Jump to content
  • Sign up for FREE! Become a GM-Trucks.com Member Today!

    In 20 seconds you can become part of the worlds largest and oldest community discussing General Motors, Chevrolet and GMC branded pickups, crossovers, and SUVs. From buying research to owner support, join 1.5 MILLION GM Truck Enthusiasts every month who use GM-Trucks.com as a daily part of their ownership experience. 

Recommended Posts

I won’t give my final verdict till I see it in person but from the video. It looks like one of my kids tonka toys he use to play with 10 years ago. 
 

I do like the suspension setup. Very nice. And the trailer setup is nice as well.


though the engine is nice with great specs. Especially the hybrid model but once you hook up a smaller turbo engine to trailer their MPGs drop drastically.  Hell my stepdads old Ecobust couldn’t muster 10 mpgs pulling a double jet ski trailer up to our lake house. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good numbers for sure. Slightly edges out the Ford Powerboost.


GM definitely needs to address this, but hopefully in a way that still involves the correct number of cylinders.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks are subjective ,  having said that I’m not a fan. Those fenders are lol identical to the k2. No one saw that in their design room to even mention it? It’s just sooo blocky. I do like the headlights and tail light. Now having said that they really improved in every area. ( hard not to after 15 plus years) finally a fully boxed frame , more towing and payload ,  composite bed is interesting but I love it on my buddies taco. 14 inch display ( although I don’t like how blocky interior looks l) big moonroof. Fox 2.5 that’s tried and true. Now what is interesting is that they said only 2 engine options? Someone correct me ? But both mated to 10A. 389/479 for standard set up and then the Hyrbid which makes 437/583. Toyota is not messing around.  I think this puts pressure in GM and Dodge. Am I wrong ? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, it's still a Toyota.  No thanks.  One glaring omission is the lack of Auto 4WD.  23 years after GM introduced it on their half tons Toyota still doesn't have it.  I've been using Auto 4WD drive on three different GM half tons for 21 years and I wouldn't be without it.  It's one of the most useful features ever devised for winter driving.  Ford and Dodge/Ram eventually put it in their half ton trucks, but Toyota and Nissan remain firmly planted in the 20th century when it comes to 4WD systems.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really impressed to be honest.

The front end looks like they copied a child’s toy version of a K2 GMC front end. Huge honking nose on the new Tundra and that grill is 1/2 K2 GMC and 1/2 previous gen Subaru. Yuck. Everything else on the market is MUCH nicer (and I don’t even like the T1 noses much…. But they’re way better than this)

The TRD Pro quite frankly underwhelms. No front locker (not even optional), no improved departure angles, just suspension tuning for higher-speed off-road desert running (which few will do) compared to the TRD off-road. I can’t see why anyone would buy it over a ZR2, or frankly a TRD Off-road for that matter.

The Hybrid version doesn’t offer anything more than a 400W inverter, which is pathetic given the inverter options on the F150 Hybrid (2Kw or 7.2Kw with the Pro Power package). 

The bed options look competitive against a GMT900, but no answers to the modern tailgate & bed options. Composite beds are nice (and allow it a little extra leeway in payload), but no power, no steps, no storage, 

The interior is tonka-toy. Some nice design bits (physical HVAC controls are nice and that screen looks gorgeous), but it looks like it was put together from lego. All hard plastic, tons of projections, that ridiculous centre-console access hatch (which gives access to the cup holder).

Also the rear seat is arguably too big. I’ve complained about this elsewhere, the rear seating is getting more space than is needed even to comfortably seat tall people when all of these trucks could stand to lose some length. I’m wondering how much longer than my K2 this Tundra is with that massive nose and extra few inches of cabin behind the drivers position.

I thought the previous Tundra was the least attractive of all the full-size options. The new Tundra has definitely taken that crown away from the old one. 
 

Oh, and Toyota’s lost every buyer in the ‘V8 or no buy’ crew, which is still a significant market. Their 5.7L V8 was very well regarded and the new one is 3.5TT V6 only. Even Ford kept the 5.0 as an option for the folks who just couldn’t bring themselves to buy a turbo 4 or 6 even when the turbo was a better performing engine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it.  It's kinda ugly on the outside, but that obviously doesn't matter too much to me since I drive a T1. I really like the inside, even though it has a console shifter, it appears to have a lot of room for "stuff". 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mawz said:

The TRD Pro quite frankly underwhelms. No front locker (not even optional), no improved departure angles, just suspension tuning for higher-speed off-road desert running (which few will do) compared to the TRD off-road. I can’t see why anyone would buy it over a ZR2, or frankly a TRD Off-road for that matter.

 

Only one truck offers a front locker in half tons and even that is a silly option, it is useful for a very small handful of people (more people will run fast off road or in the desert than need a front locker by a long shot). Front traction based systems especially from the likes of Toyota, Jeep or Land Rover are excellent and a better option for the front diff for 99.998% of the owners. The fact you can add the TRD Off Road package to most trims is excellent (same with Ford and the FX4 package) and not get all the silly black bumpers and wheels (hopefully) that comes with a dedicated off road trim level is awesome. If I could get a Trail Boss Package added to an LT (just the bones not the aesthetics) I would be set. Even though I off road more than most even I don't care or need the ZR2 off road tech (front locker and DSSV multimatic shocks), but if the next gen of trucks can add a good front traction based system like that is on the AT4 Yukon and a rear locker that is selectable with a small lift and better shocks would be ideal.  With Toyota you can package a solid off road package (rear locker and good front traction based system) with improved shocks, tires and protection will take care of most everyone and can be added to mid level trims and those with chrome bumpers and cloth seats, that they did right. Styling isn't attractive but I am not buying based on looks. 

 

Tyler

Link to post
Share on other sites

You’re not buying based on looks??? OK. I for one make a HUGE decision on the purchase of a vehicle based on its looks because it’s being parked in my garage, being driven down the highway, and I for one wouldn’t be caught in an ugly vehicle. Just me, but looks make a decisive decision on my buying experience. Hence why I never bought an SS sedan few years ago. Looked to much like a cheap Malibu. If they would have kept the G8 looks from the Holden Pontiac I might have pulled the trigger. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks wasn’t my first priority. Price was. People usually pay more for the tundra. Those buyers buy for reliability, usually keep their Toyota’s many years. I don’t so I didn’t pay the extra money. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.