Last post on Mar 29, 2007 at 5:33 AM
You are in the Toyota Tundra
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Tundra, Chevrolet Silverado 1500, Truck
#1846 of 2059 If a Tundra HD comes,
Mar 19, 2007 (7:30 pm)
It will be in 2010.
I wouldn't put it by Toyota to start that rumor to throw the domestics off. Toyota can keep a secret better than any priest!
They have to see if the Tundra does, in fact, gain a real foothold in the market.
If they can sell 200k+ next year, expect to see an HD 18-24 months thereafter. Maybe 50k units. They have many diesels in use outside the US, and Hino will help build them, although any engine producer would kill to work with Toyota on such a project.
Just speculation. That's what I'd do.
#1848 of 2059 Re: ROCK [geo9]
Mar 19, 2007 (7:42 pm)
LOL, that is actually kind of funny that the best engineered by the GODS (Toyota) super truck only got 4-stars I guess all those so-called standard airbags aren't going to help you much when your chest caves in with the 5.7 sitting in your lap.
#1849 of 2059 Re: crash test results [1offroader]
Mar 19, 2007 (7:50 pm)
In a frontal crash, the Tundra owners may be crippled, or in the morgue, while the Silverado owners walk away. Thems are the facts, says NHTSA.
No that's not what the NHTSA says at all in it's tests. If you looked at the results you'd see why.
5 stars means that the occupants have up to a 10% risk of injury,
4 stars means that the occupants have from an 11-20% risk of injury.
If the GMT900's are a 10% risk and the Tundra is an 11% risk is that anything to even discuss.
The NHTSA gives some values from their own risk matrix which creates this scoring. But they don't explain what each of the values means. The biggest differences seem to be in the deceleration values. Under the NHTSA tests the Tundra occupants might experience more deceleration forces in the chest which seems to be a seatbelt issue.
The risks of injury to the driver's head in both is very very close.
The risks of injury to the passengers head is greater in the Tundra - according to the Govt test.
One thing about the NHTSA tests is that they give no explanations of why the scores are what they are. The IIHS goes into detail in what creates one score or another.
I'll defer judgement til the IIHS speaks up. Their test is in fact harder and they test more ways.
Frontal 40 mph and 40% offset
Side Impacts...not done at all by the Govt
Rear Impacts...also not done at all by the Govt.
As to the prior post about drivers choosing to get airbags I agree 100%.
...except for the fact that any F150 buyer wanting to protect himself and his family is O-o-L because he can't get Side Airbags at any price.
...except for the poor buyer who only wants a Reg Cab Silverado or Sierra, he too cant get side airbags either - at any price.
That's a whole group of 2nd class citizens, Reg Cab buyers, who even if they wanted the protection are being told 'Nope, ya can't have it.'
Now should the Tundra have gotten better scores. Absolutely. There's no excuse in today technology not to ace the simple NHTSA test. Does this mean the truck is unsafe, no way. If this is your criteria and you stick by it then you have to recommend that no one ever buy an F150 or a Reg Cab T900. These don't even offer the most basic side protection that nearly all new designed vehicles have.
This might not be a real big issue that GMT900 ( and especially Ford ) fans want to get to deeply involved in.
#1850 of 2059 Spec's for 2007 Tundra and 2007 Silverado
Mar 19, 2007 (7:55 pm)
I got this from Toyota.com
Toyota Tundra Double Cab w/ 5.7 L 2x4 vs.
Chevy Silverado Extended Cab w/ 5.3 L 2x4
Toyota Advantage Summary
Below is a summary of all Toyota advantages in this vehicle comparison.
Pricing Tundra Silverado 1500
MSRP $28,110 $31,500
Destination Charge $645 $900
Colors Tundra Silverado 1500
Exterior Color Chips 11 Available 9 Available
Tundra Silverado 1500
Base Engine Displacement 5.7 liters 5.3 liters
Valvetrain 32 Valves
double overhead cam (DOHC) 16 Valves
overhead valves (OHV)
Horsepower 381 hp 5600 rpm 315 hp 5200 rpm
Torque 401 ft-lbs. 3600 rpm 338 ft-lbs. 4400 rpm
Truck Features Tundra Silverado 1500
Bumpers chrome painted
Running Boards step - Optional Not Available
Seating Tundra Silverado 1500
Total Seating Capacity 6 5
Comfort Tundra Silverado 1500
Reading Lights front and rear reading lights front reading lights
Safety Features Tundra Silverado 1500
Brakes - Rear ventilated disc drum
Braking Assist Standard Not Available
Traction Control Standard Not Available
Stability Control Standard Optional
Head Air Bag front and rear front and rear - Optional
Side Air Bag dual front Not Available
Front Center Seatbelt Type 3-point belt Not Available
Child Safety Locks Standard Not Available
Rear Headrests 3 2
Parking Assist front and rear parking sensors - Optional rear parking sensors - Optional
Handling Tundra Silverado 1500
Turning Circle 44 ft. 46.9 ft.
Tundra Silverado 1500
Max. Payload Capacity 1755 lbs. 1603 lbs.
Max. Towing Capacity 10600 lbs. 10300 lbs.
Range in Miles Toyota
Advantages Tundra Silverado 1500
City 422 mi. 416 mi.
Fuel Data Tundra Silverado 1500
Fuel Tank Capacity 26.4 gal. 26 gal.
Exterior Tundra Silverado 1500
Height 75.8 in. 73.9 in.
Wheel Base 145.7 in. 143.5 in.
Ground Clearance 10.2 in. 8.9 in.
Advantages Tundra Silverado 1500
Front Shoulder Room 66.6 in. 65.2 in.
Rear Shoulder Room 65.7 in. 65.3 in.
Front Hip Room 63 in. 62.5 in.
Rear Hip Room 62.6 in. 61.9 in.
Front Leg Room 42.5 in. 41.3 in.
Rear Leg Room 34.7 in. 34.3 in.
Maximum Seating 6 5
Turning Circle 44 ft. 46.9 ft.
EPA Mileage Estimates Tundra Silverado 1500
City 16 mpg. 16 mpg.
Highway 20 mpg. 22 mpg.
Range in Miles Tundra Silverado 1500
City 422 mi. 416 mi.
Highway 528 mi. 572 mi.
Both trucks are HOTT right now! My local Toyota dealeship sold around 350 '07 Tundra's from Feb. 19- March 19. Chevy sold around 420 '07 Silverado's. Toyota's catching up!
#1851 of 2059 Re: Toyota comes up short [pmusce]
Mar 19, 2007 (7:57 pm)
I was surprised when I read this on GMI and here so I asked the question myself.
That info was a 'throwaway line' in an article about Nissan dropping the HD versions.
The reply was that the diesel is still on track and nothing has changed. Typically it's nearly impossible to get a straight answer out of Toyota until they are good and ready.
Until I see something in print directly attributable to someone in a responsible position at Toyota the answer is 'Can't say for sure.'
#1852 of 2059 Re: Spec's for 2007 Tundra and 2007 Silverado [iqbaldhillon2]
Mar 19, 2007 (8:15 pm)
Not sure we can believe those Toyota specs since it was on the toyota site. I mean, is the toyota really better in every single thing?
I notice that they left off heated washer fluid and easy to remove spin on oil filter. Both of those have been cited here as advantages for GM. There are probably others.
#1853 of 2059 Re: Toyota comes up short [vmax2007]
Mar 19, 2007 (8:16 pm)
Do you really believe this? I really don't think anyone at Ford (or Dodge) would say or even think this.
Hi jreagan .. vmax2007... next alias
Obviously you don't understand how business and marketing work hand in hand. Pricing is the tool by which companies express themselves to buyers.
Mercedes comes into the market and promotes itself with world class luxury and engineering. To express this elite status to the buyers it then states 'We'd like all you college grads who are just starting out to get behind the wheel of our excellence so we're offering you ZERO down-ZERO interest-ZERO payments for 1 year, ..... Dude.'
Similarly if either Ford or Dodge managements truly believed that they had class leading trucks then they'd be promoting the elite status over the lowly Tundra and GMT900's by refraining from getting down in the gutter and slugging it out with low prices to the rabble.
Well the actual situations are that Mercedes has no interest in offering any kind of incentives to people without significant resources... and
Ford and Dodge managements know that if they aren't the lowest priced vehicles in the market that they'll never get enough buyers in the door to get to breakeven.
Those are just the facts. The pricing levels are set by the the managements of each company. It's not a mistake that the F150 and the Ram are the two lowest in price. The Queen of England didn't set the incentives and the price levels the respective Sales Departments did.
#1854 of 2059 Re: crash test results [kdhspyder]
Mar 19, 2007 (8:59 pm)
5 stars means that the occupants have up to a 10% risk of injury, 4 stars means that the occupants have from an 11-20% risk of injury. If the GMT900's are a 10% risk and the Tundra is an 11% risk is that anything to even discuss.
kdh you seem to be very selective in your choice of numbers. In my previous post I used the WORST case for each vehicle - 10% vs. 20% risk of injury - in order to be conservative. However, for some reason you chose 10% vs. 11% - the WORST case for the GM vs. the BEST case for the Tundra. Now, why would you do that??? Let me guess...perhaps to put the WORST spin on the Silverado vs. the BEST possible spin on the Tundra? If that makes you feel better about the test results, well, golly, who are we to argue with your innermost need to do that?
But just to be fair (You want to be fair, don't you? Of course you do, kdh!) - two can play that game. I'll choose 1% risk for the Silverado, vs. 20% risk for the Tundra - both of these numbers are within the NHTSA range, correct? Only this time, we'll turn the tables on you and choose the BEST number for the Silverado vs. the WORST number for the Tundra. Now, the odds of serious injury are 20 TIMES WORSE for the Tundra. Once you start playing games with the numbers, you can't stop it just because you find it inconvenient. Now, to be honest, I don't believe my 1% vs. 20% any more than I believe your 10% vs. the 11%. I'm just playing your game.
Re: side air bags on the standard cab models - I agree. You might be surprised by that. They should be AVAILABLE, and I predict they will be - and maybe even sooner than the Tundra is able to make 5 stars in the front crash test.
As far as your conclusion - I openly agreed on at least two previous posts - the Tundra is NOT unsafe. It just isn't the best. It's just LAST. Which, in this case, isn't terrible. It's just not as safe as it should be, which you agree with. This has got to hurt, esp. after Tundra fans have invested so much emotionally on the (totally unsubstantiated) theory that Toyota Co. is much more concerned over its customers' safety than Detroit. Unfortunately, Toyota has not been paying attention to the Tundra fans on this board in that respect.
Hey, Tokyo, can you hear us now?
#1855 of 2059 GM fans rejoice!
Mar 19, 2007 (9:33 pm)
Can I yawn any louder?
What happens when Tundra aces the IIHS test, a much harder test?
The only people who get hurt in a full-size truck are the ones who don't wear seat belts. Natural Selection.
It's not like they built the thing with gas tanks outside the frame rails or something.....