Fullsize P/U Comparison: Toyota vs. Chevy vs. Nissan

[DetroitNut90]

I will, I've driven the GMT-800 Yukon XL many times, and the tranny wasn't smooth when driven aggressively. I don't know why you'd want to bet that a ancient 4spd shifts comparbably to a completely new 6spd.

In my experiences, driving any transmission aggressively takes a notch out of shift quality...even my cousin's Sienna.

[toyoguy]

In my experiences, driving any transmission aggressively takes a notch out of shift quality...even my cousin's Sienna.

Not so in the newer trannies, drive the Accord's 5spd auto or the 3.5L V6 Camry's 6spd. Shifts are seamless. The older Sienna 3.3L 5spd is based on Toyota's previous 4spd. The Tundra's V6 and 5.7L V8 transmissions are completely new.

Edited January 26, 2007 by toyoguy

[Northstar]

Not so in the newer trannies, drive the Accord's 5spd auto or the 3.5L V6 Camry's 6spd. Shifts are seamless. The older Sienna 3.3L 5spd is based on Toyota's previous 4spd. The Tundra's V6 and 5.7L V8 transmissions are completely new.

I drove an Accord... shifts were not smooth.

[toyoguy]

I drove an Accord... shifts were not smooth.

which model?

[Intrepidation]

Not so in the newer trannies, drive the Accord's 5spd auto or the 3.5L V6 Camry's 6spd. Shifts are seamless. The older Sienna 3.3L 5spd is based on Toyota's previous 4spd. The Tundra's V6 and 5.7L V8 transmissions are completely new.

Shifts are so seamless you hardly notice the Camry missing gears.

[bcs296]

Shift quality has nothing to do with the number of gears.

This might be true that specifically, shift quality won't be any different, but under hard throttle you're going to feel the shifts with a 4 speed a lot more than with a 6 speed. The 4 speed has huge spacing in between gears compared to a 6 speed.

[Intrepidation]

I was wondering...could the Allison 6-speed the Duramax uses be fitted to the V8's? Or is it not compatable?

[balthazar]

Don't know if it'll bolt up, but I doubt it. It's also a physically massive trans- too large for cars.

>>"...but under hard throttle you're going to feel the shifts with a 4 speed a lot more than with a 6 speed. The 4 speed has huge spacing in between gears compared to a 6 speed."<<

#1: there's nothing wrong with feeling a car shift- many consumers have complained pointedly about CVTs because of the lack of this characteristic.

#2: a 6-spd absolutely can still shift harder than a 4-spd- it's moreso in the clutches as opposed to the ratios.

#3: some 6-spds merely add a ratio past 5th gear- therefore gear spacing can remain comparable.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

So....

The Silverado SCORED better..... Was MORE REFINED.... And was agreed to be the MOST RECCOMMENDED...

Yet, didn't win the comperison?

WOW! So now the Toyota wins "Just because"?!?!?! [billy bob redneck voice] "It gots more power so that make er a better rig!!!" [/billy bob redneck voice]

Of course... We ALL knew this would happen, so get used to it because this WILL be the verdict in probably EVERY compearison. The automotive media has to present a united front to be taken seriously by the idiots that rely on them for buying tips.

[K.C.]

which model?

My brother has an 05 Accord EX V-6 w/NAVI and each time I have ridden in it I have noticed the poor shift quality on it, especially when its cold. I have ridden in this car many times since he bought it and it has done it each and every time. It is a great car, but the shift quality on it is not as smooth as any of my cars.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

The Silverado lost by 1.5 points.

PS: And why wasn't the F-150 included?!?! Can we only target ONE domestic at a time?!?!?

And they handicapped the the Silverado and Titan with 4 door models. I'd say, naturally, a SMALLER Tundra would be faster than that travesty they debuted at Detroit. The Silverado was also further handicapped by the lack of an off road package.

The all-new Tundra is Toyota's first serious attempt at competing head-on with domestic nameplates, and it's no casual affair.

So you're telling me that none of Toyotas previous 10 years of trucks have been 'serious' attempts to this company VERY serious about dominating the market and OFF-ING one of the domestic companies?!?

When you clamber into the Tundra's driver seat, you're immediately struck by the sheer size of the thing. First, it's a big step up into the cabin. Once inside, the interior feels expansive. The center console imparts a vast, Hummer-like separation between the two front-seat occupants, and the multifunction display for the audio and navigation controls is waaay over there. Pull up next to a high-riding 3/4-ton truck and you'll be eye to eye with the driver.

*GASP* What's that you say?!?!? Comparing a Toyota, the green company, to a Hummer?!?!?! I think I just heard Prius drivers all through the great state of California (Great?--- Yeah right!) pass out. Oh wait, that's just because their heads grew to large. They're far too ignorant to recognize that Toyota, like every other car maker, is a profit machine determined to supply the market with every LARGE wasteful SUV that it can soak up.

When we drove off-road, however, the Tundra's interior didn't attract nearly as much dust as the Silverado's nicer-looking cabin.

Really grasping at straws there, aren't we?

Next to the buff-looking Titan and Tundra, the all-new Silverado's styling seems dated to some of us, and yet attractively traditional to others.

I would tend to agree.... My family has owned many Chevy trucks over the years but I seem to find the styling of the new truck awkward and somewhat bland. It is attractive, but certainly not as nice as the Sierra. I'd like to see what these editors think of the new Sierra in this situation... Hell, come to think of it I'd just like to see a friggin' write up on the new Sierra to begin with.

The staid styling is an issue though, as I see many younger buyers probably opting for the more aggressive imports and that's not a good thing. You know, those buff wannabe extreme Gen Xers that seem to buy beefed up imported trucks to try to compensate for things such as their effeminate demeanor and, well, you know...

Since our Silverado is a long-term test truck, we have a larger sample size from which to cull fuel economy data. The picture is not pretty. Over 5,436 miles, the Chevy has averaged 12.7 mpg with a best tank of 14.2 mpg. Of the three trucks, the Silverado's performance is the furthest from its EPA rating of 15 mpg city, 19 mpg highway.

So, essentially, they're screwing the Silverado over because they have unfairly tested it in conditions other than this test as well as with multiple drivers. The fuel economy observed for the Titan and Tundra was in a controled manner, the fuel economy for the Silverado was not and that obviously didn't matter here. You can't compare apples and oranges.

In fact, the Silverado squeaked a minuscule lead over the Tundra in the evaluation portion of our scoring, and was the unanimous choice as the truck we'd most recommend to others for casual use. It's one refined truck, and offers an impressive breadth of talents. But the chasm in performance capability between the Tundra and Silverado simply couldn't be bridged by the Chevy's friendly ride and interior.

This is the subjective BS that I am talking about when I say that the domestics will ALWAYS be outclassed by the asians in the media. The Silverado, by their own admission, was clearly the better truck yet the Tundra won on SUBJECTIVE "It feels better" terms. I'd like to see them test a CTS-V with it's obviously more capable classmates and dub it the winner based on it's powertrain alone..... Yet, that will never happen because of its country of origin and the media's predisposition to covet and laude all things from Japan.

It comes down to utility, though, and the 1st-place 2007 Toyota Tundra simply offers more of it. No matter what we threw at it, the Tundra never blinked. It's almost as though Toyota built a 3/4-ton truck and honed it for half-ton duty, such is its unburstable nature. You pay for the Toyota's proficiency with a stiffer ride than the Silverado, but the payoff is the most capable half-ton truck on the market.

So, essentially, a notoriously green and environmentally concious publication is telling it's readers that eventhough the smaller truck is the more capable truck, they should rush out and live by the 'bigger is better' montra and buy a hulking Tundra.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Biased reporting at it's best.

While both the Tundra and Silverado sport dual gloveboxes, the Chevy's boxes are small and the lever is fiddly and sharp.

Lame.....

It takes 4 seconds of full throttle until the Silverado's full 367 hp and 375 lb-ft are unleashed from its optional 6.0-liter V8.

So, even when GM tries to innovate and get better mileage out of it's trucks via excess technology that no one but the media and greenie elitests care about, they're still chastised over 4 seconds.

...this clever lockbox on the driver side.

Wow! How innovative!! Except Ford had it in the 60s...... Same with the fold and swing tailgate on the Ridgeline!!!! Except GM and Studebaker had it years ago.

*** Never the less, GM obviously needs to work on a few issues with the 900s.... Better power and a 6 speed transmission should be top priorities.. I wonder whose idea it was to dyno the trucks... Hmmm... I wonder why the Toyota over performed.... Coincidence?

Feature Content

(25% of score) TUNDRA: 58.3 SILVERADO: 50.0 TITAN: 54.2

This is how the feature content was SCORED

VERSES a diagram of their very own "TOP 8 FEATURES" where the Silverado kicks both the Titan and Tundra's ass.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drive...1/pageId=118461

Doesn't make much sense to me, how about you?

Recommended Rating (10%): After the test, each participating editor was asked to rank the pickups in order of preference based on which he or she thought would be best for the average consumer shopping in this segment.

This is Edmunds own explanation of their recommend rating in which the Silverado garnered 100% approval. Shouldn't this basically be an overall indicator of the outcome of the article??????

[SingleStylish]

I went and test drove a 2007 GMC Sierra Z71 SLE2 5.3 w/ AFM this weekend. Looks like I will be ordering one.

On to the interesting part... the tards at Edmunds are not noticing lag caused by AFM. It is the transmission. The transmission shifted into neutral when in V4 mode and is gently put back into gear by the torque converter when awakin back to V8 mode. Not even close to 3-2-1 more like... and 1. The truck in whole felt much more capable T/H wise than its predecessor. As an owner of an Acura TSX and an '01 Silverado I complement GM on the power train and overall quality but... the interior will not win any awards. Doesn't bother me at all since I am probably one of the few left that feels that a truck should still be a truck, unrefined and all!!!

It is my assumption that part of the 6-speeds design includes a taller gear that will function as a "neutral" for v4 mode. Until then GM handeled it just fine. PS The new ride height in the 900's is a welcomed suprise!

[biff]

I was at event this past weekend where a dealer had a new Tundra for show that was making a tour through dealerships around the country. It was black with an extended cab (not the crew max of whatever they call it). I didn't check it our for too long, but here are some thoughts...

-Rear doors look kind of akward. The size of the door is deceving as compared to how large the back seat is.

-Rear door handles don't look like the fit...also look akward.

-Interior is nice but over done. Didn't sit in the seats but they looked pretty flat and not as comfortable as others.

-Much better rig than Toyota's previous attempts at making a pickup, it will gain ground in sales.

As non biased as I can be, after looking at it I'd still buy a GMC. Toyota doesn't look as sharp (round is out, sharp is in) and GM finally has the best interior. Fuel economy is better and a 5.3 has over 300 HP, so spending more for for a fuel guzzler isn't necessary. If I wanted to tow more, I'd get a 3/4 ton with a diesel.

Just my $0.02.

[stefanmueller]

some sources would be nice too.

[The O.C.]

So... Toyota won...

http://www3.telus.net/sjdj/big%20whoop.wmv

GM needs to get those six-speeds in fast. At the same time however... this test is comparing the high end models. I'd pay more attention to the test that compares the models with the midline V8's (Toyota's 4.7L vs. GM's 5.3) because that will be the segment that matters.

....except that the 5.7L Toyota engine is predicted to be by far the Tundra's volume engine choice (65% penetration I believe.)

So the more likely match up is the 5.3L "volume" Chevy engine versus the 5.7L "volume" Toyota engine.

[ponchoman49]

those were the #'s provided by edmunds dyno test. Toyota power curves in their brochures. This doesn't all really matter since GM forces you to wait 4seconds.

Tundra 5.7L

381 hp @ 5600 rpm

401 lb.-ft. @ 3600 rpm

Silverado 6.0L

367 horsepower @ 5500 rpm

375 lb.-ft. of torque @ 4300 rpm

As Toyota forces you to reach way over to get to the controls or Nav screen, or to lean over just to look out the confining peculiar rear window or how they force you to squint looking at the rediculous Phantom of the Opera dash with it's tiny guages or the odd steering wheel with controls on one side with no symetry!

[The O.C.]

As Toyota forces you to reach way over to get to the controls or Nav screen, or to lean over just to look out the confining peculiar rear window or how they force you to squint looking at the rediculous Phantom of the Opera dash with it's tiny guages or the odd steering wheel with controls on one side with no symetry!

Uh....what does that have to do with a discussion over the trucks' power and torque curves?