Toyota Tundra vs GMC Sierra Chevy Silverado

Submitted by: TundraHQ... Do I smell bias?

The tundra hasnt lived up to expectations and many many other tests demonstrate that. The Silverado is still the best truck for the money.

Care to enlighten us with facts that will back that statement up?

this 'comparison' came from the 'Toyota Tundra Headquarters' website. It is meaningless.

Agents, why did you allow this crap to be posted?

I agree. This is a marketing stunt from the Tundra HQ website.

Agents, If they want to advertise in Autospies they should pay up. Sneaky posts like these shouldnt be allowed.

Here's an idea - read the comparison!

Maybe then you'd see what we said. The GM product is quite good, and if you didn't care about some other trucks passing you on the road, the 5.3L is probably the best truck we've compared to the Tundra to date.

Of course, you'd actually have to READ what we wrote.

This does give the perception of bias.

This proves everyone's point. It's a truck not a car. You see Toyota and immediately say it's a better car. You did not even read the article.

A German car is the better car. Better quality and performance and interior.

The Chevy is the way to go.

The Tundra is too damn ugly.

In fact, there' isn't a word in the dictionary that describes if foulness.

There isn't a word in the dictionary to describe your poor grammar. Correction, yes there is, redneck!

lol!

El Lobotomy again demostrates the logic and capacity of the remnants of his so called 'brain!'

If I'm buying a truck, it's definitely not for speed, so I could care less about how quick the Tundra might seem to be.

One need only look for the "Twist Ditch" comparison on youtube, to find the real winner between the 2.

I just saw the video. And the differences were like night and day.

The Siverado/Sierra are so much better looking inside and out. If only the Silverado had that engine and transmission. The Tundra is really UGLY inside and out. The Tundra interior is mish mash of shapes and textures. It is hard to believe that the same company that designs Lexus interiors designed this autrocitty.

Chevy doesn't offer the 6.6L diesel in the 1500, which was the basis of this comparison.

Read this:

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/10/30/sema-2007-toyota-tundra-dually-diesel/

Apparently, it's going to take a whole lot of modification to the Tundra, to incorporate a diesel engine.

The Toyota is the same size as the rest, although you are on the money, Toyota has to make a fully boxed heavy duty frame if they are going to compete with the big boys. A big diesel would help too.

Take a look at the bed bounce of the Tundra on you tube...it's very moving...


http://youtube.com/watch?v=EWjTbiYo3x0

the article is from tundraHQ, therefor, it maybe biased.
but the very same thing can be said to your video link, unless some other companies/person can recreate the exam, you video is merely a marking tool from Ford.

True enough. Ask your self this question though. Why would Toyota put the Sequoia on a fully-boxed frame and not the Tundra?? My guess, a Sequoia with the Tundra frame would see significant stress fractures in the body soon after off-road driving due to the weakness and high flexibility of the Tundra frame. Therefore, Toyota had to spend the extra money and develop a fully-boxed frame. Of course I have no evidence of this but the thought is definitely interesting....

Thanks for contributing...

This is a non biased article! I hate/love them both equally.I like the way that Toyota doesn't have the rear shocks inches from the ground like the chev! Then again Chey has a way better frame! Brakes, Toy is the clear winner! Numbers say it all! I would like to see an off road version of any truck that you could actually go off road! All the off road packages are just a bunch of shocks and stickers. I am so disapointed! Great trailer princeses just not off road worthy!

Reality hurts! Are all of you de-boosters saying these trucks could follow a Hummer H-1? Not that a H-1 is the best off road vehicle. Does anyone actually take there trucks off road? These trucks are both great trucks, it is just lacking in off road engeneering. Todays trucks have improved in leaps and bounds in every department, safety,interiors,performance,looks, but off road ability has gone the other way a long time ago. Poor off road ability!

for TRUE off roaders, the Tacoma is a far better choice than the Tundra. to say nothing of the Land Cruiser. (IF you don't mind bashing rocks with a $50-60k ride; and here the LC outdoes ITS $60-80k competition too!)

so the off-road competence argument is irrelevant.

the tundra 5.7 IS the best in its class too. more power AND better economy. to say nothing of hauling ability.

if economy is a priority, there is the 4.0 v6, which also betters the competitions' 6 bangers.

cars like the tacoma and LC are irrelevant. yes some do go offroading, but not LC-like offroading. the tundra has been noted many times for a bumpy ride, especially bed bounce, camshaft and tailgate failure. like this:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=JNgHHtvzmu4

camshaft failures on less than 25 trucks makes the WHOLE LINE bad?

look at CR Frequency of Repair records. even with the old tundra, toyota trucks have had FAR LESS problems than ALL the domestics with regard to engine reliability.
when you compare trannys and drive systems, the differences get EVEN GREATER.

EIGHT YEAR OLD tundras and tacomas remain more reliable than domestics HALF as old.

and the tundra has only been around for 10 yrs while the silverado has been around for 50 yrs.

plus CR isn't going to cut it for you. these are old cars not new ones. this is when the silverado/sierra have improved.

so the domestics have been cranking out MEDIOCRE trucks for 50 years. big deal.

it wasn't UNTIL detroit started feeling the heat from imports that they upped their game.

their CARS have almost matched imports in quality and durability. their TRUCKS are STILL considerably behind. MAYBE the new silverados are better. but no one will KNOW for sure until they've been around for 8 years or so, whether they can compare to tundras, of ANY AGE.

go back before the tundra came out, and compare the tacoma to its domestic competitors. NO comparison!

i've known of and seen more chebby s-10s sicken AND DIE than any other vehicle, short of yugos.

who said anything about midsize pickup trucks? I know they don't have one any more yet you bring it up.

The new LC good off road? I guess if one would compare the LC to these trucks maybe but not much, The H-3 out did the LC in Petersons FOURWHEELER or maybe or was it Fourwheeler? Not impressive at all when you compare it to the solid axle version. I would like to see an off road version that wouldn't cost $50,000.!

Before I bought my New Silverado I tried the Tundra and never even had the Top of the Line motor a thoguht due to MPG reasons.

Tundra was nice and did everything well. The Silverado was equal in driving feel and I just liked it overall. Preferred Chevy styling and interior. Tundra is a good option in the market and keep getting better. GM and Ford have to def keep up their game.

if you had checked the specs, the tundra 5.7 actually gives BETTER mpg figures than the 4.7 engine. as well as more power and torque, of course. THAT'S HOW GOOD the new 5.7 motor is.

BTW - The article was not as biased as I have seen other similar comparisons on Fan sites ahve been. I agree with most of the article. GM can def do better with the truck's tranny and not as efficiant as Tundras.

Only major disadvantage with GM trucks. Also more standard equipment would be better with GM trucks.

Thank you for reading and posting.

the tundra truck has a strong powertrain, but where i live in new england, i have never seen one with a plow, although occasionally a landscape trailer.
i'm not sure how they stack up when you overload the bed payload, but i think the big 3 trucks build in more fudge factor. the videos referred to earlier would seem to back that up.

While a few decent points are made in the article (such as GM needing to offer an automatic with more than 4 gears), it's definately not an objective comparison.

Please - be more specific? Was it the fact that the Tundra costs less and offers more standard equipment, was it the Tundra's superior safety equipment, or was it the Toyota 5.7L making more hp and torque with less displacement?

Which one of those facts, which ultimately led us to conclude the Tundra was superior, was in fact biased?

What ever site it comes from its completely true.

I ll post a review from silveradohq.com and then we ll see who wins!

They are also great for throwing rods and spinning bearings, not to mention all of the electrical problems I have fixed on GM vehicles, more than any other make, Japanese or domestic. I have driven both. I am not too turned on by the tundras styling but it has a much better engine and drivetrain. You couldn't really go wrong with either except the ancient 4 spd on the GM truck.

Next time put some numbers and facts down.

I do like the Tundra, but for a true truck, I think people still turn to the Chevy, GMC, Ford brands.

I myself work at a GM/Toyota dealer. I can tell you from experiance that the Toyota is defiently the better TRUCK. I have seen it side by side. I think everyone is stuck on the legend of GMC but we need to accept that Toyota has come a long way and it is finaly come to the top.

on another forum, guy mentioned he had a friend who owned a pontiac and a toyota store, among others.

the pontiac dept had to have FAR MORE mechanics.

i've had similar experiences. after buying a few toyotas, new and used, i almost NEVER had to go back to the dealer after purchase.
with a 2000 ford i bought new, i had to go back at least half a dozen times. in just the 1st 3 years.

after reading the article, i have to say, the only biased part about this article is the bolded text where Toyota does a better job than GM. it is actually a very fair review and give LOTS of credit to GM when GM wins certain category. (to those people who didn't read the article, GM actually win a lot of categories)

that's how Japanese makes cars, they treat them unbiased regardless of where they come from, do a fair comparison and improve on their design to match/beat other competitors. The ability to know and admit their weakness is what makes them move forward. sadly, with a lot of nationalism going on at GM and Ford, people are blinded (just look at majority of the comments here or at youtube). i won't say that will lead GM to bankruptcy. but if they keep losing hundred of millions a year, they are not far away from it.

For everyone who says "tundrahq is biased", I can only point you to a warranty comparison we did a few months back that placed the Tundra's factory warranty dead last.

Incidentally, we've also led the charge against Toyota in regards to the bed bounce problem that many are experiencing, and we're the only site on the internet that published a laundry list of problems with the Tundra too.

Maybe it's just that Toyota, by virtue of having the newest design and a great engineering team, was able to outperform a manufacturer that's lost $100 billion in the last decade...

Oh wait, no, we're biased. That's the only logical explanation.

i was mainly referring to the toyota 5.7 actually returning better mileage than their own 4.7

and from road test reports i've seen, better than the gm 6.0 as well.

it's possible some gm engines may have better CITY epa ratings. my understanding is the tundra 5.7 excels primarily on the HWY ratings, due to it's 6 speed tranny with double overdrive.

They should have compared the Toys engine to the chev's 6L. That would have been more fair!

That's exactly what we did.

Ahh, what impressive power that the toy has!