Car & Driver Previews '08 Toyota Tundra

[FAPTurbo]

C&D Link

A First Look At Toyota’s Not-So-Secret Seriously Full-Size Pickup: No More Mr. Nice Guy.

BY TONY SWAN, October 2006

Toyota calls it “the single most important product in its history,” which may seem like a stretch coming from a company that sells over 400,000 Camrys every year in the U.S., four times the volume of it full-size pickup sales.

But of course “full-size pickup” and “100,000 sales” are two elements of Toyota’s U.S. product portfolio the corporate product strategists wish to redefine.

Before we get into the few specifics we can relate, though, we must first tell you about the Byzantine rules governing what we can’t mention. In order to attend Toyota’s official hands-on first-look first-drive preview held recently in Louisville, Kentucky, we had to swear a blood oath to maintain secrecy regarding many aspects of the Tundra family.

For example, although we drove several different Tundra models, we are sworn to secrecy regarding driving impressions – until January 8. That’s when Toyota will officially and publicly unveil the production Tundras at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, with sales due to begin in early February.

You may wonder how some mention of the Tundra’s dynamic traits could compromise that presentation, which will be held in the confines of Detroit’s Cobo Hall. We can’t imagine either. But we know that if we utter one word about ride quality, acceleration, braking, or transient response before January 8 Toyota might have us shot. And even if that didn’t happen, we might be required to shoot you. Can’t have that, right?

Right. So here’s the info we’re at liberty to reveal.

Powertrains

4.0-liter V-6 (236 horsepower, 266 pound-feet of torque). Shared with the mid-size Tacoma, this robust six will be the standard engine in the regular cab Tundra.

4.7-liter V-8 (271 horsepower, 313 pound-feet of torque). The strongest engine available in the current Tundra, the 4.7 will become the middle offering in the new truck lineup.

5.7-liter V-8. Sorry, this falls under the Louisville Official Secrets compact. We can tell you this all-new engine will deliver a level of grunt that will rank at or near the top of the half-ton truck charts, with work ratings—payload, towing (Toyota is willing to go on record with “over 10,000 pounds)—that will be ditto. It will also show up in other future Toyota/Lexus truck products.

Two transmissions will be offered, both automatic—the five-speed auto employed in the current Tundra, and a brand-new six-speed gearbox to go with the new 5.7-liter V-8. The latter will be unique in the full-size pickup world, at least for the time being.

As you’d expect, four-wheel drive will be an option.

Dimensions

Toyota is willing to admit to a longer wheelbase and an increase in overall length of 10 inches. This doesn’t track throughout the lineup, in part because model designations differ between the current Tundra and its replacement, but this much is certain: the new Tundras will be distinctly bigger, particularly in models with four-door cabs and/or long cargo beds.

In all, the new Tundra line will embrace six body/bed configurations—three cargo bed lengths, three cab styles. Toyota has officially released some preliminary specs on its Tundra standard cab and double cab models, which are generally wider than their predecessors, and much longer when paired with a long cargo bed or four-door cab. Wheelbases for long-bed editions are also much longer—164.6 inches for the double cab version, which is a little longer than a long-bed Ford F-series SuperCab.

There will be no cab-and-a-half version, a la the current Tundra Access Cab with its rear-hinged demi-doors. From standard cab the next step up is the double cab, with front-hinged rear doors. As you’d expect with expanded widths, there’s more room inside—four inches more shoulder and hip room, up front, according to Toyota. Toyota also claims that double cab rear seat passengers—will enjoy three inches more shoulder room and six inches more hip room.

There’s also more room in the cargo bed: 50 inches between the wheel wells, almost an inch more than the current Tundra, and 22.2 inches deep, almost the same as Ford’s F-150, the truck that established the new deep-box trend.

On the topic of cargo beds, we should note one nifty new touch that Toyota is willing to reveal before January 8. The new Tundra’s tailgate has hydraulic damping, so that it eases down when it’s opened, rather than slamming to its stops with a crash. We predict this will become an industry standard as fast as the other players can copy it.

Perhaps you’ve noticed that all of the foregoing deals with just two of the cab styles—standard and double? Right. There is another cab, but we’re sworn to silence on that one. However, at the risk of censure from Toyota’s Official Secrets squad, let’s just say that this other model is going to make the Dodge Ram Mega Cab look almost normal.

Styling

After sneaking up on the full-size segment for some 14 years, it’s clear that Toyota has finally internalized the essence of the American full-size pickup market: nice guys finish last. The 1993 T100—barely bigger than the Dodge Dakota of the day, with no V-8 engine option—was a nice guy truck, something that’s been true, to some degree, of all its descendants, including the current Tundra.

One look at the new Tundra is all it takes to get the message: “no more Mr. Nice Guy.” Unlike Toyota’s previous full-size pickup development teams, this one is composed almost entirely of U.S.-based personnel, most of them Americans. Product planning was initiated in Torrance, California, home of Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., engineering development went forward at the Toyota Technical center in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and all the styling, inside and out, was created by Toyota’s Calty Research and Design operations in Ann Arbor and Newport Beach, California.

The look is nothing if not seriously butch, a macho presence Toyota hopes will appeal to “true truckers,” i.e., people who use their trucks in connection with their livelihood—people who have hitherto bought Chevy Silverados, Dodge Rams, GMC Sierras, and most of all, Ford F-series.

Building on the he-man look, look for Toyota’s Tundra marketing effort to spin an all-American persona for this new truck, a campaign that will undoubtedly use the all-new production facility in San Antonio as one of its major touchstones. America is the land of the full-size pickup, and Texas is its high ground. Toyota did not go deep in the heart of Texas by chance.

All of this adds up to a high-stakes game for Toyota. We think the sales goals may be a little ambitious for a new full-size truck with an import brand name in a market softened by volatile fuel prices. But we’d be surprised if the new Tundra was anything less than successful.

However, that’s as much of the story as we’re allowed to tell for the moment. For the rest of the story, check this space on January 8.

[FAPTurbo]

[Mr.Krinkle]

that really is pug fugly. and i like pugs. but not this. throw it back in, its not done yet.

[Flybrian]

The headlamps are too small and the entire vehicle is mishapen. Absolutely none of the class the current Tundra sort of has. Puke.

[Northstar]

The white one is terribly ugly. And the silver one isn't much better. I'm guessing about 25% of them will be the base model (white one) and then about 45% will be the middle model (silver one) with about 10% or maybe slightly less being the top model that we've seen so much.

[Drew Dowdell]

Lemme see if I've got this right.

4.0-liter V-6 (236 horsepower, 266 pound-feet of torque) and 4.7-liter V-8 (271 horsepower, 313 pound-feet of torque) and a yet unamed amount of power in the 5.7 are going to beat Chevy....

when chevy has 195, 295, 315, 365, and a future hybrid?

Riiiight.

Opps, I forgot. *sips kool-aid*

PSUSHRODS ARE TEH SUXORS.

Personally, I think it's astonishing that Toyota takes 4.0 litres in a DOHC 6 to make 236hp and 4.7 litres in a DOHC 8 to make 271hp when Chevy can make 242 in a 3.7 litre 5 cylinder and 291 in a 4.2 litre 6 cylinder.....

I'd have given them more credit really...

Edited November 1, 2006 by Oldsmoboi

[Flybrian]

Toyota is trying to make a DOHC perform like a pushrod. They failed.

[z28luvr01]

This is one ugly fat-ass truck that's trying too hard to be macho.

[FAPTurbo]

My opinion... if this thing was a man, it'd have man breasts... It just looks "fat" for some reason.

[Mr.Krinkle]

Toyota is trying to make a DOHC perform like a pushrod. They failed.

210960[/snapback]

i think you hit the nail on the head...maybe use some of those fine nascar engines.

right tools for the job, so to say. imagine if they went that route. what a nightmare for the pr.

[Drew Dowdell]

I just re-read this again..

is it a preview or a Toyota press release? This guy is all but offering Toyota a hand job.

[Mr.Krinkle]

and it seems odd with the silvys and sierras knocking at the door

they want us to stick around to wait and see what toyotas offering.

i think that gm's got the goods anyway so f it. everyone can wait if they want and be mildly disappointed on january 8th. i think most die hard truck buyers already have their minds made up.

perhaps this is why gm decided spend 100's of millions on promotion too. strike a balance.

[Northstar]

The 5.7 has 380HP, Olds. But that won't make up many sales.

[balthazar]

Yes- it's bloated in appearance. Wheels/tires look disproportionally small. The way the grille 'overlaps' the headlights is really awkward. Mirrors (since we were 'treated' to a close-up) are ungainly & cumbersome-looking compared to even the GMT800 manually-extendable mirrors. GMT800 Tahoe beltline seems obvious in it's inspiration. Overly-thick C-pillar will undoubedly contribute to blind spot. 2 completely different door handles on the 4-dr are ridiculous. Rear fender scallop is a bizarre optical illusion.

Really; this couldn't be farther from groundbreaking and presents no valid arguement whatsoever for switching.

Wonder if the media will pick up on it this time around?

[BigPontiac]

But we’d be surprised if the new Tundra was anything less than successful.

I seem to recall C&D saying this same thing when the Nissan Titan and Honda Ridgeline came out...

[siegen]

I seem to recall C&D saying this same thing when the Nissan Titan and Honda Ridgeline came out...

211028[/snapback]

And they'd be right, at least with the Ridgeline.

[BigPontiac]

And they'd be right, at least with the Ridgeline.

211062[/snapback]

Nothing says sales success like a $2000 Cash to Dealer "incentive" from 09/06/2006 to 12/31/2007. The Pilot has a $2500 offer, but at least it's only for the month of Oct like the rest of the 2006 Hondas.

How 'bout that production cut Honda made earlier in the year when the Ridgelines were stacking up on dealer lots? The new Civic is a sales success, the Ridgeline not so much.

[FAPTurbo]

I looked at them again, and I can see why Toyota is cutting production...

[regfootball]

I just re-read this again..

is it a preview or a Toyota press release?  This guy is all but offering Toyota a hand job.

210973[/snapback]

pretty much. and they 'cleaned up the mess' too.

the pic with the blue one from the rear is alright...however, the rest are putrid.

still, this is America. Because someone had a reliable 1986 corolla, this thing will sell like hotcakes. or maybe not with 4k incentives on current tundras.

that grille is horrible. it reminds me of , hell i can't even decide what it reminds me of. it just looks.....WRONG.

Edited November 1, 2006 by regfootball

[toyoguy]

Nothing says sales success like a $2000 Cash to Dealer "incentive" from 09/06/2006 to 12/31/2007.  The Pilot has a $2500 offer, but at least it's only for the month of Oct like the rest of the 2006 Hondas.

211077[/snapback]

So where did you find a rebate on the Ridgeline or Pilot?

[toyoguy]

Lemme see if I've got this right.

4.0-liter V-6 (236 horsepower, 266 pound-feet of torque) and 4.7-liter V-8 (271 horsepower, 313 pound-feet of torque) and a yet unamed amount of power in the 5.7 are going to beat Chevy....

when chevy has 195, 295, 315, 365, and a future hybrid?

Riiiight.

Opps, I forgot. *sips kool-aid*

PSUSHRODS ARE TEH SUXORS.

Personally, I think it's astonishing that Toyota takes 4.0 litres in a DOHC 6 to make 236hp and 4.7 litres in a DOHC 8 to make 271hp when Chevy can make 242 in a 3.7 litre 5 cylinder and 291 in a 4.2 litre 6 cylinder.....

I'd have given them more credit really...

210958[/snapback]

You seem to think power is the only parameter in engine design.

why compare an engine that's not available in the Silverado?

assume that the new Tundra's 4.7 V8 is the the same as the old Tundra's 4.7L V8, and you're also comparing an updated Silverado 4.8L to the Tundra's 4.7L V8

assume that the new 5.7L V8 is a low volume engine

to make this comparison fair, we'd have to wait for the specs on the new Tundra

Silverado 4.3L V6

4spd auto

17/21 or 16/19

195 horsepower @ 4600 rpm

260 lb.-ft. @ 2800 rpm

Tundra 4.0L V6

6spd auto

236 hp @ 5200 rpm

266 lb.-ft. @ 4000 rpm

Silverado 4.8L V8

4spd auto

16/20or 15/19

295 horsepower @ 5600 rpm

305 lb.-ft. @ 4800 rpm

Tundra 4.7L V8

6spd auto

271 hp @ 5400 rpm

313 lb.-ft. @ 3400 rpm

Silverado 5.3L V8

4spd auto

16/22 or 16/20

315 hp @ 5200 rpm

338 lb.-ft. @ 4400 rpm

Silverado 6.0L V8

15/19

367 hp @ 5500 rpm

375 lb.-ft. @ 4300 rpm

Edited November 1, 2006 by toyoguy

[Intrepidation]

You seem to think power is the only parameter in engine design.

why compare an engine that's not available in the Silverado?

assume that the new Tundra's 4.7 V8 is the the same as the old Tundra's 4.7L V8

assume that the new 5.7L V8 is a low volume engine

Silverado 4.3L V6

4spd auto

17/21 or 16/19

195 horsepower @ 4600 rpm

260 lb.-ft. @ 2800 rpm

Tundra 4.0L V6

6spd auto

236 hp @ 5200 rpm

266 lb.-ft. @ 4000 rpm

Silverado 4.8L V8

4spd auto

16/20or 15/19

295 horsepower @ 5600 rpm

305 lb.-ft. @ 4800 rpm

Tundra 4.7L V8

6spd auto

271 hp @ 5400 rpm

313 lb.-ft. @ 3400 rpm

Silverado 5.3L V8

4spd auto

16/22 or 16/20

315 hp @ 5200 rpm

338 lb.-ft. @ 4400 rpm

Silverado 6.0L V8

15/19

367 hp @ 5500 rpm

375 lb.-ft. @ 4300 rpm

211098[/snapback]

If I remember right the Tundra is supposed to come with 5 speeds except in the top engine.

[BigPontiac]

So where did you find a rebate on the Ridgeline or Pilot?

211097[/snapback]

Edmunds.com in their new car prices section.

[Drew Dowdell]

You seem to think power is the only parameter in engine design.

why compare an engine that's not available in the Silverado?

assume that the new Tundra's 4.7 V8 is the the same as the old Tundra's 4.7L V8, and you're also comparing an updated Silverado 4.8L to the Tundra's 4.7L V8

assume that the new 5.7L V8 is a low volume engine

to make this comparison fair, we'd have to wait for the specs on the new Tundra

Silverado 4.3L V6

4spd auto

17/21 or 16/19

195 horsepower @ 4600 rpm

260 lb.-ft. @ 2800 rpm

Tundra 4.0L V6

6spd auto

236 hp @ 5200 rpm

266 lb.-ft. @ 4000 rpm

Silverado 4.8L V8

4spd auto

16/20or 15/19

295 horsepower @ 5600 rpm

305 lb.-ft. @ 4800 rpm

Tundra 4.7L V8

6spd auto

271 hp @ 5400 rpm

313 lb.-ft. @ 3400 rpm

Silverado 5.3L V8

4spd auto

16/22 or 16/20

315 hp @ 5200 rpm

338 lb.-ft. @ 4400 rpm

Silverado 6.0L V8

15/19

367 hp @ 5500 rpm

375 lb.-ft. @ 4300 rpm

211098[/snapback]

I'm not sure what your point is here. In the Silverado, the V6 makes up a small portion of the product mix. It is mostly purchased for the most basic of work trucks. It's there for someone who needs the price of a Colorado but the size of a Silverado.

[Intrepidation]

I'm not sure what your point is here. In the Silverado, the V6 makes up a small portion of the product mix. It is mostly purchased for the most basic of work trucks. It's there for someone who needs the price of a Colorado but the size of a Silverado.

211156[/snapback]

And according to C&D , the base V6 and mid level V8 will have 5-speeds not 6-speeds.

[Drew Dowdell]

And according to C&D , the base V6 and mid level V8 will have 5-speeds not 6-speeds.

211158[/snapback]

I understood that, I didn't get the point Toyoguy was trying to make

[Intrepidation]

I understood that, I didn't get the point Toyoguy was trying to make

211161[/snapback]

Maybe he's just got too much kool-aid in his system?

[Mr.Krinkle]

new shot

[Intrepidation]

new shot

211164[/snapback]

Wow! It looks much better at that angle!

[aaaantoine]

new shot

211164[/snapback]

Don't post that! It's a CD/BP exclusive snapped during cold weather testing!!

[toyoguy]

I understood that, I didn't get the point Toyoguy was trying to make

211161[/snapback]

my point was why compare the Tundra's V6 to an I5 not available in the Silverado.

and comparing an updated Silverado 4.8L V8 assumes that the new Tundra's 4.7L V8 won't be updated from the current 4.7L V8.

[Drew Dowdell]

my point was why compare the Tundra's V6 to an I5 not available in the Silverado.

and comparing an updated Silverado 4.8L V8 assumes that the new Tundra's 4.7L V8 won't be updated from the current 4.7L V8.

211186[/snapback]

uh, the tundra's 4.7 spec was in the C&D preview article of the new tundra

My point about the I5 is that it's a modern DOHC truck engine. The V6 in the Silverado is older than god and personally I don't think it should be in there. They should have used the Atlas 6 instead. It is what it is though and very few buyers opt for the 6 anyway.

[toyoguy]

uh, the tundra's 4.7 spec was in the C&D preview article of the new tundra

211191[/snapback]

That doesn't make these numbers correct, all Toyota ever said was the 4.7L engine would return. C&D is just assuming this is the same 4.7L in the current Tundra, this may or may not be correct.

My point about the I5 is that it's a modern DOHC truck engine. The V6 in the Silverado is older than god and personally I don't think it should be in there. They should have used the Atlas 6 instead.  It is what it is though and very few buyers opt for the 6 anyway.

211191[/snapback]

maybe it is too long or something.

[Cory Wolfe]

The Tundra sure is ugly in regular cab, work truck form. It's not much better in other forms either. Course, the Silverado isn't exactly good looking either. What happened to attractive full size trucks?

[79VetteZ06]

On Jan 08 2007, the news headline will be: "Toyota Recalls Brand New Tundra even before it reached the Press Release location"

[Intrepidation]

On Jan 08 2007, the news headline will be: "Toyota Recalls Brand New Tundra even before it reached the Press Release location"

211238[/snapback]

"The 6-speed automatic wouldn't go into 3rd or 5th"

[sciguy_0504]

Love all the bashing/worrying. I guess we'll wait for the comparos.

I also love the silver mid-level model. It looks much better than the dorky Silverado, IMO, and less metrosexual than the F150, which still looks good in high-end models. The new Sierra is on par with this when it comes to exterior design/looks, IMO. The Titan is smack in the middle for me.

The interior is what worries me because that silver painted plastic will never hold up in a WT. Of course, we have not seen the interior of the Tundra WT but I think it's the same as the other models.

Some of you are saying "not enough engines" blah, blah, blah, but that is one of the reasons why GM was/is in its position. Is there a reason why GM has to offer 10 engines in its trucks? Cut the fat and only offer what the most customers choose. This goes for the other auto manufacturers, too. One V6, a low V8, a high V8, a diesel or two and possibly a hybrid is all one needs. On the other hand, Toyota knows it's not going to sell millions of these trucks so why waste money building 10 different engines to try to satisfy as many customers as possible?

[Flybrian]

Is there a reason why GM has to offer 10 engines in its trucks?

211245[/snapback]

Because GM is trying to...

satisfy as many customers as possible?

211245[/snapback]

[Intrepidation]

Love all the bashing/worrying.  I guess we'll wait for the comparos.

I also love the silver mid-level model.  It looks much better than the dorky Silverado, IMO, and less metrosexual than the F150, which still looks good in high-end models.  The new Sierra is on par with this when it comes to exterior design/looks, IMO.  The Titan is smack in the middle for me.

The interior is what worries me because that silver painted plastic will never hold up in a WT.  Of course, we have not seen the interior of the Tundra WT but I think it's the same as the other models. 

Some of you are saying "not enough engines" blah, blah, blah, but that is one of the reasons why GM was/is in its position.  Is there a reason why GM has to offer 10 engines in its trucks?  Cut the fat and only offer what the most customers choose.  This goes for the other auto manufacturers, too.  One V6, a low V8, a high V8, a diesel or two and possibly a hybrid is all one needs.  On the other hand, Toyota knows it's not going to sell millions of these trucks so why waste money building 10 different engines to try to satisfy as many customers as possible?

211245[/snapback]

Still the best looking truck IMO

[79VetteZ06]

I guess we'll wait for the comparos.

Car and Driver picked Titan First yet the last time I checked online they were offering $4000 off.

I also love the silver mid-level model. It looks much better than the dorky Silverado, IMO, and less metrosexual than the F150, which still looks good in high-end models. The new Sierra is on par with this when it comes to exterior design/looks, IMO. The Titan is smack in the middle for me.

That is YOUR Opinion

The interior is what worries me because that silver painted plastic will never hold up in a WT. Of course, we have not seen the interior of the Tundra WT but I think it's the same as the other models.

Bingo

Some of you are saying "not enough engines" blah, blah, blah, but that is one of the reasons why GM was/is in its position. Is there a reason why GM has to offer 10 engines in its trucks? Cut the fat and only offer what the most customers choose. This goes for the other auto manufacturers, too. One V6, a low V8, a high V8, a diesel or two and possibly a hybrid is all one needs. On the other hand, Toyota knows it's not going to sell millions of these trucks so why waste money building 10 different engines to try to satisfy as many customers as possible?

First of all people bashed when GM did not offer too many options, now they do, you are calling that bad? I think it is the height of hypocricy. Look at the MB E class in Europe it offers 5 gas and four diesel engines. Because that is how you attract more people in different economy group or age group to buy the product and that is part of the reason why Lexus is not that successful in Europe because it only offers few engines.

[The O.C.]

The Toyota-bashers need to get over themselves......

Everyone on here is butt-hurt because the new Silverado and Sierra have been blandly restyled and Toyota has come out with an aggressively-styled full-size pickup.

For the record, I hate ALL pickups and you'll never see me purchase one....but that being said, I think the Toyota puts GM on the trailer from a design and execution standpoint with this vehicle.

BUT THEN AGAIN, (before you ALL start in on me) IMHO....

Sales will most assuredly be another matter....but like the article says, the Tundra will be a success for Toyota.

[Snate]

This thing has all the lookings of Titan V2

[Northstar]

I'm not seeing how this:

Looks so much more aggressive than this:

Neither of them particularly look like they're telling me to get the hell out of their way.

I would say the Silverado has the more aggressive look, as it's lines are more chiseled and boxy. Everything about the Tundra makes it look like it's try to be the jelly bean of trucks (though it's obviously not like a jelly bean). All the lines are curved and pretty soft. As if it was going for the "aero" look on a truck, similar to the '97-03 F-150.

The Sierra doesn't look very aggressive either, but it's arguably the best looking pickup on the market:

The Silverado HD looks pretty big and mean, so we shall see what the HD Tundra looks like. However, I see nothing aggressive in the Tundra's design. I would have rather seen a bigger version of the Tacoma than what we got.

To me, aggressive would be something like:

or

or

Now, aggressive does not mean I think it's attractive, but they're aggressive looking nonetheless.

[79VetteZ06]

Not that I am a great fan of GM 900 truck styling they are certainly better than the Tundra.

Tundra looks like the tired bull which is about to be slaughtered by a Matador.

[BigPontiac]

Best looking Tundra so far:

SEMA: TRD Street Concept @ Autoblog

[Intrepidation]

Aggressive and sexy!

Personally. I think the Tundra looks alright in person, but I find it far from aggressive, especially since it uses smooth lines rather than sharper ones.

[Intrepidation]

Best looking Tundra so far:

SEMA: TRD Street Concept @ Autoblog

211325[/snapback]

ew. that bumper sucks.

[Mr.Krinkle]

The Toyota-bashers need to get over themselves......

Everyone on here is butt-hurt because the new Silverado and Sierra have been blandly restyled and Toyota has come out with an aggressively-styled full-size pickup.

For the record, I hate ALL pickups and you'll never see me purchase one....but that being said, I think the Toyota puts GM on the trailer from a design and execution standpoint with this vehicle.

BUT THEN AGAIN, (before you ALL start in on me) IMHO....

Sales will most assuredly be another matter....but like the article says, the Tundra will be a success for Toyota.

211278[/snapback]

time and again toyota has proven they can make a success out of just about anything. i dont see how that is necessarily an indication of the product. they have a better understanding of the car markets and a basically untarnished reputation that precedes them....they are good at controlling the situations and havent had the displeasure of letting down as many people as number 1 and 2 have in the past....they are terrific at damage control.. and when they have a dud like the echo they get on it quick enough and make it golden again. or change the name. and even with all that its safe for me to say there is not one toyota product that i have even the slightest bit of interest in. ESPECIALLY when it comes to trucks. and that been reflected time and again in past sales.

but that being said, I think the Toyota puts GM on the trailer from a design and execution standpoint with this vehicle.

im sorry but i just dont see that and unless darrel waltrip can convince enough people otherwise it will be another status quo offering from a toyota tundra. i think the restylings are tasteful and appealing without being gaudy and exaggerated.

i think its fair to say gm knows the truck market pretty well. toyotas getting there but not quite. same as nissan, lots of good ideas but not enough takers.

they throw a bone and people like you think everyone will go fetch. what would you consider a success for this truck anyway?

Edited November 1, 2006 by Mr.Krinkle

[sciguy_0504]

Because GM is trying to...

211247[/snapback]

But is it worth selling 5 trucks with the underpowered V6? Why have a 295HP and 315HP engines? I'm guessing one is flex-fuel and the other is not so combine the two and make a 305HP FF engine. The point I was trying to make is that while it may be nice to try to satisfy everyone and get the extra 5 sales, it's not worth losing money/not making much money doing so.

[sciguy_0504]

Car and Driver picked Titan First yet the last time I checked online they were offering $4000 off.

That is YOUR Opinion

Bingo

First of all people bashed when GM did not offer too many options, now they do, you are calling that bad? I think it is the height of hypocricy. Look at the MB E class in Europe it offers 5 gas and four diesel engines. Because that is how you attract more people in different economy group or age group to buy the product and that is part of the reason why Lexus is not that successful in Europe because it only offers few engines.

211272[/snapback]

I have never complained about GM not offering enough engine options in its vehicles.