Ask the Car People.SM


Article Comments 2007 Half-Ton Pickups Comparison

259 messages,  Last post on Nov 02, 2007 at 3:16 AM

You are in the Toyota Tundra Forum.

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)

Messages Page 21 of 27

#193 of 259 Re: We don't need Tundras. [captainmatty] by dreasdad

May 19, 2007 (4:10 pm)

Replying to: captainmatty (May 18, 2007 12:18 am)
The chevy S-10 was built by Isuzu, which is probably why it was so tough!!!!!!!!!

#194 of 259 Re: We don't need Tundras. [dreasdad] by kcram HOST

May 19, 2007 (7:04 pm)

Replying to: dreasdad (May 19, 2007 4:10 pm)
No, the Chevy LUV was an Isuzu...the S-10 was all GM.
 
kcram - Pickups Host

#195 of 259 Re: We don't need Tundras. [kcram] by razorthunder

May 20, 2007 (5:49 pm)

Replying to: kcram (May 19, 2007 7:04 pm)
The Chevrolet LUV was a rebadged Isuzu KB light truck. Sales began in the USA in March of 1972 as a response to the Toyota Hi-Lux and the Datsun pickup, as well as Ford's Mazda-built Courier. The LUV was replaced in the United States by the US-built Chevrolet S-10 after 1982. Chevrolet stopped selling the LUV in the USA after 1982 in favor of their own S-10 compact pickup, but Isuzu picked up sales in the US as the Isuzu Pup that same year.

#196 of 259 Interesting article by obyone

May 23, 2007 (2:26 pm)

http://www.autospies.com/news/Did-Toyota-Stretch-the-Truth-in-the-New-Tundra-Ads- -13554/

#197 of 259 Re: Interesting article [obyone] by razorthunder

May 23, 2007 (5:46 pm)

Replying to: obyone (May 23, 2007 2:26 pm)
Personally, I don't plan to take my truck up a see-saw with 10,000 lbs and then slam on my brakes, like the commercial shows. I understand its just marketing and not fact. Plus, since the article criticized the Toyota brakes. I was wondering the dimensions of brakes on GM trucks? Toyota Tundra listed theirs at 13.9 for the front diameter and 13.6 for the rear diameter at a curb weight of 5540 for a 5.7 Double Cab. I went to the GM website and ironically they don't list the size of the brakes but the curb weights are about the same weight. I was hoping to do a curb weight to brake size ratio comparison and see who comes up on top.

#198 of 259 Re: Interesting article [razorthunder] by obyone

May 23, 2007 (6:45 pm)

Replying to: razorthunder (May 23, 2007 5:46 pm)
I agree. With your titan I wouldn't do any kind of brake testing that's fo sho.

#199 of 259 Re: We don't need Tundras. [captainmatty] by idriveasunbird

May 24, 2007 (8:58 pm)

Replying to: captainmatty (May 18, 2007 12:18 am)
I don't know how accurate your logic is on that. You don't see a whole lot of 1960 Ferrari's driving around either. It is not due to the fact that they were not quality made automobiles, it is a purely a reflection on how many of those automobiles were produced. The HUGE number of Chevy, Dodge and most notably Ford pickup trucks produced in the past 40 years completely dwarfs the number of Toyota pickups produced. The numbers are not anywhere near each other so comparing the quality of the truck based solely on the number you see on the road today will not produce a valid judgement. If you are suggesting the Tundra motor will wear out before the current Ford, Dodge and Chevy motors I think you will be very mistaken. As far as the actual truck is concerned these are all very similiarly put together with the virtually the same steel and aluminum. Japanese products being more quality oriented than American products is no myth, their products are engineered better than ours today which has a direct effect on quality.

#200 of 259 Re: We don't need Tundras. [idriveasunbird] by captainmatty

May 25, 2007 (1:24 am)

Replying to: idriveasunbird (May 24, 2007 8:58 pm)
Off the 1/2 truck subject again. Oh well.
 
 Vehicle brands, marques, divisions, groups, and subsidiaries from General Motors, Volkswagen Group, DiamlerChrysler, Ford, Fiat, and PACCAR move the world. So do vehicles from Isuzu, Honda, Suzuki, Sisu Auto, Scania, Caterpillar, Navistar International, Harley-Davidson, Aston Martin, and Volvo Group.
I work for a company that has a 1999 5.4L Ford E250 van with over 388,000 miles on the od. Many of the E250's and Dodge B250's of our fleet are in the 200,000 and 300,000 mile range. They don't suck up gas that bad at all. Thanks Ford and Dodge.
NASA, Colleges and Universities, K-12 school districts, airports, Homeland Security, and so much more in this country get business done with the dependable aid of American vehicles. Those kick ass General Motors Tow Tractors aboard Aircraft Carriers. Don't fool yourself idriveapontiacsunbird, American products like your Sunbird are quality oriented. All except Tundras, Camrys, and.......................................................................................................
somebody I know told me they were riding in a cab in Brooklyn that broke down on the way to the airport. She said the cab was a newer model Sienna. A Toyota Sienna taxi cab. Better catch a ride in a Astro, Caprice or Crown Vic!

#201 of 259 Re: We don't need Tundras. [captainmatty] by andy82471

May 25, 2007 (10:45 am)

Replying to: captainmatty (May 25, 2007 1:24 am)
Wow the most enlightend post in this forum. We need a sarcasm emoticon on this forum.

#202 of 259 Re: We don't need Tundras. [captainmatty] by rorr

May 25, 2007 (11:43 am)

Replying to: captainmatty (May 25, 2007 1:24 am)
"...American products like your Sunbird are quality oriented."
 
 
 
Are you posting satire?

Messages Page 21 of 27

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement