Trailer Boats: 2007 Tow Vehicle of the Year

[toyoguy]

http://www.trailerboats.com/output.cfm?id=1210051

We measured towing and nontowing performance, braking, and fuel mileage, and our six judges also evaluated each truck in city traffic, hill climbing, highway cruising and a variety of other towing and nontowing situations.

Edited March 1, 2007 by toyoguy

[BrewSwillis]

http://www.trailerboats.com/output.cfm?id=1210051

We measured towing and nontowing performance, braking, and fuel mileage, and our six judges also evaluated each truck in city traffic, hill climbing, highway cruising and a variety of other towing and nontowing situations.

Without opening the link posted by 'TOYOguy'....I'm gonna guess that a Toyota won. I'm also gonna guess that 'TOYOguy' never posted any of the results from the last 100 years where a Toyota never won??

[toyoguy]

let's see what I've posted in here

lose

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...showtopic=11473

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...showtopic=15351

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...?showtopic=4540

win

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...showtopic=13409

and the name's toyoguy to you, brew.

[toyoguy]

Without opening the link posted by 'TOYOguy'....I'm gonna guess that a Toyota won.

correct

FINAL ROUND

We spent nearly two weeks with these five trucks: All had bright spots — some more than others. We recorded raw performance characteristics both towing and nontowing, and also made subjective evaluations in everything from engine/tranny performance to ergonomics and styling. When the dust finally settled, the points were tallied and the truck that shined brightest in Trailer Boats’ 25th Annual Tow Vehicle of the Year shoot-out was the...

...2007 Toyota Tundra Double Cab SR5 4WD powered by the 5.7L i-FORCE V-8.

Congratulations to Toyota for creating an outstanding product right off the drawing board. Completely redesigned this year, the Tundra took top honors in critical categories such as overall engine and transmission performance, and towing ride and handling. It also scored best in fit, finish and styling, and is, by far, the most significant new product to hit the 1?2-ton pickup market since the Titan’s 2004 debut.

It was also the quickest in nontowing acceleration, had the second-most-rapid towing acceleration, and boasted the greatest gross combined weight rating. The 2007 Toyota Tundra is a now officially a member of the full-size truck club, with all the brawny power, easy operation and good looks that active trailer boaters want from a tow vehicle. Well done!

[NOS2006]

I'd say to properly equip all of them then try it. You can't judge a "tow" vehicle, for example in the Sierra, with an offroad performance package. It's unfair to judge a tow vehicle on the wrong criteria, and they just did with at least a few of the vehicles.

[toyoguy]

i highlighted why the dodge failed for you BREWSwillis

VISIBILITY

Huge roof supports, such as the C-pillar behind the rear seats of the Dodge Mega Cab, or the high sills and small windows in the rear of the Toyota Tundra, may obstruct your line of sight over the shoulder, but mirrors can make or break a vehicle in this category.

The Dodge offers rectangular flip-up mirrors (with a built-in, nonadjustable convex spot) that are tucked in horizontally for everyday use, then rotate into an outboard vertical position for towing. And while they don’t extend out as much as some of the others, all of the testers liked them.

TONGUE WEIGHT

All of the trucks tested did a good job of holding up the boat’s 520 pounds of tongue weight. The Dodge Ram produced more sway and “light front end” moments than the others, however — more than one tester thought the boat pushed the Dodge around a bit.

ENGINE PERFORMANCE

The Dodge Ram received remarks such as “engine seemed strong, although towing acceleration was not as good as I had expected with all the hype about the Hemi,” and “decent towing power on flats and mild inclines, but not a great hill climber.” On steeper hills, the Dodge had trouble pulling the 6840-pound trailer boat any faster than 45 mph — but on flat stretches the Dodge would cruise at 55 mph without a lot of effort.

Reviewers made comments such as, “good power, but bogged a little on hills,” and “good flatland performance, but when pulling hills, the truck stays in second gear at 3000 rpm and begins losing steam” when towing with the Ford F-150. Nontowing performance was aggressive, with strong midrange punch, although the engine was deemed a “tad noisy” and “not as smooth as some others

TRANSMISSION

Gear hunting was a common thread when reading through the test comments on the Dodge transmission. It shifted loudly and roughly when under a load, and the top three gears were all bound into the Drive position — which means that you can’t man-ually choose between fourth and third gear. A button on the end of the column-mount shifter toggles through OD lockout and Tow/Haul mode, but the OD lockout button only closes out fifth gear.

RIDE AND HANDLING

The Dodge Ram didn’t fare as well. The suspension was deemed “soft” nontowing, but one judge noted that jolts from freeway expansion joints “made yodeling easy.” Towing behavior was not favored either, gathering comments such as, “wallows” and “the rear end kicks out to the side after potholes or railroad tracks.”

LAYOUT AND STYLING

The Dodge Ram Mega Cab, of course, offers the roomiest cab in the group. The seats are good, but not great — more support and less stuffing would be our suggestion. The main instruments are large and easy to read, but the overall dash styling is somewhat dated in comparison to the rest of the group. Most judges deemed its sheet metal stylish, although some thought its looks were tame compared to the other trucks.

Edited March 2, 2007 by toyoguy

[toyoguy]

I'd say to properly equip all of them then try it. You can't judge a "tow" vehicle, for example in the Sierra, with an offroad performance package. It's unfair to judge a tow vehicle on the wrong criteria, and they just did with at least a few of the vehicles.

the tundra had the TRD off-road package as well, no excuses. Toyota's offroad package doesn't affect gearing since it has the widest spread from the factory compared to anyone else's configurations. All 5.7L Tundras tow 10800lbs

that's GMC's fault for not having the 6spd available now

Edited March 2, 2007 by toyoguy

[bowtie_dude]

If you ask me, instead of dogging toyoguy for bragging, we need to be pressuring GM (we know one of you GM suits are watching this board ) to increase the 5300 performance or make it the base engine and have the 6000 available across the entire lineup. Or do both.

I'm all about a good ol fashioned HP war between Ford, Toyota and GM, with each MFG making changes each model year to one-up each other. Be fun.

Edited March 2, 2007 by bowtie_dude

[Northstar]

If they just wanted to see what vehicles towed the best, they should have tested the 3/4 ton models, as those undoubtedly tow better than any of the 1/2 tons. That said, the Tundra has the best powertrain (though I think the Sierra is rated at 200lbs more?), so it's not much of a surprise that it won.

[ocnblu]

Toyota doesn't need to be getting into a horsepower war with GM. With more than 52 years of development and countless racing victories under its belt, the Chevy smallblock V8 is the most versatile, the best V8 engine ever made. And it can make prodigious power, enough to put the Japanese truck to shame, no doubt.

[bowtie_dude]

Toyota doesn't need to be getting into a horsepower war with GM. With more than 52 years of development and countless racing victories under its belt, the Chevy smallblock V8 is the most versatile, the best V8 engine ever made. And it can make prodigious power, enough to put the Japanese truck to shame, no doubt.

Then GM needs to prove it! The 6.0L puts out less HP than the Tundras 5.7L at the moment. Couple that with GM ONLY offering that ages-old f@#king 4-spd slush box in its pickups and Toyota has a truck that, based on capability, is BETTER than the Sierra and Silverado.

Now I don't like the fact that the Tundra keeps winning these "true truck" comparos anymore than you do, but its GMs fault and GM needs to f@#king fix it.

[Northstar]

Then GM needs to prove it! The 6.0L puts out less HP than the Tundras 5.7L at the moment. Couple that with GM ONLY offering that ages-old f@#king 4-spd slush box in its pickups and Toyota has a truck that, based on capability, is BETTER than the Sierra and Silverado.

Now I don't like the fact that the Tundra keeps winning these "true truck" comparos anymore than you do, but its GMs fault and GM needs to f@#king fix it.

The Tundra is only better than the Silverado and Sierra in terms of powertrain. Otherwise, the T900s are superior in every way.

The 6.0 is what, 5 years old? I would hope a brand-new engine could put out more power than a 5 year old engine. And, the T900s would have 6-speeds if not for production capacity. The 6.2/6-speed combo, which I have no doubt will become available very soon, will be every bit as good as the Tundra's powertrain, if not better.

[Z-06]

Before I get into any arguement over it.

It says the Tow Vehicle of the year.

Which means the main point is it should "TOW", and considering which magazine it is (trailerboats.com) it should tow Boats if not Bigger boats.

Now if I do want to tow a big boat, I would rather use the 3/4 tonne or more which means 10,800 GW towing of the Turd is measly compared to the 18,000 odd of the GM and 19,000 odd of the Fords. And why? Because if I want BIG I would rather go BIG.Just like other megalomaniac Americans think.

Now if I am investing in a bigger boat, I have enough money to spend 4,000 more for a 3/4 tonne.

The point is that this comparison is irrelevant.

Coming from a magazine with probably 100,000 gramps, is pretty juvenile.

I can make my own magazine and call it chatterboxes and name the Turd as the ugliest pickup ever. The point is they are being hypocrites.

Edited March 2, 2007 by smallchevy

[bowtie_dude]

This is a half-ton towing evaluation. Between the Ram 1500, Sierra 1500, Ford F-150, Nissan Titan and Toyota Tundra, which tows the best?

At the moment, the Tundra. No amount of semantics is going to change that. Sure, if you really wanted to tow something buy the 3/4 ton. But hell, if you're TRULY serious, buy a medium duty Kodiak or F-550!!!

[bowtie_dude]

The Tundra is only better than the Silverado and Sierra in terms of powertrain. Otherwise, the T900s are superior in every way.

The 6.0 is what, 5 years old? I would hope a brand-new engine could put out more power than a 5 year old engine. And, the T900s would have 6-speeds if not for production capacity. The 6.2/6-speed combo, which I have no doubt will become available very soon, will be every bit as good as the Tundra's powertrain, if not better.

This isn't about excuses as to WHY the Sierra (or Silvy) are incapable of towing as much as the Tundra, its just about the simple fact that it can't and that GM needs to rectify that.

Also, its not like this is going to give the Tundra 4-5 times the sales it would need to match GM or Ford, but its still a black eye.

[97regalGS]

interesting.

let's wait another 6months and see what kind of impact this has on sales

[Z-06]

This is a half-ton towing evaluation. Between the Ram 1500, Sierra 1500, Ford F-150, Nissan Titan and Toyota Tundra, which tows the best?

At the moment, the Tundra. No amount of semantics is going to change that. Sure, if you really wanted to tow something buy the 3/4 ton. But hell, if you're TRULY serious, buy a medium duty Kodiak or F-550!!!

I agree with you. But then it should not be called the "Tow Vehicle". Because people do get into semantics with that. When you say best sports car of the year you do not select a Toyota Camry sports edition.

[Northstar]

This isn't about excuses as to WHY the Sierra (or Silvy) are incapable of towing as much as the Tundra, its just about the simple fact that it can't and that GM needs to rectify that.

Also, its not like this is going to give the Tundra 4-5 times the sales it would need to match GM or Ford, but its still a black eye.

Both the T900s and Silverado can tow 10500 if you get the 4WD model. Oddly, the Tundra can tow more (10800) in 2WD than 4WD, but the T900s can tow less (10300) in 2WD than 4WD. Max payload for the Silverado is 2160, max payload for the Tundra is 2065. I would hardly call the Silverado or Sierra bad at towing or the Tundra bad at hauling stuff because the other out-tows or out-hauls the other by a very slim margin. If you're going to be very close to the max towing capacity, it probably makes sense to step up the HD model if you can, anyways.

[bowtie_dude]

interesting.

let's wait another 6months and see what kind of impact this has on sales

Little effect. Worse for the Titan, and maybe Ram, than it is for the F-150 and GMT900s. Luckily for GM, Toyota is facing the same problem in pickups that GM is facing in mainstream cars. A customer base full of unbelievably loyal owners that have never had any major issues with their domestic pickups. Hell most of the owners wouldn't switch to another DOMESTIC brand, much less a "FURRIN" one.

[BrewSwillis]

i highlighted why the dodge failed for you BREWSwillis

O.K., I finally opened the link. After going through all the trouble to highlight why the Dodge lost, why didn't you post this:

Dodge:

The test unit delivered was a two-wheel-drive model, the only one of the bunch.

The Dodge was the perfect example of how much axle gear (ring and pinion) ratio choice can influence maximum trailer weight ratings. Our truck was delivered with the standard 3.73:1 rear end, and was tagged with a 7650-pound tow rating. A couple hundred dollars extra would get you the optional 4.10 axle, along with better acceleration and hill climbing, plus 1000 pounds more trailer-towing capacity. The increase in fuel consumption as a result of the higher-numeric axle gear ratio should be minimal under normal driving conditions.

What were the requirements for the test vehicles to keep the comparisons relevant?? It doesn't seem like there were any. I also have to take back that a Toyota probably never won the award before. It did, three times before....as did the Crown Victoria...twice.

[NOS2006]

the tundra had the TRD off-road package as well, no excuses. Toyota's offroad package doesn't affect gearing since it has the widest spread from the factory compared to anyone else's configurations. All 5.7L Tundras tow 10800lbs

that's GMC's fault for not having the 6spd available now

I didn't mention transmissions period. Guilty conscience?

I just said they should've had the most tow-worthy suspensions. If they're looking for the "tow vehicle of the year" why would they use an offroad suspension for any of them?

[CARBIZ]

I like how they credit Toyota with getting it right out of the gate - as if 12 years and 3 models later Toyota just re-invented the wheel. Fortunately, most people who tow (and I have been one of them for years) are not easily swayed by one magazine article. Ford and GM have been in a pissing contest for decades over whose wee-wee is bigger than the other's. Over all the competition has been healthy and good. We can bitch and whine about how many gears the Silverado or Sierra have, but the real truth is that those measly 4 gears are damned reliable ones - and I think that matters to more people in this category than the no-minds who rush out and buy a Camry. Any vehicle is more than the sum of its parts and certainly more than the sum of hard boiled numbers and tests. The look and feel of the truck is just as important as the numbers these rags cook up. Subjective, but important.

Besides, isn't this magazine catering to the same crowd who are towing their boat with a Mercruiser engine - block built by GM? That crowd is not easily swayed.

[balthazar]

The idea that someone who has/buys a large boat, then needs a pickup to haul it, then says to himself: 'I can only choose from 1/2-ton models, because that would be fair to the other trucks I didn't choose' is hilarious. Why buy a truck that's capacity is barely beyond your needs when a comfortable margin makes so much better sense? Anyone towing 10,000 lbs will look automatically to a 3/4-ton truck. Ooops- toyoda doesn't have one... still. Perhaps they'll get one out before rising gas prices and the shrinking segment constrict so much that the effort will have been an embarassing waste.

This isn't about excuses as to WHY the Sierra (or Silvy) are incapable of towing as much as the Tundra, its just about the simple fact that it can't and that GM needs to rectify that.

Is 300 lbs really a make-or-break amount? If it is, have no fear and throw another 1000 lbs behind the Sierra, it's well-known & has been proven countless times to handle notably more than the factory rating. Cakewalk.

...GM ONLY offering that ages-old f@#king 4-spd...

If toyota with more power & 2 more gears can only move 0.02% more weight... seems like it's toyota that

needs to f@#king fix it.

Or maybe this pissing contest over numbers just needs to stop.

[CARBIZ]

"Or maybe this pissing contest over numbers just needs to stop." AMEN.

But I doubt people like Toyguy have every towed anything other than their toy wagon when they were a child. Get out and drive the new Silvearado. It is simply amazing.

[Intrepidation]

Dodge:

The test unit delivered was a two-wheel-drive model, the only one of the bunch.

The Dodge was the perfect example of how much axle gear (ring and pinion) ratio choice can influence maximum trailer weight ratings. Our truck was delivered with the standard 3.73:1 rear end, and was tagged with a 7650-pound tow rating. A couple hundred dollars extra would get you the optional 4.10 axle, along with better acceleration and hill climbing, plus 1000 pounds more trailer-towing capacity. The increase in fuel consumption as a result of the higher-numeric axle gear ratio should be minimal under normal driving conditions.

I haven't read the article yet but why was the Dodge not equipped for towing if this is a f@#king towing comparison? That seems pretty damn unfair. Not that I expected the Ram to win...it's getting long in the tooth, but it would no doubt have done better if properly equipped.

[biff]

I don't think GM, Ford, or Dodge needs their half tons to tow as well as a Toyota. If you want to tow a big load, get a 3/4 or 1 ton. That's something Toyota doesn't have, and the big 3 should be using that to their advantage in advertising.

No sense sacrificing the base 1/2 ton to keep up with the Toyota. It just adds cost, weight, reduces economy...

Buy a 3/4 ton.

[SingleStylish]

I am glad to see common sense kicked in at the end of this thread... Toyota built a 1/2 + 1/4 ton truck to bridge a gap and gain a much needed boost in image. They will continue to win until the mags figure this out. Most who have owned half tons for around the house and pleasure type work probably will realize that in most situations all of these trucks will do.

[toyoguy]

I didn't mention transmissions period. Guilty conscience?

I just said they should've had the most tow-worthy suspensions. If they're looking for the "tow vehicle of the year" why would they use an offroad suspension for any of them?

instead of asking me, you could read the article.

and we asked each of the five manufacturers to deliver a 2007 model set up (with engine, transmission, axle ratio and tire size) to attain the maximum tow rating available.

[toyoguy]

But I doubt people like Toyguy have every towed anything other than their toy wagon when they were a child.

I've already seen two Tundra's out on the road in west Texas, so much for it's not going to sell.

[Intrepidation]

I've already seen two Tundra's out on the road in west Texas, so much for it's not going to sell.

I have yet to see one.

[toyoguy]

I have yet to see one.

I didn't realize people bought pickups in Massachusetts. Where I live 1/2 tons easily dominate the roads. I drive once a week, if even that often. Out here I see HD trucks more often than Accords, Civics, Camries, or Corollas combined, probably why Toyota builds the Tundra where pickups should be built...in Texas.

[Intrepidation]

I didn't realize people bought pickups in Massachusetts. Where I live 1/2 tons easily dominate the roads. I drive once a week, if even that often. Out here I see HD trucks more often than Accords, Civics, Camries, or Corollas combined, probably why Toyota builds the Tundra where pickups should be built...in Texas.

Well then you should get your facts straight because pickups are all over Massachusetts. Wanna know which ones? Dodges, Fords, Chevies and the occasional Toyota. Toyota builds the Tundra in Texas in a lame and pathetic attempt to convince the public that the truck is American, when it is in fact, Japanese.

Edited March 5, 2007 by Dodgefan

[toyoguy]

Well then you should get your facts straight because pickups are all over Massachusetts. Wanna know which ones? Dodges, Fords, Chevies and the occasional Toyota. Toyota builds the Tundra in Texas in a lame and pathetic attempt to convince the public that the truck is American, when it is in fact, Japanese.

my facts are fine, Texas is the largest market for pickups and full size SUV's. Apparently Toyota has already managed to convince two Texans, they built a billion+ dollar truck plant here that employs thousands Texans.

[deftonesfan867]

They didn't convince THIS Texan, regardless of wether or not they have a plant here.

[scharmer05]

Besides the lack of 6 speed in the Silverado/Sierra I wouldn't want GM to do it any differently powertrain wise. The fact that they have 3/4 ton and 1 ton models available lets them have different trucks that cator to different buyers, rather than having to make a truck that has to cator to everyone at the same time, like Toyota has to. If I was towing around a 10000 lb trailer, I sure as hell wouldn't be buying a half ton, even if it is rated for it. I pulled a 30 foot camper trailer for a friend of mine last fall. Just for 10 miles or so, to park it in a shed, with my Suburban. No idea what the Suburban is rated for, but I believe the trailer was just over the 8000 mark, and holy $h! it damn near took the front wheels off the ground.

My Suburban sometimes even has troubles pulling around our boat and snowmobile trailers, mainly on hills and in a headwind. They are probably both around 3500lbs all loaded up. Anything more than that and I would want something with a better suspention setup for towing, but I am not willing to give up the comfort that I have with my Suburban's softer suspention setup. I have read in a few other interviews that some reviewers thought the Toyota's suspention was a bit rough compaired to the 900's.

I think GM got the combo right. They have the 5.3 with pretty damn good fuel economy for the truck buyer who doesn't NEED a truck that often but needs one often enough for them buy one. They have the 6.0 1/2 ton with a little more capability and power for those guys who like a little more power off the line or need it for towing and such, but don't quite need the capability (or loss in fuel economy) that a 3/4 ton brings. Then they have the 3/4 and 1 tons for the big boys who need such a truck with the duramax available for the guys that really need to tow something. When Toyota tops the capabilities of the Duramax 1 ton, I'll give them props.

[Drew Dowdell]

I didn't realize people bought pickups in Massachusetts. Where I live 1/2 tons easily dominate the roads. I drive once a week, if even that often. Out here I see HD trucks more often than Accords, Civics, Camries, or Corollas combined, probably why Toyota builds the Tundra where pickups should be built...in Texas.

And the Sonata is built in Michigan..... so what?

[Intrepidation]

my facts are fine, Texas is the largest market for pickups and full size SUV's. Apparently Toyota has already managed to convince two Texans, they built a billion+ dollar truck plant here that employs thousands Texans.

Holy $h!! 2 you say?! Wow out of how many Texans? And uh, let's not get into the debate of who employs more people.

[NOS2006]

I'll sum up my feelings in one sentence: f@#k Toyota; GMT900s are teh sex.

[Z-06]

my facts are fine, Texas is the largest market for pickups and full size SUV's. Apparently Toyota has already managed to convince two Texans, they built a billion+ dollar truck plant here that employs thousands Texans.

Those two were the ones who traded in their older Turds for a bigger one.

[CARBIZ]

The two Tundras you saw were probably the dealer principle and his general manager of the local Toyota dealer!

[BrewSwillis]

And the Sonata is built in Michigan..... so what?

Currently, only V6 Sonatas are built at Hyundai's Alabama plant, the first U.S. factory for a South Korean automaker. Four-cylinder models will still be imported. Hyundai says it will eventually build some 4-cyl Sonatas in Alabama, but will continue to source the engine from Korea.

[Flybrian]

If the Tundra was built in Mexico, we'd be saying what exactly?

[Satty]

If the Tundra was built in Mexico, we'd be saying what exactly?

Toyota is cheap and doean't care about American workers or the American economy. People are just bitching about Toyota because its Toyota and they're slowly taking sales GM, Ford and Chrysler, although the ineptitude of the Big 3 is rarely brought up.

[FAPTurbo]

Toyota is cheap and doean't care about American workers or the American economy. People are just bitching about Toyota because its Toyota and they're slowly taking sales GM, Ford and Chrysler, although the ineptitude of the Big 3 is rarely brought up.

^

[91z4me]

Then GM needs to prove it! The 6.0L puts out less HP than the Tundras 5.7L at the moment. Couple that with GM ONLY offering that ages-old f@#king 4-spd slush box in its pickups and Toyota has a truck that, based on capability, is BETTER than the Sierra and Silverado.

Now I don't like the fact that the Tundra keeps winning these "true truck" comparos anymore than you do, but its GMs fault and GM needs to f@#king fix it.

Hold on to that a minute there. GM does produce a higher output V8 in trucks (GMC Sierra Denali) and SUVs at the moment, the 6.2L VVT Gen IV AND it comes with a 6 speed auto. The Tundra just has more availability of its performance V8, the 5.7, than GM does the 6.2 in pickups. But in terms of pure numbers I am willing to bet that GM will sell more 6.2 equipped vehicles than Toyota will sell 5.7's this year. And likely the next as well.

If GM can be faulted for anything let it be that they don't make the 6.2 an option in more cab configurations on its pickups. They have shown they have the goods.

Just wanted to get that straight.

BTW I wanna see how the 4.7 Tundra performs compared to the competition's mid model/volume engines.

[bcs296]

Oh, GM. Another loss thanks to the dinosaur age 4 speed.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Congratulations to Toyota for creating an outstanding product right off the drawing board. Completely redesigned this year, the Tundra took top honors in critical categories such as overall engine and transmission performance, and towing ride and handling. It also scored best in fit, finish and styling,

LOL....

and is, by far, the most significant new product to hit the 1?2-ton pickup market since the Titan’s 2004 debut.

That quote right there shows their predisposition for asian offerings.... Sure, the Titan and Tundra were more significant than the F-150 and T900s, both of which have the survival of their respective companies riding on them.

L-A-M-E

It was also the quickest in nontowing acceleration, had the second-most-rapid towing acceleration,

GASP!!! What?!?!?! The big 'Yota V8 can't out accelerate everything else when towing?!?! Then WHAT'S the POINT of all that power??? It is a truck afterall, not a dragster.

***And who is this publication again? I've never heard of them.... (That says a lot right there, because believe me, I HATE the media and I remember everyone, even quotes.)

[deftonesfan867]

The blundra was geared to use its horsepower more, not it's torque. I'm sick of seeing these articles saying Texans are glad toyota put a plant here. I'm ready to tell them to leave my home and take theyre POS truck with em.

[SingleStylish]

I hate to admit it but, those who are saying that Toyota isn't sellings its Tundra's can calm down. For that matter those who also argue that there isn't availability of all models of the Tundra can calm down too. Here in San Antonio, I have seen at least 3 new Tundra's a day. The dealerships here have the single cab, ext. cab, long and short bed models from base model to TRD. Even if you don't like Toyota, and I DON'T!!! They will outsell the Dodge Ram this year. Mark my words!

After all, it is obvious that Toyota set out to out muscle and imitate the "tough truck" image of the Dodge Ram. Their target is real. Increase market share and they aimed squarely at Ram first. Next model, probably the F-150.

All that said... GM's twins and all their models still offer a dependable, stylish, and valuable alternative. The mix between creature comforts, powertrain experience, and price point still kept me in the fold. The point EVERYONE needs to hear is this, GM has NEVER been about tough truck image. GM's trucks have always been for the conservative truck user. For the longest time, most who needed a 3/4 ton turned to another manufacturer like Ford or Dodge for the lack of a beefy chasis and disiel engine. While GM is competitive they STILL don't get the tough truck vote or buyer. In my opinion that's why GM has maintained its loyal following more so than other manufacturers.

[toyoguy]

If the Tundra was built in Mexico, we'd be saying what exactly?

I doubt someone on this board would be having a fit, now that Toyota is on his turf.