Toyota Nation Forum banner
1 - 20 of 62 Posts

·
Research is Your Friend!!
2006 GTO
Joined
·
850 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Just got back from test driving both rigs, back to back. Below is my honest, no BS assessment of the two competing trucks. Enjoy!! (skip to the bottom if you don't want to read all this). No camera, so no pictures, sorry. . . .



Tundra:

I test drove the Tundra first, basically because the Toyota dealership was first in the line of dealerships (all owned by the same company.). The Toyota salesman was knowledgeable, and obviously was trained on the new Tundra. Helpful, curious, and he knew his stuff. . . . thanks Mark, if your reading.

This particular model was a Gold colored Double Cab SR5, Limited 2WD with cloth bucket seats and 18 inch wheels. The dealership had 8 Tundras, all with the 5.7 liter, and Mark said there has been alot of people looking at them, but most of those were just curious, and not people looking to buy one. That dealership has not sold one as of yet. By far my favorite was the bright blue colored DC SR5 with 20's.

Exterior: B+

My initial impression was 1) it's a big truck, even in Double Cab form!! and 2) it looks much better in person, but that eyebrow thing on the hood has to go. It looks plain stupid. The nose is very short, and the front looks alot like a Dodge (Mark was the first one to bring it up, and I agree). These are my opinions, and obviously looks are subjective, so take it for what it's worth. I paid close attention to the panel gaps due to the fact that Toyota intentionally made them wide to give it a "rugged look". The gaps are large, but not terrible, and if I didn’t pay attention to them, I wouldn’t have noticed. The tailgate is awesome with the hydraulic up/down assist. Overall, I was pleasantly surprised, and like it much better in person. If you have not seen one in person, go check one out before you call it ugly. . . .


Interior: C- for material, C for fit and Finish, A- for ergonomics

First, let me start off by saying I'm a Truck guy. My current Truck is my daily driver, and in Texas, that is not a uncommon thing. Due in large part to the F150's interior released 4 years ago, truck owners now expect a nice interior, no excuses. To be honest, I am not sure how the Silverado and Sierra sold as well as they did after the new F150 was released, because the old GM interiors are bad (and I own one!!). But I digress. . . . .

Here is my take on the Tundra Interior.

First, the dash looks better in person. I was not a fan of the two (or three, or four) colored dash of the Tundra when I saw it in pictures, but seeing it in person it looks better. The salesman said that the reason for the grey section and the black section of the dash was so that the driver could "navigate" around the dash/controls without taking his eye off the road. Best reason I have heard yet, but it still looks weird (but it could grow on me). The HVAC controls are not too far way, like I thought they would be when I first saw them in pictures. My hand was able to rest on the shifter and articulate most of the knobs with no problem.

The instrument cluster was goofy, and each gauge being in its own "hole" reminded me of a Nissan, and that is not a compliment. I did like the brightness of the illumination, and the color was great. The gauges were easy to read.

Now for the bad news. I found the plastic on the interior to be absolutely horrendous!!! And that comes form a '03 GM Truck owner, so you know it has to be bad. Like I said above, the layout was great, and the color(s) I could get used to, but the plastic was C-H-E-A-P!!! This particular model had faux wood grain plastic that was the worst I have ever seen in a vehicle. You could barely make out the wood grain, so it basically looked like brown plastic all over the place. There was a ton of little storage spaces all over the interior, which was a nice touch, but the doors on them were very flimsy and cheap. The HVAC knobs had a nice feel to them, and a very tactile feel to the rotation, so A+ on how the control’s felt.

The seats were very comfortable, and the material was attractive. I did not sit in the back, so I can not comment on the roominess of the back seats.

Did I mention the interior plasitic was cheap, and flimsy?


Performance: A+

When I tell you this truck can move, believe me, it can move!!! Great acceleration, not too much noise form the engine (it actually sounded good), and the 6 speed was great at keeping the motor in it's sweet spot. The salesman was basically begging me to "knock the cobwebs out", so I did!!! Great motor, great motor, GREAT MOTOR!!!

The brakes did a great job at hauling me down, and there was alot more left in them. Good feel to them, and they look mean as hell behind the rims (in other words, they are big, bad, and non-apologetic).

The turning radius was phenomenal. In my '03, I would’ a had to do the 'ol 3 point thing, but I just kept cranking the wheel and the thing kept turning harder and harder. Nice.

The ride was comfortable, and the rear had a very compliant "give" to it over speed bumps. Kinda makes me wonder if it had the towing package (should have checked, sorry).

Overall: Solid B+

This is a great 1st (3rd) attempt at the full size truck market for Toyota. They clearly did their homework on the Capabilities of this thing, and it would not be far fetched to call it a 3/4 ton truck in a 1/2 ton body. It really is that good.

BUT. . . . .the interior is inexcusable. When the 4 year old F150's interior outclasses the brand new Toyota Tundra's, there is clearly something wrong. It's not even the colors or the layout of the interior, it is the cheap plastic and the flimsy pieces. . . .Toyota truly dropped the ball on this one.

And don't fool yourself and say "well people buy trucks because of it's performance and don't care about what the interior looks like". That may have been true 5 years ago, but Ford set the bar with it's new interior, GM followed with it's new GMT-900's (more on that later), Dodge doesn't care, and Toyota. . . . .tried. . . . . .but failed in this "truck guys" mind. Why not have performance and a nice interior, the market now demands it.

Likes: Sweet engine, great tranny, innovative tailgate, and great ergonomics on the inside.

Dislikes: Goofy looking uni-brow thing on the hood, Gauge cluster is odd, and that CHEAP interior.

Verdict:Great 1st (3rd) attempt. Toyota will sell 200,000 easily, based on the performance alone. For me, I'd consider it, if the interior wasn’t so CHEAP!!!



BIG BREATH. . . . .


Silverado:

Right after I got done with the Tundra, I went across the street to the Chevrolet dealership. The Silverado I test-drove was a White, 2WD Crewcab LT with the "work truck" interior, cloth bench seat and was the only VotecMAXX they had. VortecMAXX is the 3/4 ton 6.0 liter GM motor, but in a 1/2 ton chassis. It makes 367hp and 375 ft*lb. There were alot in stock, but like I said, this was the only one with the 6.0 liter. The sales lady was nice, but not knowledgeable about the trucks at all. Couldn't tell me the stats on the motor, and had no idea about packages, or standard features. . . .not good. It had 18" wheels as well.


Exterior: A

I have seen these trucks several times, and I really like the way they look. Very clean, not pretentious or cartoonish. . . .basically looks like Barry Sanders scoring a touchdown ("Yea, I've been here before. . . ."). That said, the wheels were ugly, and the tailpipe is puny (and points straight out the back!!! Stupid). Also, I wish they would have added more plastic on the inside of the rear wheel wells, it looks unfinished with the small piece GM has installed now.

Also, on a related note, the panel gaps on the Chevy were at least 1/2 the size of the Tundra’s. No biggie, right? Well, other than GM really tightened up the gaps to help with aero, which they did. These New GM trucks are the first to have undergone wind tunnel testing, and they are slick, to the tune of .39 coefficient of drag!!! by comparison, the old C5 Corvettes had a c.o.d of just .36- so not too shabby for a big truck.

Speaking of big, the Silverado looks smaller than the Tundra, and it very well may be. But only those with a "mine's bigger than yours" complex are going to notice, because they both are LARGE trucks!!


Interior: A for material, A for fit and Finish, B+ for ergonomics

I'll keep this short and sweet. Stylistically, the Silverado's interior was everything the Tundra's was not. Simple, well put together (by the looks of it), not at all cartoonish, and the fit and finish was top notch. I know I'm going to get flamed for say this, but looks wise, the Silverado's interior is head and shoulders above the Tundra’s, and I predict the buying public will come to the same conclusion.

The gauge cluster was nice and bright, and I didn’t have to look into different "holes" to view each of them. The buttons on the radio/HVAC were on the small side, so I do think the Tundra has edge on ergonomics. Also, the Silverado's seats were uncomfortable with too much padding in the middle of the back. This was the bench seat, the Sierra I sat in (after the Silverado test-drive) had very comfortable bucket seats.

The only big issue I had with quality was the lever on the top glove box looked to be flimsy, but I didnt open it, the sales lady did.

Performance: B+

The 6.0 VortecMAXX is no slouch, that is for sure. I didn't feel the "4 second delay" in acceleration we have all read about, but I didn't gun it from a dead stop either. I predict the general buying public will never know it's there (as they have never noticed it before), so I don't see this as an issue, and I was looking for it. . . .

I honestly think that the thing that holds the VortecMAXX back is the 4 speed auto. After driving the Tundra, the RPM drop between gears is quite noticeable in the Chevy, whereas in the Tundra, it was non existent. The Chevy almost seemed "bogged" in comparison when shifting. The new GM 6 speed auto's can't come soon enough, and their coming (already in the Escalade's and Denali's). . . .

The brakes were on par with the Tundra's, but admittedly I did not test either to their limit. In every day driving, they were comparable in feel and confidence.

The Turing radius was noticeably bigger in the Silverado, but better than my '03. The new rack-and-pinion steering is a welcome upgrade compared to the old and sloppy reciprocating ball steering of the last generation Silverado.

The ride was stiffer in the Silverado (but not stiff). It did have the tow-package, so some of the stiffness is due to the stiffer rear suspension that comes with it. . . .

Overall: Solid A

GM did exactly what it needed to do to keep it's customers happy. No over the top exterior styling, no Technicolor interior, and a fantastic quality, fit and finish, and material upgrade to the Rubbermaid interior that was the last generation GM trucks.

I wish the 6.0 was mated to the 6 speed auto, and the ergonomics on the dash were a little better, but other than that, the Silverado is one solid and good looking truck. Performance wise, the Tundra has the edge, due in most part to the great transmission, and the smooth revs of the 5.7 liter. The 6.0 will definitely benefit from the 6 speed when it comes out, but as it is now, it is still quite capable.


Likes: Sweet engine, GREAT interior, meaty look with out the bad aftertaste.

Dislikes: Stupid tailpipe that is too small and exits out the rear!!! Small buttons on some controls. 4-speed auto needs 2 more gears, now. . . .

Verdict:Will keep GM truck buyers coming back, and gives them no excuse to shop anywhere else. . . .other than maybe GMC!!! What it lacks in brawn (and it aint much), it makes up for in clean styling and a fantastic interior.


CONCLUSION:

GM better keep an eye on Toyota's Tundra, because once they get the interior fixed, it's perfect. As it is right now. . . . .No reason for a GM guy, or a Ford guy to defect. I predict most of Toyotas conquest sales will come from Dodge and Nissan.




Thanks for reading (if you could make it all the way through). Feel free to disagree, but I am exactly who Toyota wants (and needs) to buy their new Tundra. As it is, I'll keep what I have, for now. . . . . .
 

·
GO PATRIOTS!
2007 Tundra
Joined
·
8,676 Posts
Nice review. They are both nice trucks, but both with any kind of options get REAL pricey, guess thats just the way it is now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
Remember that GM (Chevy and GMC) is number one in truck sales and Toyota is really only gunning for Dodge, (Nissan hardly even counts) at least for now.

I have looked at both, but have not test driven either. Interors are subjective, but I do not agree with your conclusions. The work truck Silverado dash is too busy (two small gloveboxes?), has poor quality chromed plastic around the instruments and the HVAC controls (right out of a Cobalt) look and feel delicate and will be hard to use with gloves on. The Toyota you tested had some kind of fake wood, not an even comparison with a work truck Chevy interior. The cheaper Toyota dash looks better, but still not best-in-class. Ford still sets the standard for truck interiors.

i agree with your exterior comments. GM has IMO always had the best truck styling. Smaller panel gaps, however may backfire if squeaks and rattles develop under hard use. Please, Toyota, paint the grille body color, like the last Tundra.

The 6.0 Vortec does have the throttle delay problem. Two owners of 2500 Silverados here at work have experienced it and they consider it dangerous in certain situations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
Hey guys, I have posted here awhile and had a 05' Tundra. I loved the truck but my lease was up before the new Tundra has gotten into full production.

I decided on the new line of Chevy re-designed trucks - a 07' Avalanche LT3. I have also seen (but not driven ) the new Tundra. I really liked the new Tundra styling and size, capacities, etc. However I am NOT enthused about the interior. I have to agree on the new interior of the Tundra being a mistake in terms of material choices - to many "painted" no texture plastic that remind me of my wife's 04' Nissan Quest (Nissan ditched that interior after 3 years and went to higher grade plastics). I have no doubt the QUALITY of the fit and finish will be good but you can only make grey plastic's look so good....:disappoin

Overall I think I'd give the Tundra a year to work out and issues, especially since the Tundra will be built at a new facility, with new part suppliers, new workers, new engine, new rear diff, brakes, tranny, etc. This is no slight against the workers, I have worked many years as a FAA certified inspector - even Aerospace companies that have defect rates that make Toyota wet itself can't overcome 1st year design & build quality issues. It takes humans, and we are not perfect. :eek:

On the new GM interiors - I can't even believe it is a GM product. The switches are Euro-style and so is the leather seating, HVAC, NAV, etc. I think they lifted alotf of components from their Opel division in Europe. Thusfar desipte the pot holes/full sized forst heave's I have no squeaks/issues with the new interior of the Chevy. SO even though I have leased a Avy I still love Toyota's, but give this design a chance to take off - I would let the 1st year owners fix the bugs for you - similar to the 1st year Tacoma's that nearly wrecked Toyota's JD Power ratings. Here is a article I read today on the Freep.com about Toyota's concern's on new design/build issues.

http://http://www.freepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070209/BUSINESS01/702090427/1014
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
735 Posts
Nice review. Thanks for the input. I'm afraid to drive either one, I just finished paying off my current truck (WOHOO!) and all vehicles in my sig are paid for. If I test drive them I might be going home with one, and I don't want any more payments for a while.

GM is offering the 6.2L 403 horse 415 ft-lb torque in the 1/2 ton Sierra Denali line with a 6 speed automatic. Since the Toyota Motor is so powerful it makes me wonder if the general is going to take the engine "exclusivity" from the Denali and drop it in the Silverado/Sierra line?

It's going to be interesting to see how these trucks do. An interesting side note is that GM sells very few 6.0L 1/2 ton trucks compared to 5.3 and 4.8L 1/2 ton sales.... so is the average 1/2 ton truck buyer even looking for a high HP/Torque truck?

I think Toyota will soon be expanding their Texas Plant ;)
 

·
it is what it is
07 Camry SE
Joined
·
2,294 Posts
SILVERadoTACOMA said:
Nice review. Thanks for the input. I'm afraid to drive either one, I just finished paying off my current truck (WOHOO!) and all vehicles in my sig are paid for. If I test drive them I might be going home with one, and I don't want any more payments for a while.

GM is offering the 6.2L 403 horse 415 ft-lb torque in the 1/2 ton Sierra Denali line with a 6 speed automatic. Since the Toyota Motor is so powerful it makes me wonder if the general is going to take the engine "exclusivity" from the Denali and drop it in the Silverado/Sierra line?

It's going to be interesting to see how these trucks do. An interesting side note is that GM sells very few 6.0L 1/2 ton trucks compared to 5.3 and 4.8L 1/2 ton sales.... so is the average 1/2 ton truck buyer even looking for a high HP/Torque truck?

I think Toyota will soon be expanding their Texas Plant ;)
One little test drive, come on:lol:
 

·
Research is Your Friend!!
2006 GTO
Joined
·
850 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
nikita said:
Remember that GM (Chevy and GMC) is number one in truck sales and Toyota is really only gunning for Dodge, (Nissan hardly even counts) at least for now.

I have looked at both, but have not test driven either. Interors are subjective, but I do not agree with your conclusions. The work truck Silverado dash is too busy (two small gloveboxes?), has poor quality chromed plastic around the instruments and the HVAC controls (right out of a Cobalt) look and feel delicate and will be hard to use with gloves on. The Toyota you tested had some kind of fake wood, not an even comparison with a work truck Chevy interior. The cheaper Toyota dash looks better, but still not best-in-class. Ford still sets the standard for truck interiors.
Your right, design and style are subjective. To call the chrome trim around the instruments poor quality is questionable, afterall they are behind a piece of clear plastic, so how could you judge quality? I honestly like the way it looks, but there again, that's my oppinion, so we can disagree. The Radio you speak of is GM "family" radio/HVAC, and yes, unfortunatly it is shared with alot of GM vehicles. It is nice, and easy to use, but the buttons are smaller than I would like. To knock the radio/HVAC due to the fact that it is shared with another vehicle is unfair. Toyota does the same thing. . . .

I have never understood the "use with work gloves on" argument. . . . I have owned trucks my entire life and can count on one hand the number of times I have driven, or even touched, the interior of my truck with gloves on. You wear golves to keep your hands clean, and free from scratches . . . . .why in the world would you touch the interior of your truck with dirty gloves? Makes no scence, and I find the argument strange.

The fake wood on the interior of the Tundra was due to it being a "Limited". This lead me to believe it was the more upscale interior. To say it was unfair to compare it to the work truck interior (i.e. the lowest end of the interior options) of the Silverado is true. . . . .It should have been tilted in the Tundra's favor (due to the "Limited" package), but it was not. The wood was terrible, and the quality of the plastic is too. I stand by my assesment, the interior of the Tundra is it Achilles' heel, and I think the Truck buying public will agree. . . .

nikita said:
i agree with your exterior comments. GM has IMO always had the best truck styling. Smaller panel gaps, however may backfire if squeaks and rattles develop under hard use. Please, Toyota, paint the grille body color, like the last Tundra.

The 6.0 Vortec does have the throttle delay problem. Two owners of 2500 Silverados here at work have experienced it and they consider it dangerous in certain situations.
Have small panel gaps hurt any other car? No. I know trucks will be used more aggresivly, but to say panel gaps are going to "cause" squeeks and rattles is laughable. The panels are not touching. . . . .so how could a small gap "cause" a rattle or a squeek?

As far as the 4 second delay. . . . .I experienced nothing out of the ordinary when I testdrove the Silverado. From a stop, it had good acceleration (though I did not have it floored), and when passing, it shifted into second and ran like a scawld ass ape!!! Unless your dragracing these things, you will never notice the delay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
735 Posts
engineer said:
I have never understood the "use with work gloves on" argument. . . . I have owned trucks my entire life and can count on one hand the number of times I have driven, or even touched, the interior of my truck with gloves on. You wear golves to keep your hands clean, and free from scratches . . . . .why in the world would you touch the interior of your truck with dirty gloves? Makes no scence, and I find the argument strange.
I thought that was one of the most retarded things I've ever heard as well. I spend many summers with my grandparents and cousins cutting and splitting firewood (both for sale and to use for winter) and gloves were mandatory! Splinters hurt :lol: The FIRST thing you did (either right before you got in, or right after) when you got in the truck was to take your gloves off and set them on the seat. They were nasty, muddy, and dirty. You have a much better and more comforatble grip on the steering wheel with them off. I also worked as a geotechnical field technician on large construction sites for a year and the guys I worked with always took their gloves off when entering the job trailer or pick-ups.

ALTHOUGH for the average consumer, seeing a commercial with a "manly" guy "ruggedly" turning knobs with gloves on helps create an "image" and it's one that will sell a lot of trucks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
309 Posts
I agree that most conquest sale will come from Dodge. The way I see it, most undecided buyers before were swayed by the Hemi, so the new Toyota 5.7 will sway thoes back from Dodge I think. Plus to me the Tundra overall exterior wise seems to be going for the Dodge look. Not saying that's what I think it looks like, but it reminds me more of a Ram than anything else.

I'm still not convinced that it will make it's 200,000 sales goal easily. I still haven't built and priced a tundra compared to something else, but I did look at the local dealers inventorys and let me say I can't see spending $28-29K for a double cab that has a V6 in it. They must have been loaded, but still that's crazy. And I still can't imagine fleets buying many of these for their work trucks with the high price. We've got two Ford dealers advertising on the Radio right now F-150's for $11,999, and they've got 15 to choose from. Now I know these are strippers, but I still can't see paying that much more for the tundra.
 

·
Millions &millions served
2013 Camry SE
Joined
·
8,078 Posts
your biased grading aside, i still prefer the tundra and so do all the magazine people. you're the only one that gave the silvy and edge over the toyota.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
589 Posts
Camread said:
your biased grading aside, i still prefer the tundra and so do all the magazine people. you're the only one that gave the silvy and edge over the toyota.
Uhh, I'd say he's far from the "only" one.

Most magazines haven't even gotten a chance to thoroughly compare the two. My guess? Many magazines will choose the 5.7 Tundra over the 6.0 Silverado because of the honey of a motor. Where Tundra falls behind is in value at the lower (and highest volume) price points. Toyota has, for lack of a better term, "optimistic" pricing on the base and midrange trucks. When you can walk out of a Chevy dealer with the enormously popular 5.3 Silverado for the same price as a V6 or stripper 4.7 Tundra, it's a lot harder to justify.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
309 Posts
Camread said:
your biased grading aside, i still prefer the tundra and so do all the magazine people. you're the only one that gave the silvy and edge over the toyota.
Name the magazine's that you are refering to, because I haven't seen them. In fact Motor trend said the Tundra was to busy chasing the last Silverado. The ones I have read have been about 70/30 in favor of the silverado
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
290 Posts
haha, easy fix for your biased review:

Exterior: I give Tundra an A for its strong, tough yet modern look. No offensive, the Silverado is so 1980s, so I will give it a B-.

Interior: I didn't have chance to sit in a new Tundra yet because they put it on the stage in the autoshow I attended. From the videos shown in www.toyotaiguide.com, Tundra's interior seems quite functional and easy to operate. But I did sit in the new Silverado. Fake wood and small buttons just turn me off. How about give them a tie score for interior :)


Price? real life MPG?
 

·
Registered
2005 Toyota Tacoma
Joined
·
131 Posts
I agree. The Tundra's overall interior does look better. I’ve been in the Silverado, and though it was nice, I wasn’t blown away by any means. If I really wanted a plush interior, I’d buy a Lexus. I like a truck that’s sporty and rugged on the inside; the Tundra’s dash is a refreshing turn from the out-dated and boring appearance of other full sizers. That wood grain in the Tundra may have been ugly, but of course there are more models available without it. It should come down to more things than the dash anyway, such as horsepower, torque, towing capacity, acceleration, braking, payload, etc. I believe the Tundra edges out GM based on an overall comparison. As far as cost goes, the top trims in the F-150 and Silverado/Sierra aren’t exactly cheap. Toyota’s have always had a higher upfront cost, but down the road they’re still running fine while other brands are having problems. Resale value for most Toyotas is higher as well because of quality. For me the Tundra’s engine and tranny alone make it the best. :thumbup:
 

·
Research is Your Friend!!
2006 GTO
Joined
·
850 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
TRD BlackKnight said:
I agree. The Tundra's overall interior does look better. I’ve been in the Silverado, and though it was nice, I wasn’t blown away by any means. If I really wanted a plush interior, I’d buy a Lexus. I like a truck that’s sporty and rugged on the inside; the Tundra’s dash is a refreshing turn from the out-dated and boring appearance of other full sizers. That wood grain in the Tundra may have been ugly, but of course there are more models available without it. It should come down to more things than the dash anyway, such as horsepower, torque, towing capacity, acceleration, braking, payload, etc. I believe the Tundra edges out GM based on an overall comparison. As far as cost goes, the top trims in the F-150 and Silverado/Sierra aren’t exactly cheap. Toyota’s have always had a higher upfront cost, but down the road they’re still running fine while other brands are having problems. Resale value for most Toyotas is higher as well because of quality. For me the Tundra’s engine and tranny alone make it the best. :thumbup:
That's fine, by no means is the the end-all be-all of Tundra vs Silverado comparisons. I understand this is a Toyota forum and the bias is going to lean that way, so I'm fine with that. This was just my impression, after taking each for a testdrive. . . . no speculation or conjecture, just what I saw and felt. . . .

I guess in the end I was expecting alot more from the Tundra. . . .something that basically said, "if you buy any other full size truck, your an idot. . . .", but I didn't get that impression. The performance was great, but IMHO, I was totally let down by the interior. And remember, just like GM, Ford, Nissan, etc have to have something head and sholders above the Camry (in every aspect) to win conquest sales, so does Toyota with it's new Tundra. . . . .and I don't see that happening, not with that cheap interior.

And as far as capabilitys go, the Silverado does not lag behind the Tundra that much, and the difference will not be seen by those using these trucks to 75% of thier capabilities. Once the Silverado gets the 6 speed tranny, I'd say they would be pretty evenly matched. Like I said, why not have performance and a nice interior (the layout in the Tundra was fine, but the cheap plastic made me glad to get back into my '03 Chevy, yea, it's that cheap.).

Reliabilty in Domestic trucks has been on par, if not better than that of foriegn makes, so lets not start spewing the "reliability" and "it'll still be running long after your truck is dead" BS. Besides, this is Toyota's first full size truck, so how are you coming up with that conclusion anyways. Just becasue Toyota makes great cars (and midsize trucks), dont think that automatically tanslates into great full size trucks. :rolleyes:
 

·
CRESSIDA!!!
1984 Toyota Cressida
Joined
·
5,632 Posts
No, the T100 was Toyota's fullsize truck. And many have gone over 200,000 miles no problem. If you think Toyota doesn't know how to make a truck, you're sadly mistaken.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
Dude - I love Toyota's but I nearly choked on my coffee when I read that the T-100 (in your mind) was a full-sized truck. Sorry, but full sized trucks have payload capacities and GVWR's to back up their abilities. That is something Toyota sorely lacked until the new Tundra was released.

The Tundra will no doubt change the opinion of a lot of people. I guess I'm with engineer, though. It's not OUR minds Toyota has to change, it's the thousand of RV'ers who tow thousands of miles a year, the farm worker that overloads the bed and pulls a trailer WITH the overloaded bed full of hay or grain, the guys who work contruction and tow their tools in a full sized carrier tow-behind, etc..

That takes more then a T-100
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Great post, Engineer. Today I drove the SR5 4x4 with the 5.7, Double Cab. Great truck and am considering trading for either an F-150, Tundra, or 07 Sierra/Silverado.

I too have had a pickup in the family forever. Mostly for pleasure, but also to haul stuff from Home Depot, motorcycles on a trailer, or mulch etc in a utility trailer. I live in the mountains of N. GA, so I need good power, strong brakes, and good handling. My 06 Sierra Z-71 is okay. I give it a C, so am considering something more advanced, better handling, etc.

The Tundra, as you stated has a great motor, but the dash is awful in my opinion. The recessed in "tubes" gauges are goofy. I guess someone could take a Dremel tool and cut the plastic away from in front of the gauges to make them more appealing.

On the way home from the Toyota dealer, I stopped at a Ford dealer and drove an F-150 Lariat with the Chrome package, in "red fire." Gorgeous truck, and much more comfortable seats than the Tundra. Both were leather. My only complaint is the lack of power in the F-150 compared to the Tundra with an 81 hp advantage. Not to mention 6 spd vs. 4. For a long trip across country I would take the Ford. To have fun in the mountains, better power and handling, I would say the Tundra gets the nod. I'm going to drive an 07 Sierra/Silverado too to make an educated comparison before making the decision. So far, with rebates, the Ford appears to be about $3K less!
 
1 - 20 of 62 Posts
Top