New 2009 F150 Versus Toyota Tundra

I can’t wait! However, Tundra cannot tow as much a ford f150. I was told that towing is more than just power. It’s also about the frame, weight, and things like that. oh well, we will have to wait and see.

Just a comment on your statement that Ford “made no mention of improving the 5.4 power”. Ford has said the 5.4 will be upgraded in power and economy, although numbers haven’t been released, and new 6.2L “Boss” V8 will be released, just not in time for the initial production. It’s the diesel that has the most interest for me, as fuel prices rise. It’s believed to be a version of the European ford diesel.

Brian - you’re right. We still need to do that. We’ll work on it this weekend.

Dennis - we interpreted Ford’s announcement to mean that the 5.4L would get better fuel economy, but we could be wrong. There was no mention of the 6.2L either…frankly, it wouldn’t make much sense to bring this engine out. It’s a step in the wrong direction now that the CAFE MPG restrictions are in place.

Bryan - thanks for your comments. I don’t know what I’m going to gain by responding to your points, other than to say you seem less than objective.

I did see one thing i left out. you mentioned the 6.2l being a bad idea due to cafe fuel standards and yet you produce a truck that doesn’t have the highest fuel economy?

OK Bryan - you win.

On average, the Tundra is about 500 lbs heavier than the F150. Of course, a crew cab F250 is 1500 lbs heavier than an F150, so I really don’t think you’ve got much of a point about the Tundra needing bigger brakes because it’s so heavy. Especially considering the much heavier SuperDuty’s brakes are only 13.66 inches in diameter, still smaller than Tundra’s by about a third of an inch.

So a bigger vehicle needs bigger brakes, yet the F250’s brakes are smaller than the Tundra. Huh.

The 4-star crash test rating is a disappointment’s, however Ford doesn’t currently have any standard accident avoidance features like stability control, traction control, etc. NHTSA studies have shown stability control reduces single vehicle accidents by 40% - that’s almost half! I think the Tundra’s safer as long as it has all the electronics. Maybe with the 09′ that will change, but who’s to say the Tundra doesn’t achieve 5 stars by then.

Your point about a “3/4 ton frame in a 1/2 ton truck” doesn’t make sense to me. So what? Is that bad?

The T.O.T.Y. award is BS. I’m the first one to say I don’t care. If you look thru the site, you won’t find a post or mention of it anywhere. Take your point up with Motor Trend.

Your point about the 340hp aussie 5.4 belies your lack of understanding even more. Anyone with a little bit of industry knowledge will tell you that Australian emissions standards are much different than those in the U.S., so you can’t really look at aussie HP figures as realistic for U.S. soil.

The CAFE argument you made is disjointed, but I think I get the drift…you’re saying why is the 6.2 bad if the 5.7 is OK? I don’t know the answer to that one. Up until a couple of weeks ago I thought Toyota was going to make a hybrid Tundra in order to help meet CAFE. Now it seems they’re going to focus on a diesel and that’s it. I expect Ford will do the same, but I could be wrong. Maybe they will bring out the 6.2.

Finally, we come to your accusation that I spelled your name wrong. If you read through the comments, you’ll find the Brian I was speaking to.

I started looking around on this site and noticed it looked familiar. Then i realized that I had seen it before a year ago. I took at look at the f150 comparison you guys did where you said the engine was better cause you assumed it had good toyota quality. Ha and now we know the cam shafts have snapped and the u joints broke along with the collapsing wheels.

That’s when I remembered this site was a joke. Take a look at these sites where they do some real comparisons and not by you high schoolers.

http://fiestafordlincolnmercur.....its-armor/
http://www.fordvehicles.com/thetruthabouttrucks/

John,

The lighter frame (f-150) is also supposed to be stronger. This will both improve gas mileage (lighter) and overall payload/towing performance (stronger).

The proof will of coarse be in the pudding however.

Nuckie - Funny! I laughed when I read your comment. I think the point we were making is that Toyota’s standard electronic safety features compensate for a 4 star rating in some ways. IIHS testing of the Tundra was rated “Good” all the way around. Good is the IIHS’s highest rating. The F150 received a Good rating in frontal impacts, but has not been rated for side impacts yet.

We’re still comfortable saying the Tundra is safer based on the standard ESC and traction control, and the IIHS “Good” rating.

Just had to toss my two pennies in there, not gonna argue the overall safety package.

I’m of the doesn’t *really* need a full size truck just likes the convenience of it group. Haters may flame I could definantly get away with a small pickup.

Only things really turning me off from the tundra are looks and price. I thought the last gen tundras were pretty clean and would’ve liked to see an evolution of that. They ventured into ram styling territory on me which is pretty much the opposite of what I’m looking for.

Sadly looks and price are the only real deal breakers for me with the 1/2 tons, they are all more’n capable of doing what I need em for.

As it stands I’m waiting to see what ford actually releases as far as new engine options for the next gen truck, and I’m very anxious to see all of the manufacturers small diesels.

One more thing about the T100. I have had random people come off the street and offer to buy my truck, this have never happened with any cars that I have owned.

I wonder haw many people would like to purchase a 1993 F150 …

Just a thought.

Oh yeah and don’t give me any, “Oh the new Ford is so much better now and so much better designed” .

I know a mechanic that used to work for Ford dealership in OR and he says that it is still the same crap on with different headlights.

Any car is good while it is new, but if you are going to work it hard and plan to keep it for a while then buy a Toyota.

AND I have a 1973 Ford Pickup that keeps on running and running…i even still use it to pull..

I would rather drive my 1973 ford pickup over buying or driving any Toyota brand truck….new or old!

I know several people who own other old ford trucks from the 80s 90 and current that have had little or not problems with them.

Toyota is still just another mediocre brand like nissan.

Its in the Eye of the Beholder. American Cars have been the down fall of american business like ford, gm and dodge.

The trucks of Ford, GM and Dodge are not being surpassed by Toyota, proven by sales numbers and dependability in a truck…except in the eye of a Toyota fan.

Moving factories from the U.S. is not a reason of defeat but of success…The majority of Toyota is build outside the U.S. making it very competative in the pricing market…thus, hurting american sales as you can buy a Toyota for less than an American car/truck…

In order for the Big 3 to make it competetive in price (and to increase sales) is to also to move some factories off of American soil as people in Mexico and other countries will work for much less than an American….

Would you be willing to work for Japanses wages while in the U.S.? Doubt it!

How does one become competitive with cost if nobody is willing to work for less?

Yes, the Toyota truck is being manufactured in the U.S. but is just like walmart does, sale for less in some areas/departments and lose a little money there as people will buy the other stuff that is above cost. (the remainder of Toyota that is being made for less in other countries yet making a proffit cause it can still sell for less than an American car being made at $30.00 an hour versus $2 - $6 an hour.

Ford 2006/2007 sales and losses are not due to less sales of Ford directly, but Fords specific decision to stop selling wholesale/rental type companies in that year killed lots of sales bringing their total numbers down.

This is called Supply/Demand…something that there is a million of has a lower value of something that there are very few of. Take for example the Ferarri…if there are a miilion of them out there, they would not be selling for the price they are selling at.

Get to the fact that Ford/GM/Dodge can make and DO make Great trucks and even todays American Cars: Fusion, Focus, new taurus as well as Chevy Malibu are new standards that equal or surpass the competitiion.

My 73 Ford is build strong enough to last 35 years…gotta call that made pretty great!

Ford Motor Company has announced another recall for cruise control switch problems, that could potentially result in engine fires, stretching across more than a dozen vehicle models ranging from 1992-2004 model years. The new recall involves more than 3.6 Million passenger cars, trucks, sport utility vehicles and vans. Click “Full Story” for the list of affected vehicles.http://www.truckblog.com/story-1396-ford_endures_more_pain_with_36_million_vehicle_recall Thats safety at its best

there are a lot of ignorant ford fans on this site. if you check the numbers like admin has been sayin the tundra dominates all other half tons.
i use to own an f-150 5.4 i now own a tundra 5.7

Fords big 11,000 lb towing claim is on a single cab long bed 2wd, i think they sold like ten of those. but the more popular extended cab 4wd shrt bed can only haul around a measly 8,000 lb. and the tundra doulble cab 4wd pulls 10,300 lbs. now tell me who has the better tow rating?
oh and by the way tundras 2wd long bed can pull 10,800 lbs just 200 lb below fords. and it can pull and stop it a hell of a lot faster!

Where to start.

1) It has been well documented Ford will be raising the 5.4L power in the ‘09 models, but only in the area of 10-30hp, with all 1/2 ton models mated to a 6spd trans. The 6spd should improve mpgs slightly due to keeping the motor within its power-band better than the current 4spd. It has also been well documented that Ford will be releasing two versions of its 6.2L V8 “Boss”, a N/A version and a “Twin-Force” or “Eco-Boost” version. Initial release shows the Twin-Force 6.2L version will have HP/TQ ratings in the area of 425/450, which many inside Ford have stated this to be a low estimate. The 6.2L will first be released in the Navigator, and then installed in the F150/Expedition. Ford will also release a V6 model Twin-Force model that reaches in the 300+ HP & TQ range and receives 20-30% better mpgs than similarly equipped V6’s. So the 6.2L Twin-Force should get roughly the same, if not better mpg’s than all other makes 1/2 ton largest displacement motor. The ’09 F150 is to be released in mid-late ’08 with the N/A 6.2L being released by late ’08 to early ’09. Twin-Force 6.2L is to be released for the 2010 model. Also 4.4L diesel, based off the Volvo 3.6L diesel, which is estimated to produce around 330hp/515lb-ft tq has unofficially been slated for F150 production in the 2010 model. So CAFÉ standards shouldn’t be hurt much, if at all, as well as performance demands met. Ford has been behind the times in performance power for years, but if this is a sign, they won’t be lagging behind for much longer. So I don’t understand how releasing the 4.4L Diesel, estimated in the 20’s for mpgs and the 6.2L with Twin-Force estimated at a 20-30% better mpg rating than similar V8’s is a step in the wrong direction? Thorough research will show Ford is dedicated and heading in the right direction on their motors to provide max power with increased efficiency.

2) Regarding towing. Ford still has the crown, even though it may not be the highest sold model in the lineup. This F150 2WD Regular Cab 7700 series is still the most commonly used 1/2 ton work truck purchased by construction companies. How many construction sites do you see that have crew cab model trucks that aren’t 3/4 or 1 tons? Not many, because 1/2 tons can’t hold up to many of the demands required for these sites. Also, how often does a 1/2 ton owner actually exceed 10K lbs towing? It’s a rare site and very uncommon. The wisest option in towing over 10K lbs is to move up to a 3/4 or 1 ton truck, they are built sturdier and for this purpose. Just because a 1/2 ton can tow more than 10K lbs doesn’t mean it’s the best option or smart decision. Personally, after driving all ’06 1/2 tons and the ’07 Sierra & ’07 Tundra, I still wouldn’t suggest using a 1/2 ton model for anything more than 8-9K lbs. Now the majority of 1/2 ton owners don’t even exceed 7K lbs towing, so Admin why compare a situation that will happen in 1 out of possibly 10-20K vehicles sold? You state you try to compare the trucks based on the highest sold model in the lineup, but real world experience would tell you that the majority of the trucks you mention will never see a trailer behind them, let alone anything over 7-8K lbs. Sure you have this once in a blue moon, but those are the exception not the rule, just like the F150 2WD 7000 series.

3) Tundra has the advantage on safety equipment currently, no doubt. But this forum is to compare the Tundra to the ’09 F150, so why continue to compare the Tundra to the 04-08 model F150 safety equipment? Doesn’t fit the topic and seems you are trying to sway the audience rather than providing an accurate comparison. The safety equipment is nice in avoiding accidents (stability control, traction control, etc), which is a good thing. Problem though is not all accidents are avoidable. Driver inexperience, especially all these people that are used to cars that are now getting into trucks for no other reason than to have a truck, can counter act the benefits of many of the safety equipment features. So the F150 has 5 stars to the Tundra’s 4, Tundra has more safety features than the F150. So to me it’s basically a wash, neither providing a decisive advantage. Now if the ’09 is released with many of the features the Tundra already has and the 5 star rating, then the F150 would win in this category no matter how you look at it, unless the Tundra can get up the the 5 star rating.

4) Had you read the posts properly, Bryan or Brian was stating the Tundra has a 1/2 ton frame mated to a 3/4 ton power-train. This is good and bad. The power-train maybe able to handle some of these severe loads, but can the frame? 1/2 ton frames aren’t built as sturdy and strong as 3/4 tons, so the laws of physics will come into play. This may give owners a false sense of security. Truck can pull the weight, but can the frame handle the weight and stress over time. No proof either way yet, as none of the Tundra’s have enough miles and abuse to conduct accurate or thorough research.

5) Regarding hybrid cars/trucks, if you’ve done your research, many are just as bad for the environment as are the low mpg vehicles. Not due to emissions, but due to the nickel metal batteries. So the hybrids are just a basic shift of pollution rather than a true fix. Due some research on these hybrids and their pollutant levels and you’ll find they are just as bad for the environment if not worse in some areas.

6) Frames, well the lighter frame will help reduce weight and improve mpgs and the strength can withstand more abuse and higher payload, with less chance of flexing or bending. Now they won’t really just break or snap, but flex can cause problems during towing and for durability, especially with the high weight (10K+ lbs) everyone continues to talk about.

7) Resale value for Toyota’s across their lineup is better than Ford, but if you refer to their 1/2 ton trucks only, they are basically the same. I’ve posted this is the forum comparing the F150 to the Tundra. I’ve done plenty of research through KBB & NADA comparably equipped trucks. Through these sites, on average the Tundra cost $2K more at purchase based on MSRP, but after 3 years the resale value of the Tundra was only $1500-$1800 higher than the F150. So in all actuality, the F150 had a better resale value. Either way, it’s not a significant difference, so I consider this a moot point to stress.

’93 T100 to a ‘93 F150 is a big difference. I know a few acquaintances with T100’s that love the truck and haven’t had many if any problems and some regret moving to the first Gen. Tundra from the T100. I also know quite a few people that still own the ’92-96 F150 body style with over 300K miles with very few issues. You may hear about more problems from the F150 simply due to the difference in sales figures. How many T100’s were sold in comparison to F150’s during the T100 production years? Toyota only sold on average 40K T100’s per year it was in production. So lets say in ’93, only 40K T100’s were produced with 2% having problems. That would only be 800 trucks with problems. During the T100 days, Ford sold anywhere from 550K-850K F-Series. Let’s say 1/2 of those are F150’s and the average of 550K & 850K is 700K. Say those 700K F150’s were sold with 2% having problems. That’s 14K trucks, which is a huge difference, 14k versus 800 trucks. Even though they had the same problem rate, you’d still hear about the F150 more due to the number produced. So sometimes you may have different makes/models of vehicles having more problems than others, but you also have to factor in how many of the vehicles were sold and the problem rate. You also have to factor in how the trucks were used. The T100 didn’t have nearly the capabilities that the F150 had, so the F150 was more than likely put through much more abuse than the T100. Personally I would take a ’93 F150, whether it’s the 300 I6, 302 V8 or the 351 V8 over a ’93 T100 any day.

9) Your mechanic friend must not know much about trucks if he believes the only differences are the headlights. Might want to do some research on the changes Ford has made to the F150. You’ll notice there have been significant changes made from the 04-08 to the ’09 model. Plus, the ’09 F150 hasn’t even been released, so how would this mechanical expertise come into play if they aren’t even on the road yet? The Ford dealers/mechanics haven’t even gotten the majority of the ’09 F150 specs yet, so if he “Used” to be a Ford mechanic, how does he know the ins and outs of the truck? I’m going to call BS on this one.

10) Ford still has more models made in the US and assembly plants in the US than Toyota, so what’s your point? The Tundra is made in the US for Americans. How many 1/2 ton trucks do you see in Europe or Asia? Toyota built the Tundra specifically for the American demand for trucks, no one else, so it’s only right it’s built in the States. That’s why they are built here and have always been built here. Sure the domestics are sending some of their work force and plants to other countries, but this is to compete. Look at the unions and how much it costs to build a vehicle inside the US vs. outside. Toyota has the majority of their lineup assembled outside the US at a lower cost, saving them tons of money. So why is it okay for Toyota to build outside the US at a lower wage, but it’s not okay for the Big 3 to do the same? Sounds like a double standard to me. Got to look at the entire picture, not just what fits your agenda.

11) Toyota has not surpassed the domestics in trucks, let alone 1/2 tons. Sales figures will point that out. The new Tundra is a great truck and is having some good sales. Still, Ford sells 4 times as many full size trucks, let alone what Dodge and GM sell. I’d say Toyota is on pace to catch the domestics in say the next decade, decade and a half, but they have not caught the domestics in any form or fashion currently. Heck they only have the ability to produce 200K Tundra’s a year currently. Now the Ford Ranger was the best selling compact truck from 87-04. Problem is Ford has lost interest in the truck or segment, as the Ranger hasn’t been fully redesigned since 1993, just little face lifts here and there. The Tacoma has claimed the spot ever since, which I loved the old Tacoma before Toyota did the redesign in 2005. Even liked the compact truck they had prior to the Tacoma’s introduction in ’95.

12) Why always the topic of recalls being brought up? This recall was issued in early to mid ’07, old news. We could always bring up the Sienna doors opening by themselves, the Tundra rear propeller shaft, Tundra ball joints Toyota engine sludge, etc. Toyota owners seem to think domestics always have recalls, while Toyota is perfect and never has any. Get a grip, everyone has them.

13) Toyota doesn’t win big by the numbers in all areas. I’ve posted many of these items in the F150 vs. Tundra thread prior, but here is some of what has been found. Tundra has more HP/TQ, larger brakes, more rear legroom. The F150 has a larger bed by dimensions (5.5, 6.5 & 8ft beds all larger), has more head, hip and shoulder room and smoother ride. Tundra has a better turning radius by just under a foot. F150 frame is fully boxed and stronger. Ford has a higher payload, while the Tundra has a higher tow capacity (with the exception of the F150 7700). So you can see there are trade-offs. One is better in some areas, while the other is better in others. Simply depends on what’s most important to you.

Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate what the Tundra has done to the market. Competition breeds competition. Each manufacturer will continue to up the bar and out do the others. That’s a good thing. Personally, I dislike the Tundra overall, but am willing to give it props where they are due. Like the HP/TQ output, the first to have a 6spd trans., brake size and the added leg room in the rear. This only makes Ford/GM/Dodge counter with something better, and the cycle continues. Otherwise I see no other area where the Tundra has improved upon what is currently available. I know every Tundra fan will go back to the towing capability, but I can only stress again, a 1/2 ton should not tow over 10K lbs, no matter if it’s Ford, GM, Nissan, Toyota or Dodge. I’m being redundant, but each truck has its goods and bads. Some ride better, some have more power, some can tow more, some can haul (payload) more, some have better style, some get better mpgs. It’s a toss up anymore, depending on the owners needs/wants. I chose my truck because it was the best on the market for my needs/wants after driving all ’06 models, the 07 Sierra and ’07 Tundra. I’m not one to just throw stuff out there like some here, bashing one or the model or another.

So thanks everyone for dealing with my long post and for all your feedback. I read every post here, some were valid with very good points, some were complete BS and others were simply from less knowledgeable posters. You had all three of these situations from the Tundra and Ford backers, as well as some GM owners. So it simply goes to show we’re all alike. Each make has biased diehards that can only see their view and their make is the best. You have some that post their thoughts/opinions, just haven’t done thorough research to verify if they are correct or not. And then you have those that follow the trucks, every make and model, in and out and have done thorough research so they don’t look like some of the a$$es that have posted.

Justin - Glad to see you attacking again! I was wondering if you were going to latch onto this one or not…

1) Ford’s 6.2L has been on the drawing board for about 6 years. It keeps getting added and then pulled off…here’s why. The most comparable engine, the GM 6.0L, isn’t a very good seller. So whatever development costs Ford has, they’re probably going to be amortized over a small volume.

The 6.2L, likely to get 18mpg highway, 13mpg city, is a step in the wrong direction for Ford considering they need a fleet rating of 35mpg from a lineup that’s composed mostly of trucks and SUVs. Toyota and GM have a lot of cars to average with - Ford does not. However, having said that, I wouldn’t be shocked if Ford planned on worrying about that later. If Ford does bring out the 6.2L, it will be a victory for them if the gas mileage rating is competitive.

2) I’m not sure what your point is about towing. We’ve conceded that the average Ford hauls more than the average Toyota, but the average Toyota (we figure it to be a double cab SR5) easily tows more than the average F150 (which is probably an XLT super cab). Ford does do better in the work trucks, but you’re completely wrong about the 7700 payload package being common. It requires a 5.4 and a long box, it’s only available on a reg. cab., and if you’ve ever worked at a Ford dealer you’d know that’s a very rare bird (most reg cab work trucks are 4.6’s). Besides - a 7700 payload package truck is expensive for a work truck…most construction companies we know want the cheapest truck they can get (because their employees are just going to tear them up anyways).

3) The last time we drove a car, we determined that the brakes are a safety component. Tundra’s bigger brakes and shorter stopping distances are a big advantage over the F150, especially when hauling/towing. Even if the new F150 offers all the right electronics, it’s still going to have smaller brakes (at least based on what we know right now).

4)There isn’t any proof to support the “3/4 ton power train in a 1/2 ton truck” argument, yet people keep making it. Besides, if you believe that Ford brings out the 6.2L engine in their half ton, how will their truck be any different? Won’t that be a 3/4 ton power plant in a 1/2 ton truck?

5) Uh…don’t know who you’re talking to, but it’s not us. We don’t remember making any claims about a hybrid’s environmental superiority. As to your point, it’s definitely up for debate (but not here, try AutoBlogGreen.com).

6) Sounds good.

7) It’s an interesting point - I’d like to see some data from a reputable third party to support it, but I think your analysis is intriguing. One thing to consider - NADA and KBB are guides, not factual representations of actual prices - they’re a snapshot of a moment in time, and they’re updated in an ad-hock manner.

8 ) I agree the 93 T100 has half the capability of a 93 F150, but I think the T100 was probably better made than the F150 was back in 93. In any case, I’d choose the truck that was in better shape. When they’re 15 years old, it’s a crap-shoot anyways.

9) …

10) Well said.

11) The Ranger is dying a slow, miserable death, and it’s a great example of Ford’s mis-management. It’s a nice inexpensive truck that’s pretty damn reliable, yet Ford treats it like the proverbial red-headed step child. Ford has stated the compact truck segment is dying, but I have a hard time believing that.

12) Recalls have always been a bad way to determine quality. I remember the 2001 Focus had 5 recalls, yet just a couple of years later Consumer Reports rated it a “top pick”.

13) We like the F150 - we really do, but we’ve found the Tundra is better in more ways than it is inferior. The good news is that you can’t go wrong in today’s full-size truck market. They’re all pretty good.

Sorry, mislabeled #2.

True the average extended/super/double cab model Tundra has a higher rating than the competition, but the average owner of a 1/2 ton won’t come close to towing over 8K lbs. You have your once in a while owner that does this, but they are the exception, not the rule. Now the 7700 package, actually is roughly $1500-$3000 more than a 4.6L XL work truck, depending on the options included, so as a business expense and compared to the competition, this is a small expense. Many if needing more than the 10K will actually opt for a HD model truck, which the F250 V10 work truck is less than $2K more than a 7700, depending on options. Many of the basic work trucks do have the 4.6L, but all depends on what the business owner/purchaser needs in a truck. Is it a parts delivery business or will it two a CAT call day? I know with the many construction workers or foreman I know, their companies either purchase the largest engine and payload in a 1/2 ton or opt for an HD model. All depends on the requirements of the truck. Usually these business owners are pretty wise in what they need their trucks to do, so if they need anything towing near the limits of what a 1/2 ton can tow, they then opt for a larger truck. Personally if you know you’ll be towing 10K or more on a daily basis, why use a 1/2 ton that can only tow 10-11K and strain the truck and motor which will shorten its life. Why not just opt for a 3/4 or 1 ton that is better equipped to handle these loads? So yes the CrewMax and DoubleCab have higher tow ratings than its competition, I never disputed that. Simply it’s rare to see any 1/2 ton towing over 10K lbs and if you’re required to tow that much, it’s in every ones best interest to move up in truck size.

Admin: Againh, thanks for the reply.

I too know plenty of people (my wife included), who’ll purchase a vehicle soley on color or style, not knowing anything else about it nor it’s competition. So I agree whole heartedly that too many people purchase vehicles based on little things or status symbol. Like the Escalade for example, sure it’s really nice and has good power, but is one of the least reliable vehicles on the road. But hey, to each their own I guess.

Also true, there are those wise and unwise business owners. I’ve seen and heard about these not so smart people towing 2 times the GVWR. Even though I’d hate to see it happen, but I’m sure if thise accident scenerio occurred, there would be a huge price to pay for the owner of the towing vehicle.

I’m sure many people tow more than their GVWR with more than just the Tundra. Seen it before with all makes/models, except the Titan.

I have seen the price fluctuate greatly between NADA & KBB and usually try to take the middle ground of the two. Wholesalers and dealers are always trying to get the upper hand on your trade in value, so it wouldn’t suprise me if they switched years or deduct packages (SR5, Limited, Lariat, etc) to work in their favor. This is why I do not trade in vehicles, unless I have too, or I require the dealer to give my stated value. If they are unwilling to work with me, on to the next dealer I go.

It is true, the majority of Toyota’s are worth their resale value, depending on how the vehicle was used and abused of course. Fords, depending on model and how they were used/abused, many times were not. Like the SuperDuty 6.0L, great truck but too many problems with the motor. Many of the Ford cars weren’t worth their resale value. Now Ford trucks, again depending on how they were used, were worth it. Ford is finally starting to gain ground on their car quality and reliability, so hopefully they’re turning things around, while Toyota for the most part, just has to continue what they’re doing.

As far as I’m aware, the 3.5L EcoBoost is an enlarged and heavily modified version of the Duratec they currently have in production, so by all accounts it shouldn’t be a modular motor. Now by everything I’ve read, Ford is to release a base 6.2L that is N/A. A year or so later, Ford is stated to be releasing the 6.2L EcoBoost/Twin-Force. Attached is an old link slightly referring to it. Also, look for any web post by “Igor”, a very reliable person with Ford insider info. I’d venture to guess he’s been accurate on 95% of the info he’s released.

http://www.autosavant.net/2007.....ction.html

Here’s an old post by Igor, about the 6th post down, referring to the new Ford motors: http://www.blueovalforums.com/.....ntry196581

Here is an article written by him: http://www.autosavant.net/2008.....-ford.html

I’m not saying the 6.2L EcoBoost will hit the 20’s, just using the basic 20-30% logic that Ford has released about the EcoBoost capabilities. Again though, I think the 6.2L will be offerred on a limited basis in the F150 and as a replacement for the 6.8L.

It’s always fun to speculate and like I’ve said before, this is what I love, one manufacturer is always trying to one up the others.

Thanks again for allowing us to voise our thoughts and opinions.

Trader I’m happy you have one. Such a lovely comment. Shows great commitment.

Is Toyota making the 8 foot bed, tailgate step, power folding/extending mirrors and trailer brakes a option? What is the real capacity??

Earl sent the last comment so if there is any questions or comment let me know.

Here is the reason im going with Ford. Under the Maintenance Interval it says to “TIGHTEN THE CHASSIS MOUNT BOLTS” and “RE-TORQUE PROPELLER SHAFT BOLT” every 5,000 miles under towing conditions. And every 15,000 miles if you drive normal. They should not loosen. Maybe its the wrong bolts or need stronger bolts. This could indicate the 3 frame to make one (uni-body) are not as strong as advertied.
At 30,000 you need to replace the SPARK PLUGS no matter if your towing or not. That isnt going to be cover under the warrenty, it aint cheap. At 60,000 it recommends the “INSPECT THE ENGINE VALVE CLEARENCE” if you have been towing. This is the recommended maintenance so it is not cover under the warrenty (warrenty just expired). Doing a valve job is not CHEAP. With shop rates at $50 to $70 dollars a hour theres a couple hundred dollars.

They dont tell you this on the commercials. The dealership didnt even want to let me look in the owners manual when I was looking at the truck. Does the F-150 require this??? NO!! So Toyota streched the truck as far as they could to beat the competion. But hey it tows 200 lbs more. I would rather drive down the road knowing that my Propeller shaft is secure and the Chassis isnt going any where. Personally if you have to re-torque the Chassis mount bolts and Propeller Shaft Bolt the frame is not strong enough and theres somthing wrong with the transmission, but what do I know. I can buy a F-250 CREWCAB FX-4 with V-10 for $42,000 with a $3,000 rebate making it $39,000. The same equipped Tundra (minus its a 1/2 ton) is $39,000 with a $3,000 rebate making it $36,000. With the cost of Tundra maintenance program it would be cheaper to own the Superduty. Even if it drinks the gas. At least then I dont have to worry about losing a driveshaft or the cab coming off in a turn. As for the Land Crusier you talked about above. Off road enthusiasts love them due to the aluminum body and ability to modify them. They usally are sporting a GM 350 and DANA axles, so the only thing that is a Toyota is a body.
The Tundra looks good but if I cant put a snow plow on the front of or 2,000 lbs of gravel in the bed without worring about breaking it in half then I dont need it. When I see or can talk to someone who has exceed the payload limit more than once and the truck is fine then I will think about it until then fix the maintenance program. Thats somthing i bet most owners dont even think about or know. This isnt my first time to the rodeo. Always look for the hidden things!!!!!

Keep buying that Jap junk and further drive the US into economic wows. I dont care if the dayam things are built in the US or they might be better in some respects , the profit dollars go out of the country and continent to the Japs. When this happens, it takes the money out of the hands of Americans and reduces the wealth of the economy. Case in point, how many Chev, Dodge and Ford pickups do you see in Japan? None, cause they wont allow them, or they tax them so high at the gate that no one can afford them. Free trade?? What a myth! I really dont care what you buy people , but at least support our country and the people who make it go, so stop buying that foreign stuff cause it is killing our economy. KEEP THE PROFITS IN THE US! BUY AMERICAN!

Anonymous how come ford has a recall on it’s gas tank? Also 4 recalls on the 2008 model.

So Scott I guess people must stick with the piece of domestic junk which constantly breaks down or the issues they have? When the big 3 decides to do customer service then you might keep your customers and therefore be on top. You also contradict yourself by stating people buy what you want then just buy american. You want to tell those people in Alabama, Texas, Indiana etc who make parts and build Toyota’s they don’t need their jobs? You want to pay for there unemployment? You don’t think this will hurt the econmy also?

I HAVE A 2007 TUNDRA 5.7 AND HAD NOTHING BUT PROBLEMS. ONE OF THE PROBLEMS IS THE TRACTION CONTROL, YOU HAVE TO DRIVE WITH IT ON ALL THE TIME, AND USE MORE GAS. IF YOU TURN THE TRACTION CONTROL OFF AND YOU ARE GOING DOWN A HILL THE TRANS WILL DOWN SHIFT AND SOME TIMES NEVER UP SHIFT. SO DRIVING AT 60 MILES AN HOUR YOUR TACH IS AT 4500 OR MAY BE MORE . DEPENDS ON WHEN YOUR TRANS DOWN SHIFTED, IF YOU WERE DOING 40 MILES AN HOUR , YOUR TACK MAY BE 2500 RPMS . DEPENDS ON WHEN IT DOWN SHIFTED. ALMOUST ONE YEAR FIGHTING WITH TOYOTA, THERE ANSWER IS. ALL TOYOTA TUNDRA are made this way, and your not suppose to drive with the traction control off. so now i have to use more gas with the traction control on.

FORD ,CHEVY, AND DODGE TRUCKS HAVE BEEN USED BY FARMERS,RANCHERS AND CONSTRUCTION WORKERS IN THE U.S .FOR MANY DECADES.TOYOTA HAS ALREADY TAKEN BILLIONS OUT OF THE U. S ECONOMY AND WITH DISREGARD TO THE AMERICAN COMPANIES POSITION ,STARTED TO GET IN THE FULL TRUCK MARKET-IT HARDLY SEEMS FAIR?

Ron
Looks like the farmers evovled.