New Tundra vs Sierra/Silverado

[TimmyG]

You can add a 110 outlet in your bed for the cost of an inverter and a handyman box.

 

A load floor in the backseat? Am I the only one that uses the BED for that? That's what you get a truck for in the first place.

 

 

Normally yes but there are times when you carry stuff that needs to be dry/secure or kept at a normal temperature and no tonneau can truly do that.

i carry alot of stuff in the cab of my cc, with the seat folded up!

 

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

[MikeNH]

JMO but those features belong in a minivan, not a truck. Trucks are for doing work, not luxury grocery getters. If you want that kind of fancy stuff don't get a truck, get a minivan or luxury suv.

 

 

 

What on earth are you talking about? What you said makes no sense.....I guess your simple mind can't understand then

 

How is in-bed storage (like the Ram Box) something for a luxury SUV?.....Never mentioned Ram, topic is about Tundra, pay attention

 

How is a in-bed power outlet something for a luxury SUV?.......if you can't see that as a luxury item and need someone to explain, I feel sorry for you

 

How is having seatbacks with plastic backsides to create a durable load floor something for a luxury SUV?........didn't say anything about this, maybe yo ushould re-read my post?

 

How are reclining seats a luxury item?....think about it, not hard to figure out, for most people anyway.

 

Not to mention you have a LT-trim truck you added a Denali shifter to- LT trucks have power seats, windows, locks, mirrors, dual-zone AC and dozens of other luxuries........NO I don't have dual zone AC, not needed. NO I don't have power seats, wasn't needed, gear shifter is not a luxury item, installed it to match.

 

The days of all trucks being spartan work tools is dead and with good reason.

 

 

Anything else you can't seem to understand??????????

 

 

 

No, I'm through. You've already proven why it's a waste of time to argue with people who think trucks should be bare bones and basic anyhow- real awesome and mature to attack someone when you can't come up with a good counter argument.

[foghorn23]

does anyone know what year the current style of tundra came out?

 

 

Same time as the current GMT900's fall of 2006 as a 2007 model. I got mine in the summer of 2007 as a first year model. Maybe some of my issues were due to it being the first year of the design. I think the frame issues were more noticeable on the double cabs vs the crew cabs. I test drove a double cab and I could literally see the bed bounce issue that plagued the current Tundra in its first production years. I never had any frame problems or vibration on the crew. At the time it was a very strong running truck, but now that Dodge has redesigned the Hemi, Ford has redone their engines, and GM has made the 6.2 more available it isn't the power standout it was 5-6 years ago.

[00Silverado4x4]

I keep watch on the latest and the greatest as I just love going truck "window" shopping. I can't say I've been real impressed with the the Tundra, or any other right to the moment. Not that the companies aren't putting out good products. Just not what I prefer in my rig. With the exception to my old '76 this Sierra is my first full size truck. Everytime I would look at a truck it just wasn't set up the way I liked it. Even the GMT900 looks like a great truck but I just don't care for the layout nearly as much as my old GMT800. I did go out and looked at a new Tundra awhile back but it wasn't a comfy set up in their cabs either. It's hard to describe but my biggest peeve is the engine. If I don't like the looks under the hood, regardless of everything else, I will not buy that vehicle.

Somehow I think it's just going to be awhile before I find the "right" truck again.

[ATMINF]

_{A friend of mine has a Tundra. I think its a good truck, but its not any better in my mind that the chevy, ford or dodge. All in all I think the Japanese made a big mistake thinking they could take over the market like they did with small cars. Overall my take is that the reason why Toyota and Nissan etc took over the small car market is that at the time 70's thru 90's is that the domestic small cars were not very good. They were only okay at best. The Japanses may have thought that was the same case for the full size trucks, but in reality the large Domestic trucks were always good trucks. Their price points were good, and they lasted a long time. So overall when Toyota and Nissan put out their trucks they were at best only on par with the Big Three. And when traditional truck buyers looked at their trucks, they did not wow them. Most of us said "okay they aren't bad, but so what??" . Also when you think about it, what is so much better about the full size offerings from the Japanese? Are they cheaper?, Do they last longer? Can they tow as much?, Overall do they have more capablities? And generally speaking they are all about the same, so I think most buyers like me said, I am familiar with Chevy and I like it so that is what I am sticking with. Just my 2 cents.}

_{And back to the main post I have heard the next Fullsize platform will incorporate some of the other newer "cool" stuff.}

[MikeNH]

You also need to consider that most fullsize truck buyers are among the most brand-loyal vehicle owners out there. Nissan and Toyota might steal some buyers from the big three but I'd be willing to say the bulk of GM/Ford/Ram buyers would be hard pressed to look at another domestic brand, let alone a foreign brand truck, even if it is made here.

[foghorn23]

You also need to consider that most fullsize truck buyers are among the most brand-loyal vehicle owners out there. Nissan and Toyota might steal some buyers from the big three but I'd be willing to say the bulk of GM/Ford/Ram buyers would be hard pressed to look at another domestic brand, let alone a foreign brand truck, even if it is made here.

 

 

+1 It's tough to put a Chevy guy in a Ford and vice versa. I don't think the Japanese realized how brand loyal for the most part truck buyers are. Mike, I think you hit the nail on the head here.

[Prokopchuk_9]

JMO but those features belong in a minivan, not a truck. Trucks are for doing work, not luxury grocery getters. If you want that kind of fancy stuff don't get a truck, get a minivan or luxury suv.

 

You said it buddy!! I've had two friends bought them, one tundra and the other Tacoma. Each of them for fully loaded pickups, each of them only owned them for less than a year LOL. The tundras box was destroyed in a couple months, tail gate buckled, he hated that truck. Lots of useless crap that he never used that just broke lol. Tundras are flex-I-flyers. The Tacoma my buddy had that box destroyed right quick too, lol. They are just overall "city" truck. They can't take the abuse like a ford, dodge or

Chev. They both picked up dodge 1 tons after LOL. I use a truck like a truck, I don't need reclining rear seats, air conditioned seats, useless crap that belongs in a minivan.

[kstruckcountry]

I fold up my backseat too, usually to clean or get out the jack. The only toyotas I'm fans of are the "Taliban taxi" 80's models, so much fun to jump and bash.

[wranglerguy93]

Well some of this got out of hand. Yes I understand some people use a truck for a truck. At this point in time I think people are buying trucks to do more of a duel role. If people only wanted trucks for trucks then companies would not make all the models they do and they would only have base work trucks and nothing else. Obviously there is a market.

 

As far as cool guy features some would be nice, no I'm not in the back seat but for the times I use my truck to haul around a bunch of people they might enjoy that. I'm sure GM had its reasons for not doing this and the point someone made about cool guy features drawing people is probably very correct.

 

I have heard bad things about the Tundra and body being really thin. Same could be said of ours to I'm sure. (Not exactly sure what though)

 

I really didn't mean for this to be a bash. I will say big three customers are brand loyal. I never even looked at dodges or fords, let alone a foriegn truck. I know GM and grew up with it. Its been proven to me.

 

Just some observations I had and wanted to see where everyone stood on it and if I was the only one that had seen such things.

 

As far as "luxury truck" why not have it, you may as well be comfortable while working. Thats not saying I use my truck everyday for hauling wood or stone but I bought my truck to have that option down the road, like owning a house and needing to get something. A SUV won't have that option. I have my jeep for being a real manly work vehicle if I feel the need to show it. (And I don't)

[music]

Re: the reclining rear seat, it's very important to note that they do not fold up. The back rest folds down on the Crewmax, which probably works fine for some uses, but I use the "fold-up seat" feature on my truck a lot. Apparently, they couldn't have reclining *and* fold-up.

[MikeNH]

Re: the reclining rear seat, it's very important to note that they do not fold up. The back rest folds down on the Crewmax, which probably works fine for some uses, but I use the "fold-up seat" feature on my truck a lot. Apparently, they couldn't have reclining *and* fold-up.

 

Well now that's actually useful info instead of just saying "waaaah that crap doesn't belong on a truck!".

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wysilverado]

Tried the Tundra twice,Crewmax space was nice,power was nice....... Rubbermaid trashcan Door panels and pathetic interior were not, along with paper thin sheetmetal .Bedbounce,interior rattles and about every other negative comment on a Tundra on this page I'd agree with. 24,000 miles on the 1st one,11,000 miles on the second one.

[wranglerguy93]

Well, that was one tidbit of information I didn't know. At that point I would say I'll still take my fold up seat for the dog.

[RyanbabZ71]

Same here fold up seats much more practical for me

 

 

Ryan

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk