Consumer Reports: Tundra Beats Silverado

The Tundra engine is what is pushing the truck over the competition. If you have an opportunity to test drive these trucks back to back you will definitely notice a difference.

They didn't test the Titan. Whats that all about. The Titan has beatin the Tundra in at least two comparos that I have seen.

So the Tundra is more Lexus-like than the Titan RICEMASTER? Why can't it simply be more "Toyota-like?"

The Titan hasnt beaten the new Tundra in any tests. Provide a link if you're going to make statements like that please.

RICEMASTER, I agree with you that Toyota's interior quality has degraded in the last few years due because the cars are being built here in the states and using cheap material. But they're still far better than the domestic quality. Believe me when I ride in my friend's F150 brand new truck, my elbows hurt from the hard door plastic and center arm rest, but the Tundra doesn't have that, its very comfortable actually. So I don't know why you claim the Tundra has hard plastic?

Here is the first link:
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/12507/2007-nissan-titan-se-4x4-crew-cab.html.
Here is the second link:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4212506.html
I am sure your going to tell me that these two publications are not so reputable. First one is an automotive publication that generaly does not like Nissans. The second is a completly unbiased publication when it comes to car manf. There are your examples

One other thing, the interior materials in the 08 Titan has been upgraded nicely and is far better then the the Tundra's. Also, the Tundra's dashboard is a mess. It looks like the designers couldn't deside which dashboard to use. So they slapped a Camary dashboard into 1988 Buick.

Well, you provided the links. What can I say, there is obviously some love out there for that oddly styled, underpowered Titan. I dont know what Popular Mechanics was thinking, their results were all over the place with no clear scoring mechanism, all purely subjective. C&D, on the other hand, who rarely has good things to say about Toyotas, is flawed in a way that is transparent. (They publish their scores.) But they obviously did not want the Tundra to win, so they added subjective categories that negated the Tundra's winning objective numbers. I mean honestly, the Tundra won in every performance category, but came second to last in "fun to drive." gimme a break. ANd the Tundra scored a 2 in rear seat space. Unbelievable. Has anyone sat in the back of that monster. Its frickin huge.

I was obvioulsy wrong in assuming that the Titan hadnt beaten the Tundra in comparos. But after reading the links, there is no reason that the Titan ever should have won.

Titan isn't anything special over the Tundra, and C&D rankings are fine for those who want a group of old, opinionated men telling them which cars and trucks put a tingly sensation in between their legs.

I initially liked the Titan's exterior looks, and still do somewhat. However I've been inside a Titan, and was overwhelmed with the plastic everywhere, and none of it was soft-touch plastic/vynil either.

I'm not interested in any pickup truck, but if I were, I'd imagine I'd be hard-pressed to pass up the Tundra's power, intimidating looks, and more ergonomic interior.

This is a very unfair comparison. They picked the chevy with the smaller axle when they could have configured one with a bigger axle as a "no cost option".
Their argument was that they bought the trucks with gas mileage in mind. When someone buys a truck for "heavy duty" towing, gas mileage is the last thing they think about.

Read this argument against the CR report:

http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/news/miscnews/cr071.html

Try this link:
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/12502/2007-chevrolet-silverado-vs-2007-dodge-ram-vs-2007-ford-f-150-vs-2007-nissan-titan-vs-2007-toyota-tundra.html

Tundra has more gears, more power, more torque, better FE and more safety features, no more expensive...

this was BOUND to have all the toyota bashers come crawling out of the woodwork.

fact 1: the tundra 5.7 is superior to the chevy 6.0, in both power, torque, AND mileage. it is inconsequential that CR chose a chev 5.3 for better mileage; it STILL came behind!

fact 2: due to 1), even if the chev had a 4.10 rear end, it STILL would have trailed the tundra.

fact 3: the tundra's 6-speed vs. the old chev 4-sp provides an additional RANGE of power/economy flexibility advantage. tundra owners can HAVE THEIR CAKE and EAT IT TOO.

conclusion: the tundra SIMPLY OUTCLASSES the silverado. chev fans should be glad the test results did not MORE DRAMATICALLY reflect the technical superiority of the tundra. (and then there is the issue of toyota vs. chevy RELIABILITY.)

Please, explain away the reviews in which the Silverado beats the Tundra, then. I cannot bring up one other review where the Toyota wins.

I always do enjoy reading your posts with their artfully placed caps.

...

Its Consumer Reports. Like I stupid enough to trust what they say. CR has become a joke I dont care who they pick!

Why, I was overcome with shock and surprise when I read the title. CR picks a Toyota! Incredible! Who would've thought?

s4--

sorry but altho' i do own a truck, i do not read current truck enthusiast rags as i am not now in the market for a new truck. whatever reviews may have been in those, i suspect are on the subjective side.

by THE SPECS, as well as the CR tests, i have not seen where the silvy beats the tundra ANYWHERE.

and thanks for appreciating my CAPS. since i can'd do bold or italics here, that's all i have to work with. i have been accused in the past of speaking in a monotone. so i EMPHATICALLY no longer do so.

oh, and if you actually DO appreciate my posts (and didn't just say you did in irony), go over to the forums at MotorTrend.com.

they do let me write MUCH more colorfully! ;)