Silverado gets new facelift for 2016

[ultrarunner]

MPG can go overboard...

My then 85 year old neighbor had a low mileage 1985 Cadillac that she and her husband bought new... always garage kept and 15 years old... she was driving about 2,000 miles per year.

Her college granddaughter absolutely didn't like the car for a number of reasons... too big... Detroit made, not good on gas... etc... so grandma succumbed and traded it in for $1000 on a new Prius... with her Granddaughter doing the negotiating...

Nothing wrong with the Prius per say... it's just the other car was paid for and well liked by the owner who only drove to market, church and Doctor visits...

She did not like the Prius... never got used to it and missed having a full bench seat and gear selector on the column...

The gas "Savings" will never pay or justify...

 

[ovrszd]

I can't verify this, but, have heard several times that the Prius has a very high "Carbon Footprint".

And this I can verify. I get passed on the hiway the most by speeding Prius drivers.

 

[TomSeller]

A good friend just bought a Tundra, gets about 8 mpg, omg, 5/7, it's more like 9/12. My 5.3 suburban get 17 in mixed and is close to 22 on highway. That puts Toyota in "wouldn't even consider" category. HS

I would have to agree with you based on those numbers.

 

[Grateful11]

A good friend just bought a Tundra, gets about 8 mpg, omg, 5/7, it's more like 9/12. My 5.3 suburban get 17 in mixed and is close to 22 on highway. That puts Toyota in "wouldn't even consider" category. HS

Then your friend either doesn't know how to drive or his truck has a problem. We've put close to 4000 miles on our new Tundra 2015 5.7L SR5 TRD 4WD Double Cab. We drove right at 300 miles Saturday, mixed driving about 60% highway and 40% country roads, filled her up Mon. and calculated the mileage on a good old calculator and got 17.2 mpg. That's not the only tank that's gotten that good either so it wasn't a glitch. Around here when mostly country roads it's getting 15.9 to 16.4. The highest we've seen the onboard computer go is 16.5mpg. Not bad for 381hp and 401 ft. lbs. of torque.

Never thought we'd ever buy a Toyota truck until we started looking at everything available, looked at the Chevy 1500's and everyone we looked at was marked final assembly Mexico and my wife no way, plus everything we looked at equipped like she wanted was $47-52K MSRP. She drove the Dodge Eco-Diesel and it was a nice truck but just didn't have any get up and go. Once you were going on down the road it was ok but nothing to brag about especially not at $51K. Drove onto the Ford lot and everything equipped like we needed was a good $2-3K more than Chevy and Dodge. So we went home mulled it over.

Finally we saw that a Toyota dealer in Charlotte had a '12 Tundra Limited with fiberglass cap and loaded, it lasted a day on the lot and was gone before we got there. They also had an '11 Chevy 2500 Diesel/Allison tranny, didn't realize it was 2WD until we got there, we drove it, price wasn't bad, mileage pretty low. So I called my brother that has a '12 2500 Chevy Diesel and said don't touch if it's 2WD, he said around the farm you're going to get stuck way too many times. He said if you would pee in front of the rear tires with the truck in the yard he have to put it in 4WD to get it to move. He says there's so much weight up front and the rear traction without 4WD just plain sucks.

So the salesman says I can put you in a new truck for about what those two used ones are/were going for so we said show us. So we looked at a SuperCrew cab first and the bed was just too short and it had a bench seat with no power adjustments. Then I noticed a sweet looking white Tundra SR5 TRD 4WD, bucket seats(power drivers seat), 5.7L V8, sprayed in bedliner, 18" Michelins All Terrains, 6 speed tranny, back-up camera, Bilstein Shocks, Navigation, Bluetooth, everything we wanted. MSRP was a tad over $42K and the selling price was $36.5K. We made the deal and she loves, drives great, feels solid, plenty of room.

We drove a couple counties away from the farm Monday to pick up some seed that wasn't available here and before she got done she had 1400# in the bed, she did all the driving and I asked her how it handled with that much weight in the bed and she said, "couldn't even tell it was back there."

I don't think it'll ever get quite what our '02 Chevy Tahoe Z71 with a 5.3L gets but we're not complaining. The Tahoe will get 19 on the highway, it has 92K miles on it.

 

[TomSeller]

Then your friend either doesn't know how to drive or his truck has a problem. We've put close to 4000 miles on our new Tundra 2015 5.7L SR5 TRD 4WD Double Cab. We drove right at 300 miles Saturday, mixed driving about 60% highway and 40% country roads, filled her up Mon. and calculated the mileage on a good old calculator and got 17.2 mpg. That's not the only tank that's gotten that good either so it wasn't a glitch.

I would have to agree with you based on those numbers. Curious what other's unvarnished truth is. You seem to be very accurate and with first hand information.

 

[Patches]

I would have to agree with you based on those numbers. Curious what other's unvarnished truth is. You seem to be very accurate and with first hand information.

I've owned my '07 Tundra since July of '07, It now has 115,000 miles on it and has averaged 16 to 17 mpg on the local county roads(45 to 55 mph) but little in town driving. On interstate trips I've obtained as much as 19.5 mpg, if I keep the speed below 70 mph. I tow a two place "clam shell" snowmobile trailer with two sleds in it and average 13 to 14 mpg. The trailer weighs about 2100lbs. and is a good sized sail. I have towed an equipment trailer with two farm tractors on weighing an "estimated" 12,500lbs and it towed that load very easily; agreed that weight is beyond the advertised tow rating and I am not advocating others attempt this, but is just an aside to demonstrate the Tundra's ability. This is the longest I have owned a vehicle(8 years) and I've no intention of trading it; I'm hoping to get another 115,000 from it

 

[clemsonfor]

MPG can go overboard...

My then 85 year old neighbor had a low mileage 1985 Cadillac that she and her husband bought new... always garage kept and 15 years old... she was driving about 2,000 miles per year.

Her college granddaughter absolutely didn't like the car for a number of reasons... too big... Detroit made, not good on gas... etc... so grandma succumbed and traded it in for $1000 on a new Prius... with her Granddaughter doing the negotiating...

Nothing wrong with the Prius per say... it's just the other car was paid for and well liked by the owner who only drove to market, church and Doctor visits...

She did not like the Prius... never got used to it and missed having a full bench seat and gear selector on the column...

The gas "Savings" will never pay or justify...

That sounds like a story right out of california!!!

I dont understand how the girl could not see that! Grandma drives less than 3000 miles a year!!!! who cares if she gets 10mpg the gas would only add up to like 2 car paryments a year tops!!!

 

[s219]

Then your friend either doesn't know how to drive or his truck has a problem. We've put close to 4000 miles on our new Tundra 2015 5.7L SR5 TRD 4WD Double Cab. We drove right at 300 miles Saturday, mixed driving about 60% highway and 40% country roads, filled her up Mon. and calculated the mileage on a good old calculator and got 17.2 mpg. That's not the only tank that's gotten that good either so it wasn't a glitch. Around here when mostly country roads it's getting 15.9 to 16.4. The highest we've seen the onboard computer go is 16.5mpg. Not bad for 381hp and 401 ft. lbs. of torque.

To me your numbers are reasonable and typical for Toyota, but keep in mind that is still below the class MPG leaders. I normally do about 50% city/highway with my GMC with 5.3L V8, 4x4, crew cab, and my tanks average 19-21 MPG at the next fill up. On tanks where I am biased to mostly highway driving and country roads, it will come in around 22-23 MPG (country roads at about 50-55 mph are the sweet spot, as the truck loafs along on just 4 cylinders with very little throttle input). The only time I see a tank's average go below 19MPG is when I mix in some towing or an abnormal amount of idling or city driving, or in the dead of winter when all the numbers skew lower. Aside from an all-towing tank that was down near 13-14, the worst mixed towing/commuting tank I ever saw was still in the 17s.

When I combine all the specs and numbers I see reported on forums like this, Toyota is consistently about 6-7 MPG lower than the most efficient competitors, apples to apples. It's just the way it is. Their window sticker numbers also reflect this. Surely they can improve this with more engineering. I expect them to take a leap with their next generation to keep pace.

 

[Patches]

Those are good #'s, but consider your truck is about 300hp, Toyota is 380; you're in the 340 to 350lb/ft of torque range, the Tundra is 401; you are probably running a 3.73:1 axle ratio while the Tundra is turning a 4.30:1. While I'd like your fuel mileage, I'd rather have my power

 

[s219]

The 5.3L V8 has 355HP and 383ft-lb torque. Lower than Toyota, but not so much that it justifies 25-30% worse MPG numbers in my opinion. If more power and torque is needed, there are other engine options available in the other brands, but you cannot get a more efficient motor from Toyota -- they don't even give customers that choice. My point being, the other brands cover both ends of the power/efficiency spectrum. Toyota is stuck on one end only, which is very uncharacteristic for the brand.

 

[Patches]

GM offers nothing bigger than the 5.3 in a half ton unless you go Denali($60,000) and the last I checked, nothing lower than 3.83's. My last GM, an '04, 5.3 half ton Avalanche ordered with 4.10 gears was a passable tower, but nothing special. Prior to the Avalanche I owned a bunch of GM half tons with both 5.7 and 5.3's, but with 4.10 gears; none of them got exceptional mileage. I realize the new cylinder out engines are more efficient, but at what cost; I remember the 4-6-8 Cadillac's and in a word, POISON. Your hp/torque #'s are better than I expected, but as I said, I haven't looked seriously at GM in some time

 

[Grateful11]

To me your numbers are reasonable and typical for Toyota, but keep in mind that is still below the class MPG leaders. I normally do about 50% city/highway with my GMC with 5.3L V8, 4x4, crew cab, and my tanks average 19-21 MPG at the next fill up. On tanks where I am biased to mostly highway driving and country roads, it will come in around 22-23 MPG (country roads at about 50-55 mph are the sweet spot, as the truck loafs along on just 4 cylinders with very little throttle input). The only time I see a tank's average go below 19MPG is when I mix in some towing or an abnormal amount of idling or city driving, or in the dead of winter when all the numbers skew lower. Aside from an all-towing tank that was down near 13-14, the worst mixed towing/commuting tank I ever saw was still in the 17s.

When I combine all the specs and numbers I see reported on forums like this, Toyota is consistently about 6-7 MPG lower than the most efficient competitors, apples to apples. It's just the way it is. Their window sticker numbers also reflect this. Surely they can improve this with more engineering. I expect them to take a leap with their next generation to keep pace.

The other night I saw Chevy advertise a Chevrolet Custom, lower priced but had a nice look to it. I tried to do a Build&Price one but was never able to find that particular model. I was telling my wife about it and all I know is she started shaking her head no and was to get out of her chair and come over here to me. She said, "don't even think about it". She likes that Tundra that much. We've owned a few trucks over the years, an '86 Chevy K10 5.0L V8 3.08 gearing, decent mileage, built like a tank but no power. Then it was '94 Chevy 1/2 ton 2WD extended cab 5.0L V8, spent more time in the shop than on the road, then a '97 Ford F150 they could not get a transmission leaked stopped and they bought it back under the lemon law. That was the last truck we owned for many years until we inherited her Fathers '02 Chevy 1500 4WD loaded with every option in '08. I drove it on my 75 mile commute a few times and was it costing me close $20/day to drive it to work and it had some sorta tranny problem that no one could quite figure out. We traded in on a car for our sons to go back and forth to college, they were 13 months apart and went to the same college.

Off Topic: We were thinking the other day as to why we went so long without a PU and remembered how difficult it was for our late son, who had a mild form of MD, to get in and out of a PU and we resorted to smaller SUV's for many years. He's been gone now for 4 years, been a very difficult time, losing a child at 21 years of age just isn't right, at any age for that matter, should have been us first.

 

[s219]

GM offers nothing bigger than the 5.3 in a half ton unless you go Denali($60,000) and the last I checked, nothing lower than 3.83's. My last GM, an '04, 5.3 half ton Avalanche ordered with 4.10 gears was a passable tower, but nothing special. Prior to the Avalanche I owned a bunch of GM half tons with both 5.7 and 5.3's, but with 4.10 gears; none of them got exceptional mileage. I realize the new cylinder out engines are more efficient, but at what cost; I remember the 4-6-8 Cadillac's and in a word, POISON. Your hp/torque #'s are better than I expected, but as I said, I haven't looked seriously at GM in some time

You can get the big V8 (6.2L) in the mid line GM 1500 models (i.e., SLT trim or better on the Sierra).

 

[s219]

Off Topic: We were thinking the other day as to why we went so long without a PU and remembered how difficult it was for our late son, who had a mild form of MD, to get in and out of a PU and we resorted to smaller SUV's for many years. He's been gone now for 4 years, been a very difficult time, losing a child at 21 years of age just isn't right, at any age for that matter, should have been us first.

Sorry to hear about that -- it is a tough thing to deal with, been through it with children of relatives and friends, and it's not something I can ever come to terms with.

 

[clemsonfor]

The 5.3L V8 has 355HP and 383ft-lb torque. Lower than Toyota, but not so much that it justifies 25-30% worse MPG numbers in my opinion. If more power and torque is needed, there are other engine options available in the other brands, but you cannot get a more efficient motor from Toyota -- they don't even give customers that choice. My point being, the other brands cover both ends of the power/efficiency spectrum. Toyota is stuck on one end only, which is very uncharacteristic for the brand.

Toyota though does not have their motors buring quarts of oil with less than 100K miles, or pistons slapping around and loosely falling out of the motor when the rod bearing are removed!!! And yes i had a budy with that happen to his, those 5.3 AFM motors have had thier share of trouble. The dealer that put a new short block in his...under warrenty said they do a couple a month under warrenty repair. this is a small town dealer too!!

I like the chevy truck, i have an old one and like the 5.3 motor just needs to have that technology perfected into a 300k mile flawless motor like thier older ones were. And for full decloration i do like Toyota, i dont have a truck newer than the 04 sequoia made by them and yes they consistently turn in horrific MPG numbers. i wish they would fix that once they do they will be unstoppable and the hands down best choice unless you need to be in the HD truck class.

 

[s219]

Toyota though does not have their motors buring quarts of oil with less than 100K miles, or pistons slapping around and loosely falling out of the motor when the rod bearing are removed!!! And yes i had a budy with that happen to his, those 5.3 AFM motors have had thier share of trouble. The dealer that put a new short block in his...under warrenty said they do a couple a month under warrenty repair. this is a small town dealer too!!

I like the chevy truck, i have an old one and like the 5.3 motor just needs to have that technology perfected into a 300k mile flawless motor like thier older ones were. And for full decloration i do like Toyota, i dont have a truck newer than the 04 sequoia made by them and yes they consistently turn in horrific MPG numbers. i wish they would fix that once they do they will be unstoppable and the hands down best choice unless you need to be in the HD truck class.

It seems common to want to point out other brand's perceived disadvantages (true or not) as some excuse for Toyota's poor gas mileage, but I still think Toyota should be able to give us a truck with their great reliability *and* good gas mileage. Never mind me griping as a truck shopper, I would think every Toyota owner would want that too. I think they are missing an opportunity in this market that the other brands are capitalizing on.

 

[RollingsFarms]

I think Toyota should offer different rear end ratios on their truck, not just the 4:30 across the board on the 5.7.

 

[clemsonfor]

The other night I saw Chevy advertise a Chevrolet Custom, lower priced but had a nice look to it. I tried to do a Build&Price one but was never able to find that particular model. I was telling my wife about it and all I know is she started shaking her head no and was to get out of her chair and come over here to me. She said, "don't even think about it". She likes that Tundra that much. We've owned a few trucks over the years, an '86 Chevy K10 5.0L V8 3.08 gearing, decent mileage, built like a tank but no power. Then it was '94 Chevy 1/2 ton 2WD extended cab 5.0L V8, spent more time in the shop than on the road, then a '97 Ford F150 they could not get a transmission leaked stopped and they bought it back under the lemon law. That was the last truck we owned for many years until we inherited her Fathers '02 Chevy 1500 4WD loaded with every option in '08. I drove it on my 75 mile commute a few times and was it costing me close $20/day to drive it to work and it had some sorta tranny problem that no one could quite figure out. We traded in on a car for our sons to go back and forth to college, they were 13 months apart and went to the same college.

Off Topic: We were thinking the other day as to why we went so long without a PU and remembered how difficult it was for our late son, who had a mild form of MD, to get in and out of a PU and we resorted to smaller SUV's for many years. He's been gone now for 4 years, been a very difficult time, losing a child at 21 years of age just isn't right, at any age for that matter, should have been us first.

Being a somewhat new father of a 21 month old this almost brings me to tears so sorry to hear that . Cant imagine what you and your wife feel and how you can deal with it. Our son is truly a gift from god and means the world to me.

 

[clemsonfor]

It seems common to want to point out other brand's perceived disadvantages (true or not) as some excuse for Toyota's poor gas mileage, but I still think Toyota should be able to give us a truck with their great reliability *and* good gas mileage. Never mind me griping as a truck shopper, I would think every Toyota owner would want that too. I think they are missing an opportunity in this market that the other brands are capitalizing on.

I am with you!!!! i am very "cheap" as some would call it. MPG means a lot to me. I cant wait for toyota to figure out how to make a reliable and fuel effecient engine and let it get some age on it so i can afford to buy it!!!

I am the one pointing out the fuel economy flaw as well. I also pointed out one GM flaw. I have owned and currently own vehicles from Toyota, GM and Ford!

 

[Patches]

Come on guys; you're buying a TRUCK, not a Prius