Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Pickups Toyota Tundra Toyota Tundra vs. Chevrolet Silverado 
2059 messages, Last post on Mar 29, 2007 at 5:33 AM
You are in the Toyota Tundra Forum. Your Host is kcram
|
Do I think the Toyota Tundra is a good truck? Yes, I do. Do I think it is better than the GMs? NO, I don't. Do I think the Tundra is a reliable truck? No idea, it is brand new. But based on Toyota's reputation, it should be. Keyword: Should Do I think the GM is a reliable truck? I have NO reason to think otherwise. Period!!!
|
|
|
Replying to: jreagan (Mar 02, 2007 7:18 pm) Oh, and BTW...Does Tundra offer such ammenities such as Rain Sense Wipers and Heated washer fluid? Just curious." You make the claim right there...and for the record CR takes good and bad responses.
|
|
|
Replying to: jreagan (Mar 02, 2007 7:24 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: belias (Mar 02, 2007 7:35 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: jreagan (Mar 02, 2007 2:48 pm) Re: DOHC vs. cam-in-block, Chevy has done A LOT of racing and has built SOHC and DOHC engines for the racing circuit. Their engineers have found that overall internal friction losses are LESS with the pushrod design, and the long term reliability of the timing belt/chain has always been an issue with the DOHC design, no matter who makes it. One of the reasons is that with most modern engines, when the timing chain/belt breaks the valves that are in the open position STAY open when the piston comes up either on the exhaust or compression stroke. The open valves then punch holes in the tops of the pistons and/or the valves get bent, ruining the entire top and bottom end of the motor. This isn't a problem if the belt never breaks, but requires a lot more attention to changing it regularly. Those are two reasons why the engineers feel the pushrod design is better for MOST applications. For extremely high-revving motors the DOHC has some advantages. Until now, the variable valve timing has also been the domain of the DOHC, but Chevy has now licked that technical hurdle and makes a VVT work with pushrods. Even in Chevy's top end motor, the big block Z06 (500+ hp), it is a pushrod design. Obviously, cost is not an issue with this world-class performance car, at least in terms of the minor cost difference between the two designs. If Chevy thought it was superior they would use it in the Z06 at least. As to the superiority of 6 bolt mains vs. 4 bolt, and 4 bolt vs. 2 bolt, well it's barely worth commenting on but I will anyway. All hi perf v-8s have at least 4 bolts, and only racing motors, until now, have had 6 (4 bolts + 2 cross bolts). The more, the better. Chevy has learned a lot from its many decades of racing experience. (BTW, I don't have the foggiest what the Tundra v-8 has: 2, 4, or 6, so can't comment on that issue.) 6 bolts are even better than 4 because it ties the opposite sides of the block together into a single rigid unit. It's much stiffer than even the 4 bolt design. To do this, the sides of the block ("skirts") must extend way down past the main bearing caps. On 'typical' v-8 engines, if you remove the sheet metal oil pan you can see part of the crank extending below the bottom edge of the block. With a deep skirt design, the oil pan is very shallow or maybe just a flat plate. When it is removed, you have to look up into the block to see the crank. Deep skirts were once the unique domain of hi-perf racing engines but Chevy has chosen to incorporate this design feature on some of its hi-end engines despite its add'l. cost and complexity. They wouldn't add this design feature and NOT use DOHC if they thought it was warranted. BTW, I've built hi-perf v-8s with 2 bolt mains - it can be done. But it was always an issue of limited budget, not what's best. If you've ever dropped a crank out the bottom of your car, you'll understand the advantage.  It's not an experience I would recommend. 1offroader
|
|
|
Replying to: 1offroader (Mar 02, 2007 7:57 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: belias (Mar 02, 2007 6:26 pm) Did I say the Tundra was too big? No. I was just stating that the greater rear leg room comes at a cost of 6 more inches in length and smaller pickup bed of 3 inches. As for the deeper bed, the f-series also has a deeper bed like the Tundra. This is because the sides are higher on both these trucks. Sorry, but this is not an advantage, expecially for contractors who load and unload gear from the side of the truck. Its a common complaint of the f-series. There is no benefit to higher sides. |
|
|
Replying to: belias (Mar 02, 2007 6:39 pm) Add 6 inches of cab room Take 3 inches out of the bed Add 6 inches to the length It took 9 inches to add 6 to the cab.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: jreagan (Mar 02, 2007 8:05 pm) The pushrod design never has to worry about a broken timing belt/chain. It also is limited to 2 valves per cyl. (I believe 4 valve pushrod designs have been done but they were not very successful). Two valves are not as good for very hi revving engines (8,000+ rpm) due to less maximum airflow. Of course with the big block Chevy motors such as the Z06, the hp and torque are not made at those rpms - they have displacement on their side. For bang for the buck, NOTHING beats raw displacement. 1offroader
|
|
|
Replying to: pmusce (Mar 02, 2007 8:10 pm) Bottom line: Toyota is "Fugly", Inside and out. Fast? yes, Powerful? Yes. Reliable? Remains to be seen. Better? Nope. Ugly? In every way possible. I have asked several times...Doesn't Toyota believe in body lines? And nice front end!!! haha. Oh, and don't get me started on that really stupid, ugly and poorly layed out interior. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Pickups Toyota Tundra Toyota Tundra vs. Chevrolet Silverado
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Toyota Tundra
2010 Chevrolet Silverado 1500
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
