Last post on Nov 02, 2007 at 3:16 AM
You are in the Toyota Tundra
What is this discussion about?
Chevrolet Silverado 1500, Nissan Titan, Toyota Tundra, Truck
Article comments for Comparison Test: 2007 Half-Ton Pickup Trucks - For almost two weeks, we drove all three trucks in a variety of terrain including urban crush, freeways and gravel roads. We loaded and unloaded them, poked and prodded them, and even dyno-tested them. (more)
#14 of 259 Re: Better Powertrain Comparison [rockylee]
Jan 25, 2007 (6:08 pm)
C'mon, the Denali doesn't belong in this comparison just like the Lincoln Mark LT and Escalade EXT doesn't either.
There is no conspiracy here.
#15 of 259 Re: Better Powertrain Comparison [dunit1]
Jan 25, 2007 (9:00 pm)
First off the Tundra is a mans truck boy, not some ladies truck. The Sierra can hardly pull 4000 lbs, where in which the Tundra can easily pull 7000 lbs, the Sierra can hardly take 1400 lb worth of payload, the Tundra can take a beating of upto 2100 lbs! Where's your mighty Sierra now, behinds its mommy. The Tundra will bring respect to the Toyota name! Wait 'til 2014-2017 the Tundra will be Americas best selling fullsize pickup!
P.S The Tundra starts at $22,290. Bit pricey!
#16 of 259 Re: Better Powertrain Comparison [iqbaldhillon2]
Jan 26, 2007 (3:42 am)
The towing capacity for the denali classic is 8100 lbs and payload is 1573lbs. Whats up with the 4 second throttle lag in the chevy??? Is it the vvt system??? Like the 1980s cadillac 4 6 8 fuel injection?
#17 of 259 Re: Better Powertrain Comparison [ahoron]
Jan 26, 2007 (8:34 am)
Read the details of the dyno test, and you'll understand where the 4 second threshold comes from. It's all in the programming.
#18 of 259 Re: Better Powertrain Comparison [andy82471]
Jan 26, 2007 (8:44 am)
The Denali has all the hardware as a work truck. It has
a Z-71 suspension w/ skidplates, can be configured with a toolbox, bigger powertrain, and a real bed 6.5 ft.
Some farmers in our area own Sierra Denali's because they like the luxury. One of our construction crew's at work owns a Sierra Denali, a 2002' I think ? This truck
(07' Sierra Denali) is every bit as capable as the Tundra, but yes out does the top of the line Tundra for around the same money.
#19 of 259 Re: Better Powertrain Comparison [ggesq]
Jan 26, 2007 (8:47 am)
The Mark LT is more like the Escalade, than the Sierra Denali. The Sierra Denali offers most of the luxury touches of the Escalade, but has blue collar carpenter roots.
It's a Man's....Man Truck
#20 of 259 Re: Better Powertrain Comparison [ahoron]
Jan 26, 2007 (5:01 pm)
Wow big difference, but the Sierra will not stand a chance against the Tundra Double Cab V8 w/ 5.7 L 4x4 and leather, bluetooth, and backup camera.
#21 of 259 Atleast use the best selling truck for 30 years
Jan 26, 2007 (5:11 pm)
Why didn't they use the best selling truck for 30 years, the F-150. It has 10,500 pounds of towing, and 2710 pounds for payload. so its not a real comparison till they have the F-150 in it.
#22 of 259 Re: Atleast use the best selling truck for 30 years [fordsrule13]
Jan 26, 2007 (5:48 pm)
Its kind of funny how the F-150 Towing capacity jumped up this year. When the Nissan came out they said they beat Nissan AFTER they released their figures. Now Tundra is at 10,800 magically the Ford now tows 11,00o with out a thing being diffrent in the truck!!??
Sounds like they asked the lawyers how much it might cost them if some one really tried to tow that much and killed themselsves in the wreck that wil result and they figured they could right a check for that much.
#23 of 259 Re: Article Comments 2007 Half-Ton Pickups Comparison [KarenS]
Jan 27, 2007 (3:07 am)
Toyota didn't publish prices so you just eliminated the pricing component? That's idiotic. What you get for the money is probably the most important part of any comparison test.
Frankly the idea of ranking vehicles strikes me as silly anyway. Every buyer has a different set of priorities for a vehicle. Even for a full size pickup truck everyone is going to have different priorities from off road prowess to towing, etc.
Edmunds could do better to simply review the vehicles, compare them against each other in specific areas, rank each vehicles strengths and weaknesses, and spare us the childish rankings.
If you look at how most vehicle comparison articles are written, so much of the article is about being "number one", or "not quite good enough", and other verbal references to this pedantic little ranking system when in reality most vehicles win by a couple of points out of hundreds of points in Motor Trend, Car and Driver and the others. The writers tend to portray the idea that there is a vast gulf between 1st and subsequently lower places when in reality it's rarely the case. If they admitted most vehicles are "pretty good" that wouldn't sell auto magazines or get web hits, so take these comparison articles for what they are worth and watch out for the exaggerated distinctions.