New issue comparison:

Gm's 6.0 L with fuel management w/ 367 hp @5500 rpm's & 375 lb/ft @ 4300 r's, 4.10:1. vs. tundra dc, limited, TRD, 5.7L.

Tundra has a wider powerband with 2000 rpm between peaks as opposed to the gm's 1200 rpm spread.

With the 6 speed in the tundra it puts 20% more twist to the wheels in 1st gear and the gap widens from there. Gm just can't get the 6 speed in their trucks soon enough. The tundra was 18% quicker in our towing tests, 0-65,45-65, & 20-65mph. Even when towing a 5500 lb trailer with 806 lbs on the bumper, the tundra spun the tires at start. The tundra averaged 15% better fuel efficiency while towing. The gm's v-4 did not engage very often other than at drop throttle. Gm's Epa numbers show 1 mpg better but our exercises didn't agree with that.

They loaded the tundra with over a ton of cement bags & then offloaded half of that into the gmc. Being well over weight limits, the tundra still had travel in the rear leafs! They did like how the gmc handled with the weight due to it's lower center of gravity. However, they said the gmc was noisier in cabin than the tundra. The trd bilstiens proved their worth in this test. They claimed their 4x4,trd,ltd,dc has a payload of only 1180?

The tundra's brakes were no less bulletproof than the gmc's, but were used less due to tundras sequential trans braking. They wished it didn't go into 4th while downshifting as 5th was often just right. They think the tundras trac should be toned down a bit. Not sure they knew how to turn it off.

With 800 lbs tongue weight added to each truck, they both dropped 4" (4.2 for tundra & 4.0" for gmc) even though the claimed gm's payload was 600 more than the tundra. And the tundra wasn't on the bumpstops w/ 1800 lbs payload. Once hooked to the trailers, the gmc's comfort immediately went away due to no tow mirrors. The tundra's AT temp guage never moved while the gmc's showed 199 degrees in acceleration tests. It was fairly cool outside though. The trailer tended to drive the back of the tundra & had more effect on the front of the gmc's. Which required more frequent steering corrections on the gmc. Toyota had better directional stability.

After a few hard trips down a bumpy road, the gmc's fuel door popped open several times. They commented on the pricing of the tundra as a bit higher than average but fully competitive. Similarly equipped, the sierra had a $900 higher price tag but the 6 speed auto is not available yet, nor is front side airbags, or brake assist.

Truck trends prediction:
The gmc equipped for family recreation as tested, with a more appealing interior, & greater payload capacity are not enough to overcome the tundra's superior powertrain performance,safety equipment, larger cabin, & better fuel economy in every situation.
The 3rd time is indeed the charm for toyota as the 3rd generation full-size pickup has set the bench mark another notch higher!


curb weight:
gmc---5393lbs.
tundra-5620lbs
payload:
gmc--1807lbs
tundra-1180lbs.???
tow capacity:
gmc----10,453
tundra--10,226
fuel economy towing:
gmc----7.20
tundra--8.55
price as tested:
gmc----$40,760
tundra--$41,055