Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Pickups Pickups - Archived Discussions Half-ton Pickups - The full field 
333 messages, Last post on Oct 12, 2007 at 6:58 PM
You are in the Pickups - Archived Discussions Forum. Your Host is kcram
This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Pickups Host for directions! discussion.
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: obyone (Oct 06, 2007 9:56 pm)  later that same year we got a 2002 silverado HD2500,after dealing with the FORD we didnot hesitate to also beaf up the silverado springs before it hit the job site,try driving that chevy on loose gravle, that thing is very weak,try merging on to the highway ,you better make sure there is nothing at all coming,you need atleast 20 seconds to getup to 50 mph,we have now traded 1 siera and one f150 for 2 tundra 4.7 crew cab and 1 5.7 crew max,the only complain so far from the guys ,15 mpg average,hard to get useto blind spot,to all who are yappind about great domestic trucks, tell that crap to people online,who knows no better,i for one knows the tundras cannot be any worste,i know you are going to say i am comparing older trucks to the tundra,but are you going to admit they are just starting to build decent trucks?  atleast i thaught they was,check consumeraffairs to see a brand new f150 burning to the ground  ,http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2007/09/ford_fires_continue.html.....- .......October 5, 2007 A new risk of fire in Ford SUVs has prompted a recall from the Ford Motor Corp. Ford is recalling about 1,500 2008 Explorer, Explorer Sport Track and Mercury Mountaineer SUVs equipped with the 4.6 liter engine and 6R transmission. A bolt securing the oil cooler line fittings at the transmission may not have been tightened sufficiently at the Ford assembly plant. If the bolt loosens, the transmission cooler lines can leak fluid on to the vehicle's the catalytic converter posing the fire risk
|
|
|
|
|
To All, With freedom comes responsibility. I think anyone who posts should disclose whether they have any finacial interest in either advocating for or against the vehicle they are discussing. A lot of people read these posts and they help to inform the buying public, which is a fantastic public service which Edmunds is to be commended for. Here's my pledge regarding all the posts I've made, especially regarding the Tundra and the Silverado: "I swear I have no financial interest in either General Motors or Toyota. I have never sold, nor do I sell now, any vehicles on a commercial basis. I am not currently employed by a car maker or one of their suppliers, nor have I ever been." Full disclosure: I have sold a few vehicles, but they have all been my personal cars, and I sold them used to other private parties. I own a few shares of Ford stock, which I inherited. I keep it for sentimental reasons only - Lord knows it has been a lousy investment. I am just a consumer, and I am loyal to no brand. I have owned GMs, Toyotas, Fords, VWs, Mazdas, Isuzus, Nissans, and others. I have no ax to grind with any car maker. If you are a salesman (my condolences) or are involved in any financial way with the vehicles you discuss, you have a duty to disclose it. It does not invalidate your opinion, but it does put it into proper perspective. Those who stand to profit or lose due to auto sales should "man up" and admit it. drfill and others - are you man enough to take The Pledge? If not, I am going to rag you on every post you make that expresses a strong advocacy one way or another. Your refusal to take The Pledge will say volumes about you, and others will form their opinions based on that. Fair enuf? All you have to do to take The Pledge is post "I take The Pledge". You don't have to repeat the whole thing. Simple, and fast. Then we can move on. Oh, and one more thing. There will be no discussing what the definition of "is", is, or any foolishness like that. You either take it and mean it, or you don't, and accept the consequences of your personal decision. 1offroader |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: toyota4life (Oct 07, 2007 5:56 am) Please say "yes" so I can have a good laugh for the day. BTW, I call BS to your entire story.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: h20 (Oct 06, 2007 7:35 pm) Hmmm, let me think? Nope. Not when comparing it to the GMT900's. There simply is NO comparison. The closest thing would be the engine, but based on my experience, I'll still take the GM LS engine. It is proven and keeps getting better and better. You asked, I answered, honestly. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: anythingbuttoy (Oct 07, 2007 10:13 am) again feel free to call what i say BS,what else would you call it?like i said ,tell people on here all you want how great your trucks are,but for me ,i have seen them all,and they are nothing special,and just so you know ,my crew still have the chevy,the company is planing to swapout all the other trucks for the tundra,and i cannot wait for the day!makes me sick every time i have to drive the silverado,do you want to see black hard plastic?chevy got that covered,so like i said, keep raving about your trucks,me and the guys will have a good laugh,we had a meeting last week for fall safety protection,and the tundras got so much attention,i was very please the 5.7 crew max got every one drewling,when i said to one of the guys ,man thats a nice truck,his reply,YES IT IS,wish i could afford one, but like i said ,call my statement BS,that just make us laugh at you more,the tundra have yet to prove itself ,but it can never be any worse than those contraptions
|
|
|
Replying to: anythingbuttoy (Oct 06, 2007 12:11 pm) They have stated they used the 5.3 because that is the engine most people buy, and the 5.7 is the one for Toyota. My question to you is why was the Tundra the most efficient truck in the test? Stronger, faster, more safety features, roomier, and more efficient, sounds like a winner to me. I see the bias now....with eyes wide open.  DrFill
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: drfill (Oct 07, 2007 12:54 pm) What does popularity have to do with capability? You buy what you need. Right? My question to you is why was the Tundra the most efficient truck in the test? Stronger, faster, more safety features, roomier, and more efficient, sounds like a winner to me. More efficient? I see plenty of reports of poor mileage, 12-13mpg on TS, among reports of 17-18 mpg? WTF? Stronger? Yep, 14 HP 5.7 vs 6.0. How about the 5.7 vs 6.2? hmm? Yep, WEAKER!!! Faster? again 5.7 vs 5.3/6.0 yes, 6.2"? Debateable. But who cares about 0-60 times in a 6000 lb truck. Irrelevant. More safety features? Such as??? Roomier? Crewcab VS Crewmax cab, yes, but box is smaller. DC vs crewcab...nope. Guess it depends on what you need the room for huh? Bias is a 2-way street dude. Before you play the "yeah, but Toyota offers the 5.7 in all configs" card...Remember, GM has the 2500 with Duramax and 6.0 gasser in the 2500 series in RC's. So, they have the bases covered for people who need all that power in a Reg cab.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: drfill (Oct 07, 2007 12:54 pm) BTW, you aren't a real doctor, either, are you? 1offroader |
|
You are here:
Forums
Pickups Pickups - Archived Discussions Half-ton Pickups - The full field
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2008 Toyota Tundra
2009 Dodge Ram Pickup 1500
2008 Ford F-150
2009 Chevrolet Silverado 1500
2009 GMC Sierra 1500
2009 Nissan Titan
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
