Excellent review. Glad to see the new Tundra getting a thumbs up and out-performing the others.
New Tundra - my test drive experience
The press, articles, and pictures do nothing to really convey how the all new Tundra really drives.
Our test drives, part of training, really showed me what this new truck is made of. We ran the D-Cab 5.7 against the competition: Ford, Titan, Dodge, Nissan and the new Silverado. Each truck had about 900 pounds of water in a container. Driver and 3 passengers on most runs.
0 - ??? - in the short distance we had, the Tundra was the only vehicle to break 50MPH (consistently). The Silverado came closest, but still well short. The Ford was terrible.
40MPH to a dead stop. The Tundra was about 10 feet shorter than any other truck. When we ran the same stop with a 3,500 pound trailer, the Tundra still outperformed every other truck by a good margin. Dodge was the worst.
Turns and evasive manuvers. Tundra was definately the most stable. Nissan has a lot to be desired. Maybe it can move a large load, but it is not built to control or stop with it.
Gear's - the standard ring on the differntial (4.0l and 4.7l) is larger and heavier than any other out there, no matter what the upgrade. The on on the 5.7 liter set-up is by far as bullet proof as you will find
Drivetrain - dual path intake, 6-speed tranny, this is what makes the truck perform, combined with the heavy duty gearing. This truck is technically a 1/2 truck that can comepete head on with 3/4 and 1 tons in ability.
Our test drives, part of training, really showed me what this new truck is made of. We ran the D-Cab 5.7 against the competition: Ford, Titan, Dodge, Nissan and the new Silverado. Each truck had about 900 pounds of water in a container. Driver and 3 passengers on most runs.
0 - ??? - in the short distance we had, the Tundra was the only vehicle to break 50MPH (consistently). The Silverado came closest, but still well short. The Ford was terrible.
40MPH to a dead stop. The Tundra was about 10 feet shorter than any other truck. When we ran the same stop with a 3,500 pound trailer, the Tundra still outperformed every other truck by a good margin. Dodge was the worst.
Turns and evasive manuvers. Tundra was definately the most stable. Nissan has a lot to be desired. Maybe it can move a large load, but it is not built to control or stop with it.
Gear's - the standard ring on the differntial (4.0l and 4.7l) is larger and heavier than any other out there, no matter what the upgrade. The on on the 5.7 liter set-up is by far as bullet proof as you will find
Drivetrain - dual path intake, 6-speed tranny, this is what makes the truck perform, combined with the heavy duty gearing. This truck is technically a 1/2 truck that can comepete head on with 3/4 and 1 tons in ability.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
How was the Ford equipped? Hate to quibble here on a Toyota site, but sometimes these comparisons sponsored by one manufacturer are "rigged" by underequipping the competition. Specifically, did the F-150 have the 7700lb GVW "payload package" , which includes a bigger rear axle, along with bigger brakes?
You can't get the payload package in a 6.5' bed configuration, it's still the pig of the bunch, barely enough power to get out of it's own way. The payload package does nothing to improve power other than payload as designated. In fact it'll slow it down even more with heavier duty components. The 7700gvw was the previous gen f150's payload package, the current model's payload package is 8200gvw(only in regcabw/8' bed and supercab w/8' bed both with 5.4 V8). Oh, bet ya'll didn't know, somehow before the release of the tundra's spec, ford got wind of what the tundra's towing capacity was and ford up'd their towing to 11k(only in reg cab long bed, 4.10, 5.4V8). I don't care how mighty fords towing rating is, if you ain't got the power to back it up it means nothing.
did you go up against the vortec max or the standard 5.3? and thats pretty gutsy to say that the new tundra takes on 3/4 and one tons when its specs arent any better than the competitions half-tons. (those high figures on the tundra are for the regular cab)
http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/2007/tundra/specs.html
the other configurations are on par (within a few hundred pounds) or worse than the others.
http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/2007/tundra/specs.html
the other configurations are on par (within a few hundred pounds) or worse than the others.
I was talking about these things specfically. I know the 5.4 is a dog. If the current F-150 "Payload Package" is now 8200 instead of 7700 so what? My point is that the F-150 can be optioned up to a 10.25 ring gear and other HD items, such as brakes.isaiah58 said:...
40MPH to a dead stop. The Tundra was about 10 feet shorter than any other truck. When we ran the same stop with a 3,500 pound trailer, the Tundra still outperformed every other truck by a good margin. Dodge was the worst.
...
Gear's - the standard ring on the differntial (4.0l and 4.7l) is larger and heavier than any other out there, no matter what the upgrade. The on on the 5.7 liter set-up is by far as bullet proof as you will find
... This truck is technically a 1/2 truck that can comepete head on with 3/4 and 1 tons in ability.
Ford pulled the same you-know-what when they did a press day comparing the Fusion to Camry and Accord. They put an AWD Fusion in there, not a fair comparison.
If you take the same cab and bed configurations from each manufactuer with their biggest V8 and shortest gear, the tundra is up there mostly on top along with chevy. Example, all truck equiped with tow package, take the titan crewcab, 5.6 & f150 supercrew, 5.4 & chevy crewcab, 6.0 and compare them to the tundra crewmax with tow package, 5.7. Only the two newest truck are on top. Being the tundra has more hp and tq with that 6spd, no doubt it will tow better than the chevy. Like you said it ain't no better than the other half tons but the tundra does tow over 10k in every cab configurations like the chevy, unlike ford which drops to 9k+ as you go into the supercrew configurations. The ram don't technically have a crewcab halfton so it doesn't count, it's actually a extendedcab version like the current tundra doublecab.chakis24 said:did you go up against the vortec max or the standard 5.3? and thats pretty gutsy to say that the new tundra takes on 3/4 and one tons when its specs arent any better than the competitions half-tons. (those high figures on the tundra are for the regular cab)
http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/2007/tundra/specs.html
the other configurations are on par (within a few hundred pounds) or worse than the others.
I will have to see of any of the documents we have tells us how each of the trucks were equipped. I know they were as close as possible so we could have an hoest comparison.nikita said:How was the Ford equipped? Hate to quibble here on a Toyota site, but sometimes these comparisons sponsored by one manufacturer are "rigged" by underequipping the competition. Specifically, did the F-150 have the 7700lb GVW "payload package" , which includes a bigger rear axle, along with bigger brakes?
Lets put it this way against the Ford. The new Tundra can got from 0 - 50 MPH, back to 0 MPH, faster than a similary equipped Ford can go 0 - 50. This was part of a big test that included running both trucks on each side of the track, and have the two drivers drive each truck on each side. Matter of fact: They took the Ford with just the driver, then the Tundra with a full load and 4 passengers and still beat the Ford in a full 1/4 mile run.
The Tundras that you drove should have been 4.7 liter engines. not 5.7's
The ones we drove were all 4.7's. The 5.7 wasn't on the lot, just indoors.
The other trucks have never been able to keep up with the Tundra IMO. The Tundra has always been geared better for accelerating then the other trucks which to me has hurt it's towing capacity. The 2007 tundra(which we just recieved today BTW, not for sale but to be viewed and driven) is much more proportioned for towing and working.
I just tossed my comparison sheets but they were VERY close in options and packages.(compartivily speaking for each manufacturer)
I have more to follow but will fill in as time allows..
P.S. Our customer test vehicles just showed up this morning.
One 2007 Tundra D-cab short-bed and one 2007 Tundra standard cab long-bed.
The ones we drove were all 4.7's. The 5.7 wasn't on the lot, just indoors.
The other trucks have never been able to keep up with the Tundra IMO. The Tundra has always been geared better for accelerating then the other trucks which to me has hurt it's towing capacity. The 2007 tundra(which we just recieved today BTW, not for sale but to be viewed and driven) is much more proportioned for towing and working.
I just tossed my comparison sheets but they were VERY close in options and packages.(compartivily speaking for each manufacturer)
I have more to follow but will fill in as time allows..
P.S. Our customer test vehicles just showed up this morning.
One 2007 Tundra D-cab short-bed and one 2007 Tundra standard cab long-bed.
isaia58,
You once again harped on acceleration, in other words, the power advantage. I conceded that. Im not interested in the fastest 1/4 mile or towing over 10,000lbs for my use of a truck and the vast majority of customers dont have that as the primary factor, either. The 4.7 in my 2005 Tundra is overkill and I wish Toyota sold a V-6 4x4 Tundra, like the FJ. Marketing "bragging rights" of such things are more important to the automotive press, many of whom hate trucks anyway and praise the ones that are the most "car like".
You once again harped on acceleration, in other words, the power advantage. I conceded that. Im not interested in the fastest 1/4 mile or towing over 10,000lbs for my use of a truck and the vast majority of customers dont have that as the primary factor, either. The 4.7 in my 2005 Tundra is overkill and I wish Toyota sold a V-6 4x4 Tundra, like the FJ. Marketing "bragging rights" of such things are more important to the automotive press, many of whom hate trucks anyway and praise the ones that are the most "car like".
Nope, we drove 5.7s against the Dodge Hemi and the big engines on the others. All Double Cabs. One of the Tundra's was a 4x2, the others a SR5 4x4 and a Limited 4x4.HATEnFATE said:The Tundras that you drove should have been 4.7 liter engines. not 5.7's
The ones we drove were all 4.7's. The 5.7 wasn't on the lot, just indoors.
Nikita, I am little confused about your comments. The V6 on a 4x4 just would not work, as far as what a full size truck is designed for. That is why they have the Tacoma, and the 4Runner.
As far as ride, come one, the Tundra is the best of both worlds. Best turning radius in the class. Due to the frame design, most comfortable while being able to handle terrain and load. Most people that work ina truck also live in it, they need a smooth ride and plenty of room.
They drove 5.3 V8 in the chevy and 5.7 V6 in the Toyota.plane said:Yeah, that would be a big difference. The 6.0 far outpulls the 5.3. It would be very interesting to see exactly which Silverado version was tested.
Why would a V6 on a 4x4 "just would not work"? It has more hp and torque than my previous F-150 4x4 or the C1500 before that. How in the world is a 4Runner, or even a Tacoma going to carry 4x8 building matierials or an eight-foot, 1200lb cab over camper? Since I am at 6300 ft above sea level, 4x4 is desired. That is my "mission requirement" and heavy duty towing is not on it, as my utility trailer has a GVWR of 1500lb.isaiah58 said:Nikita, I am little confused about your comments. The V6 on a 4x4 just would not work, as far as what a full size truck is designed for. That is why they have the Tacoma, and the 4Runner.
Has the increased curb weight so bloated on the new Tundra, that the 4x4 model "needs" a V-8 to get out of its own way? This seems to be a common problem with the newer models from all mfgrs.
I am not an engineer. If a V6 could handle the loads long term then I am sure it would be available on the 4x4 configurations. Apparently a V8 is capable of generating more torque cross the 4x4 system than a V6 can. V8 versus V6 (look at 4Runner for example) can carry over 2,000 more pounds trailer weight on otherwise identically equipped vehicles.nikita said:Why would a V6 on a 4x4 "just would not work"? It has more hp and torque than my previous F-150 4x4 or the C1500 before that. How in the world is a 4Runner, or even a Tacoma going to carry 4x8 building matierials or an eight-foot, 1200lb cab over camper? Since I am at 6300 ft above sea level, 4x4 is desired. That is my "mission requirement" and heavy duty towing is not on it, as my utility trailer has a GVWR of 1500lb.
Has the increased curb weight so bloated on the new Tundra, that the 4x4 model "needs" a V-8 to get out of its own way? This seems to be a common problem with the newer models from all mfgrs.
As far as curb weight, did you look at the cargo capacity of the Toyota versus the competition? The frame being used is significantly lighter, because of the C frame in the rear section and reinforced C frame in the middle. Similar to what Ford uses on their heavy duty trucks. Smoother ride, more cargo capacity, reinforced below the passenger area for safety. On the F150 they use the heavier completely boxed frame, heavier, rough ride, less cargo capacity. Look at the Nissan, same full boxed frame, claims to tow the world - as long as you only have one passenger (the driver) and no cargo in the truck!
Hey, New on this forum because I am in the market for a new truck and like the looks of the New Tundra. I currently drive an '02 F250 Crew Cab with a Powerstroke Diesel and have two questions for you.isaiah58 said:The press, articles, and pictures do nothing to really convey how the all new Tundra really drives.
Our test drives, part of training, really showed me what this new truck is made of. We ran the D-Cab 5.7 against the competition: Ford, Titan, Dodge, Nissan and the new Silverado. Each truck had about 900 pounds of water in a container. Driver and 3 passengers on most runs.
0 - ??? - in the short distance we had, the Tundra was the only vehicle to break 50MPH (consistently). The Silverado came closest, but still well short. The Ford was terrible.
40MPH to a dead stop. The Tundra was about 10 feet shorter than any other truck. When we ran the same stop with a 3,500 pound trailer, the Tundra still outperformed every other truck by a good margin. Dodge was the worst.
Turns and evasive manuvers. Tundra was definately the most stable. Nissan has a lot to be desired. Maybe it can move a large load, but it is not built to control or stop with it.
Gear's - the standard ring on the differntial (4.0l and 4.7l) is larger and heavier than any other out there, no matter what the upgrade. The on on the 5.7 liter set-up is by far as bullet proof as you will find
Drivetrain - dual path intake, 6-speed tranny, this is what makes the truck perform, combined with the heavy duty gearing. This truck is technically a 1/2 truck that can comepete head on with 3/4 and 1 tons in ability.
1-Do you know when the Diesel Tundra will be available and will it be in a heavier duty application or the same 1/2 ton? Do you have any specs on the upcoming diesel?
2-Compared to the F150 and F250's, how much leg and elbow and leg room is there for the driver? I am a very large man, 6'6", 340 lbs and and F250 has ample front room but an F150 feels a little tight especially the headroom when entering and exiting the doors. Would you say it has more or less room than the F150 in the front?
Thank you.
Have you looked at the fuel economy of the 5.7 v8? it's not far off from the 4.0 v6 and better then the 4.7 v8 so really getting a v8 now isn't that big of a hinderance on fuel econ.
the New Tundra has plenty of room up front but thats something that is totally subjective person to person as is the available power from the truck. I'd say just stop by the nearest dealer and see what you think.
There are no realease dates on diesels and from what I head, thats not the market Toyota is after right now.
the New Tundra has plenty of room up front but thats something that is totally subjective person to person as is the available power from the truck. I'd say just stop by the nearest dealer and see what you think.
There are no realease dates on diesels and from what I head, thats not the market Toyota is after right now.
My Powerstroke averages 11 miles to the gallon and about 15 on the highway on long trips so I don't expect the Tundra to do better (probably due to my driving habits). I use the truck as my personal car and to tow my track car on an open trailer (about 6000lbs). The F250 is a great tow vehicle with plenty of power and brakes. It is also very roomy in the inside.HATEnFATE said:Have you looked at the fuel economy of the 5.7 v8? it's not far off from the 4.0 v6 and better then the 4.7 v8 so really getting a v8 now isn't that big of a hinderance on fuel econ.
the New Tundra has plenty of room up front but thats something that is totally subjective person to person as is the available power from the truck. I'd say just stop by the nearest dealer and see what you think.
There are no realease dates on diesels and from what I head, thats not the market Toyota is after right now.
I stopped by Lehmann Toyota today in North Miami and they did not have any Tundra's. The fleet manager said that he has trucks incoming and had no pricing available till after their "special meeting" on Wednesday. They also told me "no" diesels are coming to the US-maybe that will change after their "special meeting" also. We'll see.
You know that eventually Toyota will HAVE to release a diesel in the US if they ever expect to compete with ford, dodge and chevy for the large truck market, so you know it will happen it's just a matter of when. The next thing on the diesel agenda is producing a cleaner diesel truck that meets US emissions.
Diesels are the only way to go if you pull heavy loads on a regular basis since the average fuel economy only drops a mile or two per gallon when your towing. I drove from Des Moines IA to minneapolis MN to pick up a couple draft horses with an 05 F250 6.0 turbo diesel. Averaged 12 mpg on the trip up(empty) and 11 mpg on the trip back(loaded with 4000 lbs)
Toyota Knows that this will have to happen or they will never be taken seriously by the guys that need the powerhouse trucks.
P.S. we now have 3 07 Tundra's on our lot. Not for sale but for looking at.
1 regular cab, long box V6 standard trim
1 double cab, short box 4.7 V8 limited
1 double cab, long box 4.7 V8 SR5
Diesels are the only way to go if you pull heavy loads on a regular basis since the average fuel economy only drops a mile or two per gallon when your towing. I drove from Des Moines IA to minneapolis MN to pick up a couple draft horses with an 05 F250 6.0 turbo diesel. Averaged 12 mpg on the trip up(empty) and 11 mpg on the trip back(loaded with 4000 lbs)
Toyota Knows that this will have to happen or they will never be taken seriously by the guys that need the powerhouse trucks.
P.S. we now have 3 07 Tundra's on our lot. Not for sale but for looking at.
1 regular cab, long box V6 standard trim
1 double cab, short box 4.7 V8 limited
1 double cab, long box 4.7 V8 SR5
I'm so glad to see that regular cab "work trucks" are being produced at the beginning. This is much different than GM's strategy of producing "Classic" models along side the new ones.
toyota is coming out with a diesel engine, but its not going so well because there having a hard time for the diesel motor to pass gay us emissions.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Toyota Nation Forum
ToyotaNation Forum is a community dedicated to all Toyota models. Come discuss the Camry, Tacoma, Highlander, 4Runner, Rav4 and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
sdspeed
506 Replies
1990Toyota
405 Replies
93celicaconv
211 Replies
