Toyota Tundra rumors

[siegen]

American trucks are proven through time and experience.  tough as nails and willing and able for more. 

From my experience, new American trucks are tough, at least the frames, however the components and small things tend to need constant repair and maintenance (this is coming from experience, not the Internet). It's always great to be evangelical, but it is better to be realistic. American makes have a lot of experience making these products, which have remained mostly unchanged thoughout the years, but they are not without their problems.

toyota can recreate or assemble a pile of parts to create product, but that wont give it character or personality.  and it certainly wont give it  the more intangible or even undefinable and elusive quality known as soul.  and thats something that almost all if not every toyota/lexus product lacks. 

We're not talking about sports cars, we're talking about trucks, character isn't as important as what it can do. And on that note, I don't think a Toyota truck lacks any soul or character when compared to a GM truck. They are just trucks. Maybe when Ferrari and Lamborghini enter the full size truck market, we will see some character and soul, but until then, they are just appliances like a Corolla.

This IS a GM website, the most unbiased one i've ever been too.

...unless you're talking about Japanese makes. Then the gloves come off.

Accelerations numbers w/o any payload/trailer are redundant and meaningless.

I disagree somewhat. 0-60 and 60-0 times are important with a full load. But acceleration numbers without a load are important as well. What percentage of the time do you have a full load vs without? If you take every person who owns a truck, and you count the minutes they spend towing/hauling vs not, I bet you will probably come up with a percentage less than 1%.

[76ChevyTrucker]

I'd say my truck has soul...and after 30 years of being driven, and driven, and driven, and towing, and hauling, and being beaten, and cursed (at least once a week), and the being beaten some more. I'd say my truck has a BIG soul. And I don't think that the differential breaking is something that I'd call minor, although with over 270,000 miles on the odometer and its still slinging around the original 1976 80W-80 rear end oil is pretty damn good for anything. I mostly don't like the Japanese trucks moving into the full-size market simply because everyone is going to latch onto them, then find out they AREN'T as capable as their ga-billion year old Silverado, F-150, or Ram and then the backlash would be huge.

[Newbiewar]

Yet none of this power translates into additional performance

Tundra

0-60

7.6sec

1/4mi

15.7 @ 88.2

0-90

17.9

60-0

135ft

Silverado

0-60

8.5

1/4mi

16.1 @ 87.0

0-90

19.6

60-0

151

http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/pickup...ison/index.html

178965[/snapback]

no offense, but quarter mile times dont sell trucks... endurance sells trucks...

GM has the Most Dependable Long Lasting Trucks on the road, and they continue to sell them every year to the masses.

And there is no way to know how the chevy was equipped... the photo they use wasnt a 2006, and the photo would indicate that this vehicle probably isnt equiped with 5.3... they want to complain about the ride/handling... well there are several suspension packages that you can get your vehcile equiped with... some are designed to be comfortable empty (the way most trucks are used)... which rear gears did they have?

you failed to mention ---> best fuel ecconomy, quetest interior...

"Hampered by small tires and tall gears (it indicated 50 mph still in first gear), the Chevy ranked fourth, the return being the best mileage, even breaking the 20-mpg barrier (and EPA highway rating) on one leg; the truck's relatively low profile and new electric cooling fans helped. This translates into quiet cruising--below 2000 rpm at 80 mph--but will net a downshift at the slightest of grades (and require two for descents); we'd stick with the 3.73:1 gears if we planned on pulling anything."

From my experience, new American trucks are tough, at least the frames, however the components and small things tend to need constant repair and maintenance (this is coming from experience, not the Internet). It's always great to be evangelical, but it is better to be realistic. American makes have a lot of experience making these products, which have remained mostly unchanged thoughout the years, but they are not without their problems.

We're not talking about sports cars, we're talking about trucks, character isn't as important as what it can do. And on that note, I don't think a Toyota truck lacks any soul or character when compared to a GM truck. They are just trucks. Maybe when Ferrari and Lamborghini enter the full size truck market, we will see some character and soul, but until then, they are just appliances like a Corolla.

...unless you're talking about Japanese makes. Then the gloves come off. 

I disagree somewhat. 0-60 and 60-0 times are important with a full load. But acceleration numbers without a load are important as well. What percentage of the time do you have a full load vs without? If you take every person who owns a truck, and you count the minutes they spend towing/hauling vs not, I bet you will probably come up with a percentage less than 1%.

179394[/snapback]

lets take off the gloves...

have you ever driven with any of these vehicles loaded? I've driven the tundra loaded... with a load of 2k lbs... and i'll tell you fish tailing at 55mph isnt good enough for me...

If you are going to insult chevy's reliablity as far as trucks go... perhaps you should take a look at Chevy200k.com

or the % of trucks that are still on the road over the last 20 years... and you'll see thats why GM can claim that their trucks are the most reliable long lasting trucks on the market...

does anyone ever pay attention to the 0-60 speeds of peterbuilts or kenworths? and if they did would it be empty or full? those trucks will pull more then any silverado or tundra... and i bet you they would lose any race...

[CARBIZ]

Well, I agree that the girls who buy the Tundra would be worried about the 0-60 times to get to the beauty parlor, but to anyone else it doesn't matter.

By the SS Silverarado if that is important. That'll blow the doors off any pick up from Toyota - even the Turd, I mean TRD edition! LOL

If ride/handing is more important than buy the Avalanche. The characteristics are different and that truck handles/rides nicely when empty because of its different rear suspension, etc.

To sell a million vehicles a year in the world's largest market, ya gotta step up to the plate with something for everybody and the GM pick ups have done that better, longer than anybody so far.

Toyota has wised up, but they aren't quite there yet.

[thedriver]

Honestly, all posturing aside, Toyota could be a problem for GM. Everyone needs to remember that they DID build the best compact trucks for about 20 years, from the late 70s to the early 90's, better and longer lasting than anyone. When they decided to try the large truck market they brought a Dakota sized joke. No one has ever accused Toyota of getting it right the first time. The second Tundra was better, but still not that good. I don't think the new Tundra will be the truck to compete, but it shows they haven't given up. If they can figure how to translate the superiority if their compact market biggie sized, something will come along. The first couple of generations of Camry were pretty lame too, but look who owns the mid sized market now. . .

I am no fan of Toyota (outside of the early 80's Celica) but this needs to be looked at in the long view.

[siegen]

lets take off the gloves...

Thanks for proving my point.

have you ever driven with any of these vehicles loaded? I've driven the tundra loaded...  with a load of 2k lbs... and i'll tell you fish tailing at 55mph isnt good enough for me...

First of all, I wasn't arguing that Toyota is better than GM. You should re-read my post more carefully. I haven't driven a Toyota truck, so I can't comment on them.

I have a 2004 GMC Sierra with a little over 20k on the clock (mostly freeway). I take very good care of it, it has never even seen past 2.5k rpms. Regular oil changes, etc. It has been towed once, been to the dealer twice for warranty issues (one of which still isn't fixed, the damn transmission shifts), and has its fair share of problems and annoyances. However, I have overloaded it on several occasions (big marine diesel engines, bed full of leaded line, etc) and it always pulls through. I wouldn't trust a Ridgeline to do the same (there I said it). I work in the marine business so I am around this every day. Like I said, this is from experience, not the Internet or hearsay.

If you are going to insult chevy's reliablity as far as trucks go... perhaps you should take a look at Chevy200k.com

or the % of trucks that are still on the road over the last 20 years...  and you'll see thats why GM can claim that their trucks are the most reliable long lasting trucks on the market...

Did I say otherwise? I said they are very tough trucks, but it's the smaller mechical and electrical components that tend to fail or need a lot of maintenance. I'm sure Toyota's are the same way, I don't know (and don't care).

Well, I agree that the girls who buy the Tundra would be worried about the 0-60 times to get to the beauty parlor, but to anyone else it doesn't matter.

All the guys who like to peel out of the parking lot after work seem to care about their truck's 0-60 times unloaded. I'm sure all the guys that put those f'in flowmasters and magnaflows on their trucks care about the 0-60 times as well. It seems like everywhere I go guys in their big trucks seem to think the performance is very important, and none of them ever have anything in the back.

[Derek77]

All the guys who like to peel out of the parking lot after work seem to care about their truck's 0-60 times unloaded. I'm sure all the guys that put those f'in flowmasters and magnaflows on their trucks care about the 0-60 times as well. It seems like everywhere I go guys in their big trucks seem to think the performance is very important, and none of them ever have anything in the back.

179791[/snapback]

So true. So true.

[Mr.Krinkle]

quoting the numbers you did just demonstrates the ignorance that toyota/nissan/ and even honda hope to capitalize on. bunch if f@#king amateurs. children, just wandering around aimlessly.

theres a reason gm trucks monthy sales look like toyotas or nissans, and or hondas yearly truck sales. yup. also another reason why gm has 50% sharte of all trucks and 4x4's... + or - a few.

siegen you use too many words without saying anything. saying a toyota truck is better than a chevy is like telling me the malibu is better than the camry. the silverado is the camry, accord, and corrola all rolled into one super vehicle. please dont f@#k with that, youd be in over your head.

Edited August 14, 2006 by Mr.Krinkle

[siegen]

siegen you use too many words without saying anything.  saying a toyota truck is better than a chevy is like telling me the malibu is better than the camry.  the silverado is the camry, accord, and corrola all rolled into one super vehicle.  please dont f@#k with that,  youd be in over your head. 

Did I say that? Please go back and read my post.

Damn this is getting annoying. Does anybody on this forum read before they reply? Or do they just pick sides and start yelling?

Performance is fairly null in the truck market unless you're towing.

Mr. Ford Lightning, SRT10, and Silverado SS seem to disagree.

Here's a quote directly from the Silverado SS's offical page: "Z60 High-Performance Suspension Package with lowered ride height". Yes, that was from the Silverado's page, not the Corvette.

[deftonesfan867]

Car people don't understand trucks, all that needs to be said. Mr. Krinkle is right.

[76ChevyTrucker]

I have to agree with you on that one def. People who build and buy and test and write about cars all day long don't understand trucks all that well. They expect a truck to ride, go 0-60, and turn a 1/4-mile just as fast as a car when that's just not going to happe unless we're strapping jet engines to it.

[Northstar]

Mr. Ford Lightning, SRT10, and Silverado SS seem to disagree.

Here's a quote directly from the Silverado SS's offical page: "Z60 High-Performance Suspension Package with lowered ride height". Yes, that was from the Silverado's page, not the Corvette.

179894[/snapback]

And how many of those do they sell? 20k a year? That's what, .2% of the truck market?

[CARBIZ]

Siegen, you're proving the point: GM builds more models of pickups than anybody else - and they have the SS Silverado for those who do care about 0-60 times. As to the peeling out of the parking lot, if they'd bought the G80 option (locking diff) maybe they wouldn't peel out. LOL

[bcs296]

Don't the GMT900's get the 6speed across the line after this first year? I'm thinking this is going to make for a BIG improvement when it comes to performance, so we will have to reevaluate 0-60 and 1/4mi times. If you ask me, the 4speed is crippling the new trucks. It's only what, like 20 years old or so?

[The O.C.]

Don't the GMT900's get the 6speed across the line after this first year? I'm thinking this is going to make for a BIG improvement when it comes to performance, so we will have to reevaluate 0-60 and 1/4mi times. If you ask me, the 4speed is crippling the new trucks. It's only what, like 20 years old or so?

182364[/snapback]

GM continues to amaze me.

They obviously engineered the 6-speed auto to fit within the chassis/powertrain structure of the new GMT-900s.....

....but GM decided NOT to engineer it right now to fit the lower level engines?

Wouldn't it have made more sense and been more economical in the long-run to introduce the GMT-900s with the new 6-speed automatic mated to every available engine (as opposed to the Denali and Escalade 6.2L engines?)

Wouldn't it probably of enhanced the already strong fuel economy numbers of the GMT-900s?

GM KNEW that Ford would be installing their 6-speed automatic in the re-engineered Expedition.....wouldn't GM have wanted to be product-competitive in this arena?

[deftonesfan867]

Too be fair they'll be the first to the market with full-size hybrids. If the rumors are true and it achieves atleast 26mpg on the highway I could see sales being very good. I wouldn't mind a solid built, gas-miser, GMT-900.

[Mr.Krinkle]

if they couldnt have both the tranns and the hybrid available at the same time, id tend to think the hybrid first would be the better decision...these are pretty remarkable trucks unregardless ...i think thats right.

the chevy website has a very nice page about the new trucks...check it out if ya can....chevy.com, you should be able to figure out the rest from there.

200% increase in tortional stiffness...thats all im gonna say. wow.