Ask the Car People.SM


Toyota Tundra vs. Chevrolet Silverado - READ ONLY

2059 messages,  Last post on Mar 29, 2007 at 6:33 AM

You are in the Toyota Tundra Forum.

What is this discussion about? Toyota Tundra, Chevrolet Silverado 1500, Truck

Messages Page 205 of 207

#2035 of 2059 MORE toyota RECALLS by geo9

Mar 29, 2007 (12:59 am)

This is a post from another site:
Although we've barely passed mid-February, Toyota has already recalled 533,417 vehicles this year in a mix that, according to http://www.AutoRecalls.us, includes Tundras Sequoias and Camrys. That puts Toyota on track to recall
more than the over 1.76 million autos they recalled in the U.S. and Japan in 2006, and the 2.2 million they recalled in 2005 when they recalled more cars than they built.
 
What's more, the current recall related to the Turdra trucks and Sequioa SUVs is similar to the same defect in 800,000 of the same vehicles in 2005.
 
Maybe somebody at Toyota isn't paying attention?
 
Hopefully the American consumers are. Recall numbers by domestic companies (GM and Ford) so far this year are as follows: Ford, 128,163; Chevrolet, 4,829; and Pontiac, 1,602. Chrysler - a German company masquerading as
an American company with plans to start importing cars from China in 2008 - has recalled 77,432 vehicles so far in 2007.

#2036 of 2059 Re: and another BTW [1offroader] by erich1965

Mar 29, 2007 (3:57 am)

Replying to: 1offroader (Mar 28, 2007 10:15 pm)
Hey there jreagan, how are you doing jreagan? Isn't it fun being jreagan? Since I became him yesterday, my life is so much better!!! Enjoy!!!

#2037 of 2059 Re: Let's turn the table... [belias] by erich1965

Mar 29, 2007 (4:20 am)

Replying to: belias (Mar 28, 2007 1:32 pm)
DrFill, in reply to post #1998
  
You are unbeleiveable!!!
 
To clarify (even though it's a waste of my time and typing, because you only hear what you want to hear anyway) here goes:
a) I never said more hp and torque wasn't better. I simply stated that 26 more hp is insignificant in the grand scheme of things. 367hp vs 381hp? Big Deal!! Unless your drag racing. To steal a Toyota phrase..."It has no "real benefit" based on the fact that 367/375 is plenty of power for any 1/2 ton, and it gets better mileage and creates fewer emissions.
b)More towing? 300 lbs, ok, if you need to tow a 10,800lb trailer (not 10,500...10,800) then fine, the Tundra is more capable. But enjoy your Tundra for the year (or less) it will last pulling that much weight.
c) Not unconvinced the Tundra frame is good, I am CONVINCED the GM frame is BETTER.
d) How in the world would you know what websites I have and haven't visited? This staement is simply arrogant and ignorant!!! I had to read it twice just because I couldn't believe you would make such a statement.
e) Again, How in the world would you know what dealerships I have visited???
f) Since when do we need emperical values to have an opinion based on common sense. Oopps I used that phrase again. Now I will be accused of saying that common sense overrides Engineering knowledge...hahaha
g) Again, How do you know what I've seen in pics vs in person?
h) I agreed that 6 spds do have their advantages, but that is not saying that Toyota's 6 spd is "better" than GM's 4 spd or 6 spd. Anyone can make a 6 spd, 10 spd, or 100 spd tranny. What does that prove?
i) You are partially correct. I don't value biased comparisons from magazines that make most of their money from advertising dollars. I do value unbiased, official tests, it's you Toyota guys that don't, that is why you debunk the crash test results. Can you say "hypocrite"
j) Accelerating? yeah, to a point. But beyond the rate of these trucks, it is useless in the real world of truck use. Braking? yeah, VERY important, but the GM is just as good as the Tundra, better isn some tests I've seen. handling? Again, very important, and again, the GM is better.
k) See post #2035
l) I never said or implied any of this.
m) rear lockers are far superior in all slippery driving conditions, on and off road. End of story!!! The GMs have all of the same "safety" systems, and their airbags are better ("smarter").
 
Funny, I didn't see anyone take you up and "finish" as you stated.
 
PS I have sat in a Tundra DC more than once, and I have been to several dealerships, Toyota, GM (GMC and Chevy), Ford (my 2nd choice), but not Dodge (but I have looked at them elsewhere). So, please stop assuming and putting words in my mouth. And please, ENOUGH with the jreagan crap, it's getting old.

#2038 of 2059 Re: Lag time... [kdhspyder] by pmusce

Mar 29, 2007 (4:25 am)

Replying to: kdhspyder (Mar 28, 2007 6:29 pm)
It's amazing how you never fail to shoot from the lip and never look up anything beforehand.
  
Do some research first.
  
Hint: ALSD
  
Do you prefer to be possibly injured slightly more, somewhere from 1% to 19%, in a frontal collision?
  
OR
  
Do you prefer to be possibly more dead in a rollover or side crash because there are no Side and Curtain airbags or Stability Control on your T900? Forget the T800's.
 
Your argument has holes. You can get stability control and full side curtain airbags (they are one in the GMT900's. Look it up) in the GMT900's. It's called choice and its available. It's not free in the Tundra as the feature is part of the higher MSRP the Tundra has against the lower end GMT900's. You can't get 5 start crash ratings on any Tundra. Amazing that you seem to argue how important safety features are yet you have no problem overlooking the fact that Toyota built a brand new truck and failed to get 5 star crash ratings.

#2039 of 2059 Re: Lag time... [1offroader] by belias

Mar 29, 2007 (4:32 am)

Replying to: 1offroader (Mar 28, 2007 7:33 pm)
Keep dreaming 1offroader... have you looked at "offroad" vehicles? Notice anything about their frames? Yeah, their C channels!! Look at the Jeep Wrangler -- open C channel used for decades from military to recreational vehicles all over the world.
It reminds me of those commercials for the "little giant" ladders where they explain that the ladder is "fully boxed" and show that a normal "c" channel ladder has a lot of flex in it and isn't as strong. But you know why they can show it flex? Because the guy "bending" the c-channel frame is doing it when there are NO cross-members on it!! Do they ever show the guy doing that with a regular ladder? Of course not, because they CAN'T do it!! The guy across the street from me drives Silverado 2500HD diesel trucks and he has about 6 different ladders on his truck frame... not a one is "fully boxed". The advantages are slim if anything at all and until somebody can post some massive problem showing that the c-channel frames are falling apart at the seams, I don't see this as something that is a good argument for the Silverado. The Tundra is fully boxed up front, has double or triple reinforced c-channel under the cab and an open c channel under the bed. It has been noted that having a c channel reduces NVH by almost every auto manufacturer -- cars use it because if the public was subjected to FBF frames in their cars they would be bounced all over the road! The ride is rough on it and is over-kill for its application. If vehicles that can tow 3 to 5 times as much as these 1/2 ton trailers don't use it and if cement trucks don't use it and if virtually every big rig and trailer doesn't use it, of what real "benefit" is it other than marketing hype? I don't see any construction guys using the "little giant" ladders anywhere. I've yet to see even see one of them in any construction site. It doesn't matter if they say it can hold 1200 lbs -- no 1200 lb guy is going to be climing a ladder to do anything useful and of what benefit does having 3 people on a 4 foot long ladder provide? Same thing with the trucks here. So the Chevy has a FBF frame. Nobody is claiming it is bad, but it has yet to be proven in terms of offering real benefits.
Oh, and sorry for not claiming you are jreagan. He does conveniently have many aliases because he is unable to leave this forum and actually thinks that all of his aliases (now using them interchangably) is actually fooling any of us.

#2040 of 2059 Re: Satisfied with my Silverado [dreasdad] by pmusce

Mar 29, 2007 (4:32 am)

Replying to: dreasdad (Mar 28, 2007 6:40 pm)
Dave, you don't know a thing about what you are talking about. There are many ,many manager and top people working for Toyota who are not japanese. Jim Press is Presidnet of North America Toyota just for starters and he did not change his name. Toyota has gotten whrere it has even though they have been taxed twice as much as the Detroit 3 and held back from selling cars at Every turn.
 
Oh really? Can you name me any other top people outside of Jim Press? How has Toyota been taxed twice? How is Toyota held back from selling cars at every turn? The US market is the most open car market in the world. If you want to see a closed market, look at Japan. Import sales in Japan or minuscule and make up a smaller percentage of total sales than any other market. Even companies like BMW and Mercedes have a hard time selling vehicles in Japan.

#2041 of 2059 Re: Lag time... [pmusce] by belias

Mar 29, 2007 (4:40 am)

Replying to: pmusce (Mar 29, 2007 4:25 am)
Just a small correction here; there are no side airbags, only side curtain airbags available on some of the Silverados. All the Tundras have side curtain airbags as well as side airbags.
Yes, 4-star rating on NHTSA's frontal crash has been noted and of course disappointing, but again, it accounts for 2% of accidents. And of that 2%, the actual opposing vehicle will need to weigh as much for the damage to occur, which, in any heavy vehicle gets a less likely probability the higher the weight (as there are not as many heavy trucks/suvs as there are cars). All that is being said is lets wait for actual IIHS test results on the other 98% of accidents that will happen (off-set front, rear, side, and rollover collisions). The reason being is that if Toyota gets poor marks for that, then you'll have a good case. However, if the Tundra does well and the Silverado does not, then you're in a much bigger predicament. That will more heavily impact this argument as there is no debate --even with government statistics as the source -- as to what is more representative of the vast majority of accidents.
When those numbers come in, I'm sure the debate on safety will be given new life.

#2042 of 2059 Re: Lag time... [belias] by erich1965

Mar 29, 2007 (4:45 am)

Replying to: belias (Mar 29, 2007 4:32 am)
Nobody said the C channel frame in the Tundra was "bad", we are simply saying the FBF is BETTER!!! Although I do believe the bolted construction and stamped crossmembers in the Tundra is really bad. Go ahead, defend that cheesy design. If the HD's used an equivalently sized/proportionatley sized boxed frame vs their C channel frames, they would also be better, but that would drive up the cost and is unnecessary since the amount of steel they use in these frames is not an issue. Fuel Economy and ride quality is not as high of a priority on the HD trucks. We HAVE mentioned real benefits SEVERAL times, you just choose to not hear them or understand us. Your ladder analogy is weak btw. You are talking in circles, saying thet the boxed is stronger, but unnecessary, but yet 300 lbs of more towing capacity is so huge. C'mon, if you want to keep things in perspective, be consistent.

#2043 of 2059 Re: Lag time... [belias] by erich1965

Mar 29, 2007 (4:47 am)

Replying to: belias (Mar 29, 2007 4:40 am)
Just a small correction here; there are no side airbags, only side curtain airbags available on some of the Silverados. All the Tundras have side curtain airbags as well as side airbags.
 
BS!!! Only difference is in the terminology. Look at the area of protection, it's the same. Do the Tundra's side airbags sense a rollover vs a side impact and stay inflated longer (up to 6 secs) to prevent post-contact injury or ejection upon rollover? I didn't think so.
 
The rest of this post is just plain old-fashioned DENIAL!!! I can hardly wait for the next set of results so we can watch you wriggle out of that one.

#2044 of 2059 Re: Satisfied with my Silverado [blckislandguy] by belias

Mar 29, 2007 (4:51 am)

Replying to: blckislandguy (Mar 28, 2007 7:29 pm)
You've got this completely backwards... back in 1995, GM had 11 levels of management between the CEO and its workers... 11!! GM was the poster-child for hierarchial problems. Changes at that time came slow because the paper-trails within the company's facilities took so long to get to top level management that improvements were agonizingly slow to address manufacturing issues. They've since managed to cut down to just 7 levels of management. Toyota has 3 levels. All financial decisions are made at headquarters, that is true, but there is a lot more flexibility in the Japanese companies and in particular Toyota and Honda than there used to be even 10 years ago. But show me any successful company here in the U.S. where regular workers or even 1st or 2nd level managers are able to command company-wide decisions? So, it happens here too. One of the major differences is that in Japanese society there is a greater expectation of going out to socialize with your co-workers than there is here. We like to go back to our families!! Gotta love that!

Messages Page 205 of 207

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement