Tundra vs F150

Status
Not open for further replies.

tacollie

Glamper
F150 is arguably Ford's flagship vehicle. Toyota is the Camery.

The Tundra was a better truck than the F150 for a lot of years. Doesn't mean people stopped buying F150s. At the end of the day trucks are a purchase based on emotion. For me the F150 checked the sales boxes as the Tundra. Neither were an F250 which is probably what I should have bought.
 

battleaxe

Captain Obvious
I wonder if this thread will get to 100 pages?
It could... But it's pretty cyclical.

Some people hate Ford, some people hate Toyota, some like both... Both are good in their own ways.

No one really wants to compare apples to apples. But the cliffnotes:

  • If you want fuel economy, buy the Ford in the 2.7 Ecoboost
  • Toyota doesn't offer a diesel... This is largely regarded as a bad thing and makes people very angry
  • If you need to AC for your nuts, buy the Ford
  • If you hate Toyota, buy the Ford and shut up about it

Maybe if @Clutch makes it back to the forum!

I also find it weird nobody has mentioned the diesel F150. To new?

I didn't even know they had it in the F150 until now. But same as I said above, I don't think it's a fair comparison overall. If you need/want diesel, then the Tundra isn't even in the mix.
 
D

Deleted member 9101

Guest
I also find it weird nobody has mentioned the diesel F150. To new?


Well... it's only available to fleet customers or the very high end trucks. Its rated to tow less than the 3.5, it's slow, and its expensive to buy... it's only real selling point is it gets better fuel economy while towing.

So if you have a trailer hooked to your truck most of the time and you are a fleet customer or plan on dropping 50k on a truck anyways, it's worth looking into. For your average consumer, it's just not very practical.
 
D

Deleted member 9101

Guest
At the end of the day trucks are a purchase based on emotion. For me the F150 checked the sales boxes as the Tundra.

I used zero emotion when I made my choice. I literally looked at cost vs. performance and the F150 came out on top.

In fact, my out the door price was less than a 4d Tacoma.
 

F350joe

Well-known member
You owned a 3.0? Like 30 years ago? Wow... I don't see how this is a bad thing? The 3.0 was a decent engine for the times, and just as comparable to anything else.

Sucks about the Tacoma, it's odd that I can't find a recall for them bursting into flames? :unsure:

All sarcasm/jokes aside, at least you're able to admit that you just hate Toyota completely.


So by your thought process... The Ranger died out for 7 years because people are brand whores? It couldn't possibly have been because the Tacoma outperformed the Ranger in every way imaginable...

How about the first gen Colorado/Canyon? Toyota couldn't possibly have built a better truck than those gems... :rolleyes:

Owned a brand new 3.0 sr5 manual 4 clutches in he first 50k miles and two top end rebuilds by 100k, sold to the junk yard at 120k.

 
D

Deleted member 9101

Guest

tacollie

Glamper
Well... it's only available to fleet customers or the very high end trucks. Its rated to tow less than the 3.5, it's slow, and its expensive to buy... it's only real selling point is it gets better fuel economy while towing.

So if you have a trailer hooked to your truck most of the time and you are a fleet customer or plan on dropping 50k on a truck anyways, it's worth looking into. For your average consumer, it's just not very practical.
On pavement the diesel doesn't offer as much. In 4 low it'll most likely smoke everyone in range. That's way more applicable than 0-60 times. I've never been in a situation where my 5.7 struggled to do 80 so there is no benefit for more power in my mind. Range is more important than speed for me.
 

Todd n Natalie

OverCamper
D

Deleted member 9101

Guest
In 4 low it'll most likely smoke everyone in range.

I wouldn't bet on it... the 3.0 has 250 hp @ 3250 rpm and 440 lbft @ 1750 rpm. The 3.5 has 375 hp @ 5000 rpm and 470 lbft @ 3000 rpm.

The 3.5 makes roughly the same HP in the lower RPMs as the 3.0 and then makes quite a bit more as the RPMs rise. While the 3.0 makes its TQ down low... that's literailly all it has to offer.

I have run a 3.5 in 4wd low and its nasty...in the best way possible.

The baby power stroke also has about 1,000 less payload due to the weight of the motor. When you add in all the cost, the 3.0 is the most expensive option to drive per mile.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tex68w

Beach Bum
I've owned a lot of both brands and as very well noted here in this thread already, they both have their pros and cons. IMHO if I am looking for a truck then the Ford gets the nod every single time, when it comes to cars and SUV's Toyota is the hands down winner. That said, the new Expedition is a tad tempting. Don't expect the latest and greatest trim and tech in the Toyota or spectacular fuel economy and expect a little bit more in maintenance on the Ford.
 

battleaxe

Captain Obvious
Owned a brand new 3.0 sr5 manual 4 clutches in he first 50k miles and two top end rebuilds by 100k, sold to the junk yard at 120k.

I think my 4runner (22RE) had ~300k miles on the OEM clutch when I replaced it. And I think collectively the older Toyota community would suggest maybe you're a little rough on your clutches?

Ultimately, I find the whole thing hard to believe...

Wierd, I've never seen the leaf spring recall worded that way... That's a REALLY big if IMO, sucks if that's what happened to yours.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
185,909
Messages
2,879,470
Members
225,497
Latest member
WonaWarrior
Top