http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/

• 410 hp

• 11,000 towing

• "d" cab larger than Dodge Mega Cab

Hopefully just a rumor...

The Ford Excursion was larger, more powerful, and could tow just as much as the Suburban.

We all see where that is.

Size isn't everything; quality is. As far as the double-cab being larger than the Mega Cab's...why? The Mega Cab is a response to the traditional shortfall of Ram Quad Cabs - roominess. Dodge decided to one-up the competition a bit and added extra length and girth in the process. I can't imagine Toyota wanting to simply make the Tundra bigger and even less managable, so does this mean a shorter bed that won't carry as much? Worse yet, a fullsize truck that needs a bed extender?

This pretty much shows where the Tundra is going, though. Wave 'good-bye' to the Toyota pickup that may have been a little girlish, but had respectable looks and a decent ride to some overcompensating rig.

by building the ginormous new tundra, toyota has proven they will offically sell or whore themselves out anywhere and try to have it both ways.

by building the ginormous new tundra, toyota has proven they will offically sell or whore themselves out anywhere and try to have it both ways.

177737[/snapback]

What both ways are you talking about?

What both ways are you talking about?

177769[/snapback]

A green company w/ the Prius and a gas guzzler w/ the Tundra. But which one will get the Media's press and attention?

410hp engine?!... ...

Please... I get the feeling that it'll get outclassed by the GM's in torque. Not to mention that it'll be expensive as hell.

If anything, it'll just be a model for those who live in the burbs, who are overly self confident of a certain body part, and want to show off to all his friends, and everyone around him...

Sadly, he'll likely come home early one day to find his wife in bed with another man who drives a Honda Civic and is well equipped in a certain department.

Serves him right I suppose...

410hp engine?!...  ...

Please... I get the feeling that it'll get outclassed by the GM's in torque. Not to mention that it'll be expensive as hell.

If anything, it'll just be a model for those who live in the burbs, who are overly self confident of a certain body part, and want to show off to all his friends, and everyone around him...

Sadly, he'll likely come home early one day to find his wife in bed with another man who drives a Honda Civic and is well equipped in a certain department.

Serves him right I suppose...

177787[/snapback]

any man with any serious cajones is not going to be caught driving a toyota.

A green company w/ the Prius and a gas guzzler w/ the Tundra.  But which one will get the Media's press and attention?

177771[/snapback]

duh, the prius.

hey remember how nasty the interiors of the new tundra are? GM's new interiors outclass them. much nicer to look at.

Edited August 9, 200619 yr by regfootball

I wonder if the 410HP is for the HD engine? 410HP out of 5.7L in anything is a lot of HP/L, much less in something like a truck that should be geared for low-end power.

I wonder if the 410HP is for the HD engine? 410HP out of 5.7L in anything is a lot of HP/L, much less in something like a truck that should be geared for low-end power.

177794[/snapback]

With DI it's possible, otherwise it would sacrifice too much on the low-end.

And somehow I doubt Toyota will give the Tundra that much more hp than the LS460.

With DI it's possible, otherwise it would sacrifice too much on the low-end.

And somehow I doubt Toyota will give the Tundra that much more hp than the LS460.

177852[/snapback]

Toyota doesnt like diversity... they generally like only 1 or 2 options... like now... 1 v6 1 v8...

so thinking the v8 has that much power seems bizzar and unnecissary for a company that is trying to seem green...

the only use for a truck like that is a SRT-10 competator...

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Autos...icleId=109261#1

interior looks good, should've just left it entirely black IMO. Very contemporary looking.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Autos...icleId=109261#1

interior looks good, should've just left it entirely black IMO.  Very contemporary looking.

177855[/snapback]

looks confusing...

Radio looks a bit far away from the driver, not a huge concern if there are ergonomically acceptable steering wheel mounted controls, but changing cds would be a pain in the ass.

Too many little Radio Shack buttons in too many places.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Autos...icleId=109261#1

interior looks good, should've just left it entirely black IMO.  Very contemporary looking.

177855[/snapback]

The silver or fake aluminum makes it look really, really disjointed. Also that center stack looks way to wide. Wider than it has to be.

I see they've upgraded the clock from one that you get in the dollar store to one that comes from a microwave.

more importantly, look at the size of those gaps! You could seriously store nickles in there!

Aren't we going to hear anything about all that hard plastic? No?

oh wait... pardon me, nurse cratchet is here with my kool-aide injection...

How convinient that Toyota for the longest time was saying "300+" HP and now, after GM's figures are released, its "leaked" that the Tundra supposedly has 400HP.

Paper engineering?

The interior looks nice except for that sombraro hat in the middle of the steering wheel......that would make me want to drive into a tree.

Look at all that fake aluminum in the Tundra interior. For a truck that's supposed to get a lot of use, that paint will definately start showing wear within the first few months of use.

I believe the pictured interior is supposed to compete with the uplevel interiors in other trucks. I doubt it would be in the WT and lower-level variants. I have also seen rumors for one V6, two V8s, a diesel and hybrid.

You guys bash Toyota for putting out a "3/4 full-size truck" and then bash it for actually competing in the segment. Bragging rights are big in the car industry but they are huge in the truck segment. Most HP, most torque, most room, largest bed, most payload and towing capacity, best fuel economy, longest-lasting, etc. However, it seems like a few of you are worried. Like the increasing the rhetoric, I'm sure the new Tundra won't steal that many sales away from the domestics.

toyota can longer claim to be green.

If I were GM I would vbe worried over one thing, the specs. The truck is butt ugly inside and out. If it out classes the GM in specs we may see some wind taken out of the General's sails.

If I were GM I would vbe worried over one thing, the specs. The truck is butt ugly inside and out. If it out classes the GM in specs we may see some wind taken out of the General's sails.

177987[/snapback]

And the GM twins outclass the specs of the Ford F150, and have for years, but the F150 still outsells the Silverado.

And the GM twins outclass the specs of the Ford F150, and have for years, but the F150 still outsells the Silverado.

178013[/snapback]

Does the F-150 outsell the Silverado AND Sierra?

You guys bash Toyota for putting out a "3/4 full-size truck" and then bash it for actually competing in the segment.

Personally, I bash toyota apologists for hiding behind the "7/8ths full-size" excuse. I bash toyota for being uncompetitive in the segment. But it's hard to call it 'bashing' when it's more factual than anything else.

You guys bash Toyota for putting out a "3/4 full-size truck" and then bash it for actually competing in the segment.

Personally, I bash toyota apologists for hiding behind the "7/8ths full-size" excuse. I bash toyota for being uncompetitive in the segment. But it's hard to call it 'bashing' when it's more factual than anything else.

178026[/snapback]

FWIW... '06 Tundra Double Cab v. '06 Silverado 1500 Crew Cab

Length 230.1 in. 230.2 in.

Width 79.7 in. 78.5 in.

Height 74.6 in. 75 in.

Wheel Base 140.5 in. 143.5 in.

FWIW... '06 Tundra Double Cab v. '06 Silverado 1500 Crew Cab

Length     230.1 in.  230.2 in.

Width   79.7 in.  78.5 in.

Height     74.6 in.  75 in.

Wheel Base     140.5 in.  143.5 in.

178031[/snapback]

Silverado Ext Cab vs. Tundra Access Cab

+1" headroom

+5" rear legroom

+2.5" front/rear shoulder room

+2" front hiproom

+5" rear hiproom

+3" bed depth

+4" bed length

+2" bed width

+~75hp/70lbft

+1/2 ton towing

BTW, I love the phrasing...

You guys bash Toyota for putting out a "3/4 full-size truck" and then bash it for actually competing in the segment.  Bragging rights are big in the car industry but they are huge in the truck segment.  Most HP, most torque, most room, largest bed, most payload and towing capacity, best fuel economy, longest-lasting, etc.  However, it seems like a few of you are worried.  Like the increasing the rhetoric, I'm sure the new Tundra won't steal that many sales away from the domestics.

177936[/snapback]

I think people bash the Tundra because Toyota deserves to be bashed, but the press doesn't seem to do it. The press bashes the hell out of GM when they put out a bad product that replaces a bad product. Look at the current Tundra. It obviously doesn't have what it takes to compete, yet the press gives it a free pass, even though it replaced a truck that didn't have what it took to compete either.

GM puts out cars that don't compete and gets bashed, yet Toyota puts out a truck that doesn't compete well and gets a free pass because "oh well the Tundra is only 7/8th size so these things that it doesn't have are ok since it's smaller." That's the sort of BS Toyota gets away with.

If I were GM I would vbe worried over one thing, the specs. The truck is butt ugly inside and out. If it out classes the GM in specs we may see some wind taken out of the General's sails.

177987[/snapback]

The people who are really worried about towing 10k pounds are probably going to go for the HD anyways. And I don't think an extra 1000 pounds towiing capacity is going to steal many buyers, especially when both can tow so much.

Tow ratings are good for one thing: bragging rights. People will overload these new trucks (all brands), just as they have for the last million years. But it's the GM truck that will be going longer down the road than this aquatic monster.

I don't blame Toyota for going to a true full-size. I blame them for being totally alien in execution. May the new Tundra suffer a quick death.

http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/

• 410 hp

• 11,000 towing

• "d" cab larger than Dodge Mega Cab

Hopefully just a rumor...

177651[/snapback]

"The new Tundra is seven feet tall!"

"Yes, I've heard. Kills men by the hundreds. And if IT were here, it'd consume the Big Three with fireballs from its headlights, and bolts of lightning from its exhaust."

/braveheart

Silverado Ext Cab vs. Tundra Access Cab

+1" headroom

+5" rear legroom

+2.5" front/rear shoulder room

+2" front hiproom

+5" rear hiproom

+3" bed depth

+4" bed length

+2" bed width

+~75hp/70lbft

+1/2 ton towing

BTW, I love the phrasing...

178052[/snapback]

But that's from your beloved MSN Autos!

"+~75hp/70lbft" is probably Tundra V6 vs. Silverado V8.

I still don't see the reason for having a "mega cab" option, if you want that much freaking leg room, go buy an SUV, then you get the nicety of a "covered" cargo area. I mean sheesh, what happened to the old days of a Suburban being basically a Chevrolet C10 1/2 pickup with a permanently attached camper shell and two extra doors? Now everything has to get rid of bed area to include someone's precious leg room. If you want leg room, get a crew cab, dually truck with a long bed and call it a freaking day. By the way, I KNOW GM's trucks get overloaded every day, and you still see them chugging down the road as happy as they were the day that they were driven off the lot. I hardly ever see a Tundra going anywhere with ANYTHING in the bed.

I still don't see the reason for having a "mega cab" option, if you want that much freaking leg room, go buy an SUV, then you get the nicety of a "covered" cargo area.  I mean sheesh, what happened to the old days of a Suburban being basically a Chevrolet C10 1/2 pickup with a permanently attached camper shell and two extra doors?  Now everything has to get rid of bed area to include someone's precious leg room.  If you want leg room, get a crew cab, dually truck with a long bed and call it a freaking day.  By the way, I KNOW GM's trucks get overloaded every day, and you still see them chugging down the road as happy as they were the day that they were driven off the lot.  I hardly ever see a Tundra going anywhere with ANYTHING in the bed.

178095[/snapback]

some folks like farmers and others who can write off a truck as a work vehicle, use their pickups as a family vehicle. great gig, family vehicle, but use it for work too and write it off. so they like the room.

Does the F-150 outsell the Silverado AND Sierra?

178015[/snapback]

I think it varies between years. Last year I think the GM twins won.

As long as GMC and Chevy truck numbers are counted separately, Ford can claim to have the best selling pickup and be technically correct. Its all spin and advertising anyway.

If the Tundra wants to play with the big boys, then the 3/4 or 7/8 or 15/16, whatever, excuse is garbage. It either holds its own or it doesn't. The same goes for any truck that advertises against the F-series, Sierra, Silverado, and Ram trucks. We'd be as harsh on any of them for failing to measure up.

As ocnblu stated, we overload our trucks. I've carried a ton of hay in an 83 S-10. You probably wouldn't believe what we've pulled out of hay fields with our trucks. The simple fact is the strength of American built trucks is way more than what they are rated at simply because the manufacturers know we are like this.

zhawk: Damned straight!!

RE: "limited access" cab - always makes me laugh. Seems a good indicator how poorly toyota has a grip on the pick-up market.

Silverado Ext Cab vs. Tundra Access Cab

+~75hp/70lbft

178052[/snapback]

Yet none of this power translates into additional performance

Tundra

0-60

7.6sec

1/4mi

15.7 @ 88.2

0-90

17.9

60-0

135ft

Silverado

0-60

8.5

1/4mi

16.1 @ 87.0

0-90

19.6

60-0

151

http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/pickup...ison/index.html

Edited August 11, 200619 yr by toyoguy

Performance is fairly null in the truck market unless you're towing.

Yet none of this power translates into additional performance

Tundra

0-60

7.6sec

1/4mi

15.7 @ 88.2

0-90

17.9

60-0

135ft

Silverado

0-60

8.5

1/4mi

16.1 @ 87.0

0-90

19.6

60-0

151

http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/pickup...ison/index.html

178965[/snapback]

What is this a drag race? I want to know how it handles pulling stumps or hauling a trailer over the West Virginia mountains.

Performance is fairly null in the truck market unless you're towing.

178981[/snapback]

You've obviously never been to Houston or Dallas.

Yet none of this power translates into additional performance

Tundra

0-60

7.6sec

1/4mi

15.7 @ 88.2

0-90

17.9

60-0

135ft

Silverado

0-60

8.5

1/4mi

16.1 @ 87.0

0-90

19.6

60-0

151

http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/pickup...ison/index.html

178965[/snapback]

It's easier to accelerate and stop when you are smaller and lighter. That's a no brainer. Ask the fat kids on the play ground.

Edited August 11, 200619 yr by Derek77

I think he's omitted some data... where are the torque and horsepower figures?

Yet none of this power translates into additional performance

Tundra

0-60

7.6sec

1/4mi

15.7 @ 88.2

0-90

17.9

60-0

135ft

Silverado

0-60

8.5

1/4mi

16.1 @ 87.0

0-90

19.6

60-0

151

http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests/pickup...ison/index.html

178965[/snapback]

Oh boy, 1 mph difference over the 1/4 mile. How about times with a trailer on the back?

You've obviously never been to Houston or Dallas.

178987[/snapback]

I've been to Houston a couple of times and I live near Dallas. Yes there quite a few people in my area that race trucks. Domestic ones though, NOT toyota's. You come here and do nothing but make Toyota seem like they can do no wrong. Pushing data that has omit's or flaw's. This IS a GM website, the most unbiased one i've ever been too. So I have no clue why you come in here trolling and bashing GM. The Silverado is a larger and therefore heavier truck than the Tundra. Maximum towing capacity for the Tundra is 6,800 lbs. The Silverado can tow 10,000 lbs. Accelerations numbers w/o any payload/trailer are redundant and meaningless.

This IS a GM website, the most unbiased one i've ever been too. So I have no clue why you come in here trolling and bashing GM. The Silverado is a larger and therefore heavier truck than the Tundra. Maximum towing capacity for the Tundra is 6,800 lbs. The Silverado can tow 10,000 lbs. Accelerations numbers w/o any payload/trailer are redundant and meaningless.

179355[/snapback]

thats a great point and i couldnt agree more. about both things.

3,200 lbs is quite a bit more if those numbers are correct. American trucks are proven through time and experience. tough as nails and willing and able for more.

toyota can recreate or assemble a pile of parts to create product, but that wont give it character or personality. and it certainly wont give it the more intangible or even undefinable and elusive quality known as soul. and thats something that almost all if not every toyota/lexus product lacks.

so, you like toyota thats good, good for you. dont try telling anyone there better when clearly that remains to be seen.

toyoguy, i hope your next $h! is square. dont f@#k with American trucks, toyota or nissan isnt quite there yet and dont kid yourself into thinking they are...no ones buying it. check for yourself.

Edited August 12, 200619 yr by Mr.Krinkle

My neighbour used to drive a mid 90s Toyota Tacoma and would take it out when he went hunting, fishing and heading off the beaten track. And it also out - accelerated our diesel Sierra.

However, he has asked us on a couple occasions to borrow our Sierra when he had to move his daughters bed and stuff from their house to her apartment and back.

The Tacoma was not that up to the task of hauling dressers, bed frames and the like. Yes it took her futon, but we had to haul the sofa.

He bought the Tacoma because he heard great things about it in Consumer Reports, and he told us that CR said our 1990 Sierra was terrible, and unreliable. Our Sierra still runs like a charm, and his Tacoma has since gone to pasture after a few transmission and engine problems.

So although I am commenting on the Tacoma, I think it can be compared with the Tundra. Yes it may out accelerate the Domestics... but when push comes to shove, when you actually need to use the vehicle for its intended purpose, the Tundra loses, that's all there is to it.

Plus, the current Tundra gets worse fuel economy in its V8 form than GM's 5.3...

Toyota 16/18 EPA ... as tested - 17.0

Chevrolet 16/20 EPA ... as tested - 18.2

sad... sad...sad...

Since you can't seem to carry on a respectable conversation, I guess you'll have to be warned, huh?

179336[/snapback]

Who was that comment to? Hopefully more than the one person I have in mind.

Who was that comment to?  Hopefully more than the one person I have in mind.

179377[/snapback]

Let's just say it's pretty telling who the problem is when we can have intelligent discussions when a certain someone isn't around.

EDIT: I cleaned up the topic a bit, so hopefully everyone can forget what happened and move on with a much more intelligent conversation.