Article Comments 2007 Half-Ton Pickups Comparison

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

You are in the Nissan Titan Forum. Your Host is kcram

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)

Outline

Messages Page 21 of 27: 1; ...; 18; 19; 20; 21; 22; 23; 24; ...; 27; Prev; Next; Last

#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. Replies to this message: obyone (May 23, 2007 6:45 pm)
#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. Replies to this message: captainmatty (May 25, 2007 1:24 am) andy82471 (May 25, 2007 10:45 am) rorr (May 25, 2007 11:43 am)
#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! Replies to this message: andy82471 (May 25, 2007 10:45 am) rorr (May 25, 2007 11:43 am)
#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?
#203 of 259 Re: 70% of Tundra buyers going for the 5.7 engine [rsholland] by trucktricks May 29, 2007 (1:31 pm)
Replying to: rsholland (May 19, 2007 6:48 am) Hmmmm, I see that the 5.7 is breaking camshafts. Looks to me like "adjusting production" was at the expense of Quality. This doesn't bode well for the already struggling Tundra. Replies to this message: vortecmax (Jun 02, 2007 5:51 pm) ggesq (Jun 03, 2007 8:05 am)
#205 of 259 Re: 70% of Tundra buyers going for the 5.7 engine [trucktricks] by vortecmax Jun 02, 2007 (5:51 pm)
Replying to: trucktricks (May 29, 2007 1:31 pm) Yeah, my heart is breaking just like those camshafts.
#206 of 259 Re: 70% of Tundra buyers going for the 5.7 engine [trucktricks] by ggesq Jun 03, 2007 (8:05 am)
Replying to: trucktricks (May 29, 2007 1:31 pm) "The all-new Tundra full-size pickup reported all-time best-ever sales of 17,727, an increase of 113.8 percent over the year-ago month." http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=37970