Reviews: 2007 Toyota Tundra

[Variance]

Reviews: 2007 Toyota Tundra

Toyota really got serious with this one, and it shows. If you've previously discounted the Tundra because it wasn't big enough or had a toy engine, think again. If you've never considered one before, have a look. More good choices are great for consumers, and since this one has been born, bred and built in the USA, there's no reason to feel guilty about it.

Edmunds Full Test

---

In general, this is a big brawny half-ton truck that seems to be moving into three-quarter-ton truck territory. Toyota has proven time and again that they know how to build vehicles that American people want and will buy.

From my first impression at the Chicago Auto Show last February where the Tundra was first revealed to the public, to our day long exposure to early production trucks that we could drive and knock around, I have to say that it looks like Toyota hit the target they were aiming for. A real trucker's truck that should make a significant dent in the huge American pickup truck market.

Thumbs up to the new truck on the block.

Family Car Road Test

---

Is it as good, or better, than the class-leading Chevy Silverado? An early drive, without the chance to compare them side-by-side indicates that Toyota has been chasing the last Silverado (and the current Ford F-150 and Dodge Ram, which each have less than two more years of shelf-life).

Finally, the Tundra is big enough to run in this pack. Toyota designers have gone out of their way to make the truck look even a bit bigger than its competition. The new V-8 is as smooth and powerful as the best of its competitors. The ride and handling is, for the most part, competitive. The interior falls short - perhaps the last thing over which you'd expect Toyota to stumble. It's a relief to find that Toyota is human, that it didn't perfectly pull off the threat of a serious, big truck for a segment that the Big Three still own. It will be an even greater relief to the Big Three.

Motor Trend First Drive

[big blue]

heh one editor who loves the truck and another who thinks the Silverado is just a little better still than the Tundra. All from the same site.

[VenSeattle]

It's a relief to find that Toyota is human, that it didn't perfectly pull off the threat of a serious, big truck for a segment that the Big Three still own. It will be an even greater relief to the Big Three.

for the third time...

[Northstar]

Out of those three sources, Motor Trend is certainly the one I'd trust the most, though they've certainly lost some credibility too.

It's good to hear that it seems Toyota was trying to best the T800s, not the T900s.

[toyoguy]

The premium-priced Sierra Denali's aluminum 6.2 V-8 trumps the Toyota iForce at 400 horsepower and 415 pound-feet.

since when was the 6.2L V8 offered in the GMC Denali?

[Northstar]

since when was the 6.2L V8 offered in the GMC Denali?

Since the GMT900s.

[The O.C.]

Since the GMT900s.

In the GMC, it's only 380......the 400+ hp number is exclusive to the Escalade.

[Mr.Krinkle]

In the GMC, it's only 380......the 400+ hp number is exclusive to the Escalade.

+ 6.2L V-8 (L92), with aluminum block and variable valve timing, rated at 400 hp (298 kW) and 417 lb.-ft. of torque (565 Nm). This engine is exclusive to Sierra Denali.

http://www.netcarshow.com/gmc/2007-sierra_denali --assuming this is accurate

[Mr.Krinkle]

The premium-priced Sierra Denali's aluminum 6.2 V-8 trumps the Toyota iForce

...I force is such an unflattering name. Sounds like something you say after eating too much rice or cheese.

I drive on the other hand, cool name for a system that just never caught on. Probably for good enough reason.

[Northstar]

In the GMC, it's only 380......the 400+ hp number is exclusive to the Escalade.

I think that's only in the SUVs, but I'm not positive. Also, the word "number" is very important in your post. I'm pretty sure C&D tested the Yukon Denali to be .1 faster than the Escalade to 60. I am guessing that it's rated lower to make the Escalade look like it's worth a bit more.

[VenSeattle]

I think that's only in the SUVs, but I'm not positive. Also, the word "number" is very important in your post. I'm pretty sure C&D tested the Yukon Denali to be .1 faster than the Escalade to 60. I am guessing that it's rated lower to make the Escalade look like it's worth a bit more.

Also...it just shows how difficult it would be for GM to trump Tundra on the numbers game. It's not. Engine, equipment, etc are already in place to beat everything Toyota is offering.

[fuel_sipping]

I find it ironic, that for now, i've seen more NG tundras on the road then GMT900s. Ive seen new new tundras around, and I saw a new avalon ~3months before I heard anything about a new one. lol I need to keep a camera in my car. And just two weeks ago I saw a NG element. In KY! wierd huh.

Edited January 11, 2007 by fuel_sipping

[Intrepidation]

I find it ironic, that for now, i've seen more NG tundras on the road then GMT900s. Ive seen new new tundras around, and I saw a new avalon ~3months before I heard anything about a new one. lol I need to keep a camera in my car. And just two weeks ago I saw a NG element. In KY! weird huh.

The only two Tundras I ever saw was prototype and one at the New England International Auto Show. I've seen couple Sierras.

[ese_yo_ese]

I find it ironic, that for now, i've seen more NG tundras on the road then GMT900s. Ive seen new new tundras around, and I saw a new avalon ~3months before I heard anything about a new one. lol I need to keep a camera in my car. And just two weeks ago I saw a NG element. In KY! wierd huh.

what you smoking willis?

[deftonesfan867]

I find it ironic, that for now, i've seen more NG tundras on the road then GMT900s. Ive seen new new tundras around, and I saw a new avalon ~3months before I heard anything about a new one. lol I need to keep a camera in my car. And just two weeks ago I saw a NG element. In KY! wierd huh.

Ummm, it's not even on sale yet.

[fuel_sipping]

I know it sounds wierd but I have. I believe its the same one though. I see it in West Chester OH just north of Cincinnati. Ill take a camera with me next time, but I swear on my own life. BTW, drugs are for losers lol.

[tmp]

and since this one has been born, bred and built in the USA, there's no reason to feel guilty about it.

The profits don't stay here, so that's not entirely true.

[bcs296]

I will be comfortable when the GMT900's get the 6 speed standard.

[RJB]

Robert Cumberford who does the design analysis column for Automobile Magazine wasn't exactly 100% sold on the new Tundra in the Feb. 07 issue. I quote : "The Silly Little Kick-Up in the sill line looks like a mistake. But there are lots of those on the Tundra" . He is referring to the sill line in the extended cab window in case you were wondering.

[sciguy_0504]

Design analysis? Do you have to get a college degree for that? I guess we all have those talents, huh?

[eldiablobanshee]

beyond the fact that most magazines do not like the style of this truck inside or outside I think the main thing that will prevent toyota from geting the 200,000 sales they want will be fuel econemy and performance. Just look at how the GMT900's get better fuel econemy with 4 speeds, imagine the numbers they will get with the 6 speed. The performance should improve also and make the GMT900's tow more and excelirate even better than it already does.

Edited January 12, 2007 by eldiablobanshee

[turbo200]

these are more like previews than reviews, but the end result is what we all knew, toyota would do thier homework and deliver a superlative product with a high level of competency. I read Motor Trend's first, and though their may be a bit of defense going on there for their TOTY choice, they seemed in favor of both trucks. I like how they pointed out the interior quality and that in pictures it seems very modern but in person that look would be decimated by the quality of the panels themselves which I can totally see happening. The Tundra is one seriously classy looking truck, and it is fast becoming my favorite pickup design, along with F-150 and the new Sierra, but I'm a GM fan and for loyalty's sake I'd probably end up with the Sierra, also cause it's a good truck and worthy of purchase. The only place I don't really like the lines of the Tundra are at the rear the tailgate shape and edges are wierd and so is the shape of the taillights, also the extended cab with the weird kink in the pillar is strange.

Edited January 13, 2007 by turbo200

[Camino LS6]

these are more like previews than reviews, but the end result is what we all knew, toyota would do thier homework and deliver a superlative product with a high level of competency. I read Motor Trend's first, and though their may be a bit of defense going on there for their TOTY choice, they seemed in favor of both trucks. I like how they pointed out the interior quality and that in pictures it seems very modern but in person that look would be decimated by the quality of the panels themselves which I can totally see happening. The Tundra is one seriously classy looking truck, and it is fast becoming my favorite pickup design, along with F-150 and the new Sierra, but I'm a GM fan and for loyalty's sake I'd probably end up with the Sierra, also cause it's a good truck and worthy of purchase. The only place I don't really like the lines of the Tundra are at the rear the tailgate shape and edges are wierd and so is the shape of the taillights, also the extended cab with the weird kink in the pillar is strange.

Really? I find it to be completely hideous in and out. The Silverado is so-so exteriorwise, but the interior is fantastic. The Ford and the Dodge are showing some age, so I"m left with The GMC as my pick.

[turbo200]

the second to last photo on familycar.com has one of my favorite pictures of the truck [not to mention the scenery and backstory of that picture are awesome, but nevertheless], I tell you the one thing wrong with it from that angle is the frickin "T" logo which just look so cheap and unimaginitive.

EDIT: I hate Toyota design generally too, the darker colors suit this truck, the bieges greys and whites are not good.

Edited January 13, 2007 by turbo200

[balthazar]

turbo200:

...the end result is what we all knew....

Do you realize how often you do this: extending your opinion to 'everyone' else?

This very thread is iron-clad proof of how erroneous that choice of wording always is.

[sciguy_0504]

turbo200:

Do you realize how often you do this: extending your opinion to 'everyone' else?

This very thread is iron-clad proof of how erroneous that choice of wording always is.

these are more like previews than reviews, but the end result is what we all knew, toyota would do thier homework and deliver a superlative product with a high level of competency.

The difference is that some can recognize/admit it and others cannot. To say the new Tundra is not competitive is like saying the next-gen Malibu isn't.

[turbo200]

The difference is that some can recognize/admit it and others cannot. To say the new Tundra is not competitive is like saying the next-gen Malibu isn't.

GM fans, ever relentless in thier defense of thier favorite company, cannot see that Toyota is fast becoming the number one car company in the world, on the back of good product. They came from below, were considered underdogs, were lambasted from day one, and studiously and judiciously released new product that won over consumers one by one.

What's not to applaud in this? You're right balthazar, I do extend my opinion a lot, I try to do it to things I believe are universal truths though. In this scenario, the universal truth proved hard to believe for GM fanboys [what I think you are in many cases].

[Snate]

Looks like a pig...seriously. It looks like they tried too hard to make it tough looking and now it just looks like a bloated pig.

Interior looks like it was designed by 2 different people who just merged their designs...either that or someone who is perpetually drunk.

At least they finally gave it a real engine....too bad the lower 2 are mediocre at best.

[Intrepidation]

In person, in Silver, it doesn't look bad. It's no where near my favorite but better than the photos. The interior looks nice, but those dead buttons and the feel of teh materials are below that of GM's offerings. For example, the A-pillar grab handles are made out of shiny plastic that toys are made with.

[balthazar]

turbo200: There are no universal truths WRT to subjective judgements. Even in this thread the assessments of the toyota are all over the board. It's not a matter of 'admitting what one "knows" to be true'; rather it's 2 different opinions and nothing more. "381 HP" is a fact. "Competitive ergonomics" is an opinion.

In other words, you may 'know' it to be true, but that's you, not everyone. You tend to place (massively undue IMO) emphasis on interior materials. I do not. That doesn't make me a 'non-believer' or in a denial lockjaw in the least. This applies to you too, sciguy.

If you happen to be interested; I could get thru your posts much easier if you would simply speak for yourself.

[turbo200]

turbo200: There are no universal truths WRT to subjective judgements. Even in this thread the assessments of the toyota are all over the board. It's not a matter of 'admitting what one "knows" to be true'; rather it's 2 different opinions and nothing more. "381 HP" is a fact. "Competitive ergonomics" is an opinion.

In other words, you may 'know' it to be true, but that's you, not everyone. You tend to place (massively undue IMO) emphasis on interior materials. I do not. That doesn't make me a 'non-believer' or in a denial lockjaw in the least. This applies to you too, sciguy.

If you happen to be interested; I could get thru your posts much easier if you would simply speak for yourself.

I'm gonna let you know, I find it very difficult to change habits

[ponchoman49]

Toyota needs to fire Miss Piggy from there design studios before I will ever take there current products seriously.