
Perhaps you should practice what you preach, the new Tundra's do NOT have a fully boxed frame, they have the "TripleTech" (haha) frame. Boxed up front, and c-channel the rest of the way back (cab area is reinforced C). They also do not use hydroforming in their mfg process. Oh, and they chose to rivet the non-boxed crossmembers in. Nice!!!
DrFill
DrFill
kcram - Pickups Host
CR is a joke, they should stick to rating Washers and Dryers and Toasters and leave the Automobiles to people who know something about them. They do NOT just report on what people say, they conduct their own tests and have no clue what they are doing.
The rest of your post just illustrates how "brainwashed" you are about Toyota supremity. Talk about "laughable"!!! Go drink some more of that Kool-Aid."
Hmmm... Mr. buttoy, I guess you are saying that the whole world is wrong and you are the authority? Okay, well before you get too confident here, just remember that Toyota is the most studied and emulated car company in the world. If a fully boxed frame is the most important thing in the world to you, it doesn't matter to me. Go ahead and buy a Silvy and have a great life if that's what makes you happy. My bad experience with GM and Ford, and the experience of others in my family with their American cars, has led me to my disposition and the respect I have for Toyota. I have owned and currently own other brands as well - hardly brainwashed as you would like to think. Of the three cars I currently own, only one is a Toyota, so don't pat yourself so hard on the back. I think there are a lot of good brands out there and obviously don't just buy Toyota's because they are Toyota's, but I do think Toyota deserves its reputation as the benchmark for quality. Enjoy the Cool Aid, and by the way, it's "supremecy," not "supremity." That isn't even a word.
The new Silvys interiors are posh compared to the Tundra, but, surprise, surprise, nobody cares, as sales fall for the new Silvy, while they soar for the more utilitarian Tundra.
The last Tundra was very quiet and car-like, and no stampedes were seen at Toyota lots. Nobody cares.
381HP, with 0% available, might be good for people. You can do a lot worse.
DrFill
Yes, the Silvy sales are down compared to last year, do you know/understand why? Let me explain..again. With high gas prices and a very poor/down housing and construction market, builders are not buying new trucks, they are making due with what they have. This affects the domestics because MOST real work trucks are from the Big 3. This does not affect Toyota because construction workers and other "real" truck buyers do not buy Tundra's. Sorry, but it's a fact.
Now, as to why the Tundra's sales (as a percentage) are up...Because it's replacing a mid-sized wannabe that everyone agreed was less than capable as a full sized truck. Toyota fans finally have a full sized truck to buy. Of course they are going to pounce. Let's see if this can be sustained. I am betting it won't. Once the hype wears off and the people waiting for this new Tundra have theirs, sales will level off and will hover around 200K. Still a tiny little league player in a big league game.
So, you continue to beleive that the reason the 1st gen Tundra was a flop was due to being "car-like" and "quiet" and not due to capability. Sure, most people put capability first, but they DO care about about build quality and fit-n-finish too. I can only imagine what you would be saying if the Silvy's interior was made of cheap painted plastic with poor ergonomics and the Tundra had the nicer interior. I am betting you would be singing a different tune, right? The bottom line is the GMT900's are just as capable as the Tundra, have better build quality/fit-n-finish, nicer interior, more features, better ride, more options/configs, get better gas mileage and all for a lower price.
Nobody cares? LOL, nice try!!! I do, and from reading all of the forums, so do most people. "Utilitarian" Tundra...again, LOL, is that why I have yet to see one with a company badge/sign on it or on ANY construction sites? Face it, 95% of Tundra's are driveway queens that make Home Depot runs and streetlight race back home with fertilizer and plants in the bed. But in a sense you are correct, Toyota fans who buy this truck for it's 0-60 times can overlook it's inferiorities.
Oh, what was wrong with the GMT800's interiors? And isn't a bit hypocritical to put down the 06 Silvy interior and then turn around and say "nobody cares"? Or is it that nobody cares about the crappy Tundra interior only?
But you need this explained, again.
GM has MILLIONS of truck owners. THE biggest customer base ever for a redesigned truck! Sell them a new truck! :mad:
The Tundra has the same market disadvanatges the Silvy does, probably more, as they've missed the market twice already.
With the millions thrown into the design of this truck, the market, and the need to keep Toyota in it's place, the GENERAL has FAILED! :sick:
You can spin it eight different ways, make any excuse you want. And you will!
There are holes in GM's marketing, design, and power. Toyota is driving a Tundra through those holes.
When Toyota is the only full-size truck gaining share, that says a lot about the job the domestics have done protecting their turf, and making better trucks.
Losing 2-3% a year, on a brand-new truck is UNACCEPTABLE!! The time for EXCUSES has passed. They missed something, and they know it.
You may not know it yet, but...... :surprise:
DrFill
"Sell them a new truck"? Why? They already have a great one. :P
Toyota has the same market disadvantages huh? Go to your local construction sites and tell me the ratio of Tundra's to Domestics, then tell me the Tundra suffers equally to a down construction market. C'mon Fill, a little common sense please.
Toyota is still and always will be "in their place". That "place" is 5th. With a fraction of total sales as compared to the Big 3 and still no HD's or Diesels. Just ONE truck with 3 engine choices.
Think there's a problem, when the truck they have is better than the truck you just made? :surprise:
DrFill
Read a paper, or something. :confuse:
The frame is alot like a 2005 Ford HD. Not a bad truck to emulate. Unless you're calling that truck a joke?
DrFill
I can think of about a dozen Domestic execs who aren't laughing anymore. :P
DrFill
ROFLMFAO!!!! DrFill, you should be a comedian!! That was a good one!!!
Hey Doc, I think you are seeing an extra zero in the Tundra's sales numbers. They are on pace to sell 200,000...not 2,000,000. From listening to you, one would think they sell 2 million/yr. 200K Doc, that's about 1/5 (or 20%) of the GMT900 sales.
Do something besides provide dim rhetoric. At least try to keep up.
DrFill
Yeah, they are similar alright, they are both made from steel and formed into a C...LOL You crack me up dude.
So, Mr Toyota, tell me why the Tundra has such wimpy payload numbers. Suspension? Frame? Or is Toyota Sandbagging? LOL
http://www.automotive.com/2007/43/toyota/tundra/reviews/driving-impressions/inde- x.html
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2007/02/carscom_faceoff.html
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2007/08/06/057372.html
http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/suv/163_0704_fullsize_truck_comparison
Before the GM guys start pointing out that the Silvy was handicapped by the 5.3L engine in a couple of the tests, it still has to make due with 2 fewer gears and still doesn't do as well in real world fuel economy. The 6.0 certainly wouldn't be more economical than the 5.3L. And strangely, no one is complaining about the C-channel rear frame on the Tundra. Looks to me like both are pretty dang good trucks, which is good news for everyone. Even the "biased" folks at CR rated the Silvy a top pick, second to the Tundra, of course :P But that won't matter in this crowd, I just think it's fun to point it out.
Um, you may want to check out the several threads over at TS about the complaints about the Tundra's painted interior plastic rubbing off from normal wiping and even from a driver's knee after one long trip. I owned my last GM truck for 8 years and the dash and interior looked as good as it did on day 1. My bet would be on the GMT900's, their colors are dyed right into the plastic/vinyl.
http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/tundra/110309-has-this-happened-to-your-da- - - - - sh/
http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/tundra/110530-dash-problems-see-this/
http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/tundra/110056-dash-rattle/
http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/tundra/107567-grey-int-paint-comes-off-eas- - ily/
Here is an excerpt from a post by a new Tundra buyer over at TS:
"However i did find some irritating things, the radio didn't pickup any stations, the antenna was tight, but still only got a few stations and it sounded like crap. The truck didn't have remote start which sucks. Every piece of the truck just feels cheap. The dash vibrates over bumps, the doors bow out when you shut the door, also is very hard to shut, the tailgate sounds like an aluminum can, and all the interior compartments just were flimsy and cheaply made. The hitch reciever was also way too large for my hitch and it rattled like crazy. I know it's a very large truck, but the thing handles horridly. I can't believe i haven't read about this on the forum or any review, but while cornering at any speed the steering is horridly sloppy. Literally a quarter of a turn worth of slack in the steering while taking curves at any speed. As stated elsewhere the gauges while cool were horrible visibility wise while driving, "but was nice cause g/f couldn't see the speedo and gripe while driving" Another thing the exhaust sounds odd, more of a clatter/whine, than the rumble of my GM. Honestly i wish i could keep them both which i probably will, being as my dad is gonna keep his denali also"
Just this past weekend, I drove to the mtns. pulling a small trailer (approx. 3,000 lbs.), 60-65 mph. Lots of mtn. roads, steep grades. Only got 14.7 mpg overall, but still I can't complain. I noticed the AFM didn't go into the 4 cyl. mode as often, but it did when the hwy. was flat and there was no head wind.
No complaints here. Oh, and also, a 6 sp. does NOT guarantee any better fuel economy than a 4 sp. trans. What matters is the final drive ratio, which can be lower, higher, or the same between a 4 sp. and 6 sp. trans depending on final drive trans. gearing and the rear diff. gearing.
1offroader
I HOPE you're not tellin' me that.
I HOPE..... :lemon:
DrFill
MPG is determined by final drive ratio, all else being equal. Final drive ratio is determined by the final gear ratio of the trans X the rear diff gear ratio.
So, for example, IF the trucks have the same trans ratios and rear diff ratios, the remaining factors would be engine displacement, engine efficiency, body aerodynamics, vehicle weight, etc.
Both the Tundra and Silverado have overdrive final trans ratios. I don't know what they are for either vehicle. My guess is you don't either, and you sell one of them. You may know the rear diff ratios offered in the Tundra because it's in the brochure, which as a salesman you're supposed to be familiar with. The rear diff on my Silverado is 3.73:1. That means that for every time the driveshaft turns 3.73 revolutions, the wheels turn once. (Ask a mechanic what the "driveshaft" is, since I promised you I wouldn't go into the icky mechanical engineering stuff).
I posted what I have recently gotten in real mpg numbers (18.2 empty, 14.7 towing). I note with some curiosity that Tundra owners don't do much braggin' about their mpg, but I do, because it amazes me considering the power and weight of the vehicle, esp. compared to what trucks were getting just a few years ago. I owned a 1992 Toyota 4wd v-6 (3.0L) that could barely get 19 mpg on a good day with a tailwind. My 1985 4wd Toyota (2.4L 4 cyl.) would occasionally get 20 mpg, if it was feeling good on that day. Both of those trucks were downright feeble compared to my Silverado, and not half as capable.
I have absolutely no idea what your post means about 3rd in the Chevy vs. 5th in the Tundra. The comparison means zip, because those are not the final gears that most people drive in. Most normal people (this may exclude you but I'm just being honest) do their hwy. driving in 4th (Chevy) and 6th (Tundra). So those are the only numbers that are directly comparable and have any meaning. Got it? Lesson over.
1offroader
On a side note at 67mph, I get 10.5mpg with my Armada towing 10,000 lbs with the A/C on.
-mike
Most people? To me, it sounds like a few very noisy people.
Tundra...again, LOL, is that why I have yet to see one with a company badge/sign on it or on ANY construction sites?
Ahem... I would say at least half of the Tundras I have seen over the last few days (since I've been watching) DO have a business name on the side. AND, one major builder who's HQ is right off the freeway on my way to work has been changing out their fleet of various Ford and Chevy HD's to white Tundra's. At first they had one... now they have 4. Go figure. Only a few Ford SD's remain to represent the BIG3 in their parking lot.
Face it, 95% of Tundra's are driveway queens that make Home Depot runs and streetlight race back home with fertilizer and plants in the bed.
And your point is... there's something wrong with that? :P
But in a sense you are correct, Toyota fans who buy this truck for it's 0-60 times can overlook it's inferiorities.
What inferiorities are you talking about? The C-channel frame? I don't think that argument is holding up based on what the real truck experts are saying. If it truly was inferior, nobody would even use the words Tundra and Benchmark in the same sentence, as they have.
Oh, what was wrong with the GMT800's interiors?
How about cheap plastic on the dash and door panels and way too many seams, none of which aligned (I'm surprised you even have to ask, as often as you praise the "fit-n-finish" of its successor) in a purposeful fashion, or how about the generic GM parts bin door pulls (painted chrome in the very pricey Escalade) or the generic GM parts bin pieces used for HVAC etc.? Dude, c'mon, it sucked compared to pretty much everything else... Although it did have probably the most comfortable ride of all its competitors - I'll give it that. But quality it wasn't.
Not true. More cogs helps to ensure that the engine stays at optimum efficiency more of the time, thereby reducing the need for more throttle input while waiting to achieve RPM nirvana. Other factors come into play as well, such as the availability of the power and the engine speed at which peak torque is achieved. If the torque peak is reached at a higher RPM in one vehicle versus another, the one in which peak torque is reached earlier will tend to get better fuel economy. The Tundra has a broader torque curve than Chevy's 6.0 and more gears, and I'll bet it has no trouble achieving at least 18 mpg on the highway.
You're buyin' this? You love it because it reinforces what you would like to think. The first thing I think when I read this is that it completely contradicts everything else I have read about the Tundra and everything I have personally known about Toyota's in general. In my readings I find that it has the sportiest handling of all trucks and has a high quality feel to all of its parts - even the hard plastic dash. No Toyota I have ever driven or looked at on a showroom floor has had anything even remotely tinny about it, but quite to the contrary, has been notably solid and really, almost over-engineered. Toyota is anything but dumb or short-sighted and they have spent a lot of $$ making sure the new Tundra is ready to play with Detroit. The guy is either a fake or just plain ignorant. Also with regard to the silver paint rubbing off, I'm curious to see this as my wifes new Sienna Limited has some silver trim on the dash at knee level, and it's a quality piece. It appears that the silver mixed in with the plastic, not painted on. but it is at least a very high quality piece, even if it turns out to be painted. I can say that it doesn't even have a single scratch on it today, in spite of my wife's big purse smacking into it every time she drives it, or my daughter throwing her metal framed backpack at it when riding to school. I would think if it can withstand this, it ought to be able to hold up at least as well to a knee covered in jeans. Again, I have not examined the Tundra up close... just find it curious to have so many contradictions to traditional Toyota quality popping up -only in the forums...