GMC compared to Toyota

thewhitestallion · January 1, 2014

if im not mistaken the optimal towing gear on the Toyotas is the 4.30. I don't know much about imports but when I saw a review on the new tundras and heard that that is their "towing" gear I just about passed out... no wonder they get such shitty gas mileage. I don't know much about transmission gearing but if it takes that small of a gear in the rear end I would imagine they have a really tall first gear... idk just seems ass backwards.

LongrangeLauber · January 1, 2014

if im not mistaken the optimal towing gear on the Toyotas is the 4.30. I don't know much about imports but when I saw a review on the new tundras and heard that that is their "towing" gear I just about passed out... no wonder they get such shitty gas mileage. I don't know much about transmission gearing but if it takes that small of a gear in the rear end I would imagine they have a really tall first gear... idk just seems ass backwards.

Yeah I think your right. The tow package comes with something stupid steep like as you mentioned the 4.30 gears. They said it in one of those brand vs. brand towing competition videos on YouTube

Sent from the side of the road...

LTZTom · January 1, 2014

I took delivery of my 2007 LTZ on January 2, 2007 (the first year of a new model). I had it until July, 2013 and the only trouble I had was a windshield washer bottle heater recall (they removed it completely). First year of a new model and I couldn't have been happier with it. I just hope when my 2014 LTZ 6.2L arrives it will be as trouble-free as the '07 was.

Badass69 · January 1, 2014

They have 4.30's but a deeper overdrive in 6th than Gm. The transmissions are ratioied completely different. The mileage of the Tundra isn't because of the 430's.... but whining about mileage in a pickup is so trivial anyway.

Half or more of you buy a pickup..... automatically have to level it or lift it and install some big heavy tires...... than whine your mileage is junk.... right. Great logic there bud.

I drive more miles in a year than probably 2 or 3 of you on this boardcombined and do it getting like 13 mpg....... I don't give a damn. I enjoy my vehicles and time on the road and don't sit brooding over fuel economy difference that might net a few hundred dollars..... or even 2 or 3 thousand if you really put it on at the end of the year. I don't have a coffee and a pack of smokes everyday.... my fuel is less than that.

Sent from the Great White North

Silverado Steve · January 1, 2014

The EPA and upcoming CAFE standards disagree with you.

Badass69 · January 1, 2014

Good for them. I couldn't care less about American agencies like the epa.

Sent from the Great White North

MikeNH · January 1, 2014

Good for them. I couldn't care less about American agencies like the epa.
Sent from the Great White North

I don't care about them either but we both have to deal with it. I live here and Canada regulations mimic American CAFE standards. Absolutely useless IMO.

Badass69 · January 1, 2014

Although true I still don't care. Why should I? I can do what I like to my vehicle in this province in particular and as long as safety regulations are met the law is satisfied. Emission laws and fuel economy requirements plus regulations on the aftermarket do not apply.

What I don't like are all the useless requirements like stability control that cannot be disabled.... take that garbage and shove it.

Sent from the Great White North

kstruckcountry · January 1, 2014

Eh I mostly agree with ya bud. Having better fuel econ gives an advantage to that manufacturer. So you really don't need all these rules when people are already going to buy more efficient stuff to save money. The gov sucks at making rules and law to help the environment. IE CASH FOR CLUNKERS. What a joke. Govt can't get anything right.

DanielAcosta · January 1, 2014

07 5.7 4x4 was my first Toyota, and it was an impressive vehicle. It had a few first year bugs, but nothing major other than the bed bounce that was never totally resolved. All in all it was a hot rod with a hair trigger throttle that was always fun to drive. I could milk 16-17mpg from it on occasion, but most of the time I got a solid 15. Highway mileage always tanked at 70mph or faster.

I was strongly biased towards another Tundra for 14, but was very disappointed that the drivetrain was still carryover from 2007. The superior connectivity (usb and power ports, etc) in the 14 GM trucks, plus many favorable reviews, convinced me to go with the 14 Sierra 5.3 4x4 3.42.

15,000 miles later I'm glad I made the switch. The ride is incredibly smooth, and I've gotten used to the soft throttle response that is a polar opposite to the Tundra's. For those who have commented about the gearing, towing, etc., I totally agree. I am amazed at how much time the Sierra spends in 6th gear climbing hills that the Tundra needed 4th gear to climb.

Some people like to say mileage in a truck isn't important, but for high-mileage drivers like me it is important. My Tundra had 35" tires and a 4" lift, the Sierra has 34" tires and a 2" lift, so while the Tundra was a little more aggressive, it's still a reasonable comparison between the two. According to the OnStar app, my overall mileage for the first 15K miles is 19; my 400 mile average is a pretty consistent 20. I think the reason my 15K average is only 19 instead of 20 is a few high-speed trips where I was only getting 18-19mpg instead of the usual 20; I have also had a few tanks as high as 22, but the norm is right around 20. So all-in-all after 15K miles the SIerra is averaging 30% better mileage than my Tundra did for the 85K miles I had it.

So, better ride, better mileage, better connectivity, crew cab with 6.5 foot bed, and more are what convinced me to switch from Toyota to GMC. In terms of reliability, the GMC after 15K miles has been virtually flawless and actually better than any of my previous Toyotas or Hondas. I have had a few ECM/TCM/BCM updates that were actually beneficial because it allowed me to program the TPMS for the higher pressure my oversize tires run compared to the stock tires. Occasionally there is a MyLink gremlin where the radio station favorites disappear from the DIC, but they always come back after turning the truck off and restarting. That's it. No vibrations, rear window failures, or any of the other first year bugs that others have reported. And yes, the knobs on my radio are lit up.

They are both good trucks, but for my $$ the 14 Sierra is better than the Tundra. Whichever one you have, enjoy yours.

Jon A · January 1, 2014

There's nothing wrong with 4.30 gears, they would be great for towing with the GM, especially if upgrading to 35" tires. Either 4.30 or 4.10's (whatever is available) are definatley on my list for the future.

LongrangeLauber · January 1, 2014

4.30's just seem a little steep for a stock truck with stock size tires, but I guess they make up for it with that super high (lower numerically) OD gear. Just seems like they could do some work to the tranny gears and put the gears back down at like a 3.92 or 3.73. Maybe they will be next to get an 8 speed, cause I know Ford and GM are working on a 9 or 10 speed for the half tons. Sounds expensive when they break lol

thewhitestallion · January 1, 2014

There's nothing wrong with 4.30 gears, they would be great for towing with the GM, especially if upgrading to 35" tires. Either 4.30 or 4.10's (whatever is available) are definatley on my list for the future.

4.30' and 4.56's are ideal gears for a lifted gm or any other American truck but running 4.30's with a 31-32" tall tire is not the same as when you run them with a 35" tall tire

mike94silverado · January 1, 2014

They have 4.30's but a deeper overdrive in 6th than Gm. The transmissions are ratioied completely different. The mileage of the Tundra isn't because of the 430's.... but whining about mileage in a pickup is so trivial anyway.

Half or more of you buy a pickup..... automatically have to level it or lift it and install some big heavy tires...... than whine your mileage is junk.... right. Great logic there bud.

I drive more miles in a year than probably 2 or 3 of you on this boardcombined and do it getting like 13 mpg....... I don't give a damn. I enjoy my vehicles and time on the road and don't sit brooding over fuel economy difference that might net a few hundred dollars..... or even 2 or 3 thousand if you really put it on at the end of the year. I don't have a coffee and a pack of smokes everyday.... my fuel is less than that.

Sent from the Great White North

You got it right. I can't stand how people drive out of the dealership with a level and some more aggressive tires and complain.... I dropped 3mpgs going from stock rake and Good Years to LR "E" BFG's and a 2" level. It's my choice to make the trade off...

Jon A · January 2, 2014

4.30' and 4.56's are ideal gears for a lifted gm or any other American truck but running 4.30's with a 31-32" tall tire is not the same as when you run them with a 35" tall tire

Definately true, it all depends on the use. If you do a lot of towing, 4.10's would be better even with the stock tires--requiring downshifting into 2nd much more infrequently. And with big tires it only puts you back to stock equivalent for normal driving around...towing a lot with big tires together and 4.30's look a lot better....