Fuel-economy monitoring provided interesting results. Although the Silverado has higher EPA ratings (better even than the base V-6) with the high-tech Active Fuel Management system, it didn't offer the all-around benefits we would've predicted. It was the clear winner on our downhill sections, but the Toyota transmission's extra gears gave the bigger and heavier Tundra the fuel-economy edge--and we worked both trucks hard. On level highway, the Tundra's drivetrain delivered better efficiency, averaging 1.0 mpg better than the Silverado's.
Once we headed to our local off-road park and left pavement behind, the Silverado's street tires were as much at a disadvantage there as the Tundra's tires were at the track. The Chevy climbed our steep concrete and granite stair step but let us know several times it had smaller approach angles (12 degrees less than the Tundra), scraping the airdam and front bumper. The Silverado felt more balanced and less nose-heavy than the Tundra. On the hillclimb and stair step, the G80 locking differential proved more useful than the Tundra's electronic traction control, although the locker took a good amount of wheelspin to engage. Be that as it may, the TRD Tundra was in its element here, with lots of controlled suspension travel and good on-center steering response. Probably the weakest venue for the Silverado 4x4 was the rutted washboards, where passengers preferred the heavier and better-tired Tundra. This doesn't mean the Toyota is faultless, as that rear-axle hop can easily catch you at the wrong moment and send the tail wagging before you can countersteer.
As Toyota intended, the Tundra feels big inside, even more so than the dimensional differences imply, and the massive dash looks more like that of a heavy-duty, while the Chevy's reminds us of a luxury sedan's. Likewise, where Chevy's extended cab uses dual-hinged rear swinging doors that now open nearly 170 degrees, the Double Cab Toyota uses conventional, admittedly smallish doors with colormatched handles for concealment. Both offer rolldown side windows and three-across seating, and while rear-cargo flexibility is similar, the Tundra offers a more conventional passenger seat.
Forward interiors are markedly different. The LTZ Silverado garnered high praise for its clean, simple, almost elegant dash. The Limited Tundra uses "Optitron" electroluminescent gauges that sit at the bottom of individual barrels. We noted the five nacelles and warning lights appear scattered on the Tundra dash, with the related traction-control "slippery" icon on one side and "Auto LSD" on the other.
Toyota uses a segmented approach for the dash design. The center section is so wide it's split in two separate finishes, making the controls a stretch for even our lankiest tester. Overall, the Tundra didn't equal the Chevy's simple and stylish design, but it's easier to get into a comfortable driving position in the Toyota.
For a night on the town, the Chevy comes far closer to replicating a luxury sedan or coach. As a tool, the Tundra rules the roost, with more, wider storage areas, seven cupholders for the front row alone, and eight dummy switches. The Chevy dash has none. For those who tow, the Tundra offers a backup camera, whereas only the SUV GMT900 platforms get the backup camera option; expect all Silverados to get it by next year. Unfortunately, government regulations only allow the screen to be used while the vehicle's in Reverse.