Tundra vs F150

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deleted member 9101

Guest
Also who cares about a break even point? This isn't a business acquisition. Diesel gives you significantly more range and tows better. That's enough for a lot of people.


I do, as do many others... You'd have to have a serious mental deficiency to not care about the operating cost of a vehicle. But hey.... If you want to burn extra money so you can get to the top of the hill first... Be my guest.
 

Dalko43

Explorer
I do, as do many others... You'd have to have a serious mental deficiency to not care about the operating cost of a vehicle. But hey.... If you want to burn extra money so you can get to the top of the hill first... Be my guest.

The difference in overall operating costs will be small in the long run. As I said before, if you're worried about cost but then going out and buying a brand new 1/2 ton or 3/4 ton (gasoline or diesel) every few years, then you're not really worried about cost.

No one has a mental deficiency...buy what you can afford and what suits your needs and preferences...stop worrying about what other think. Just because you don't understand why someone else would buy a diesel doesn't mean that person is stupid....so maybe get back on topic.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bkg

docwatson

Adventurer
Never seen that before... Buuuut in all honesty Tundras are typically in my rear view mirror. ;-)
Well played but I have never understood why only the 4Runner and Tundra have this feature. Is a glass hatch (SUV) or tiny window (truck) some how superior? I walked passed a new Ranger today and it has the tiniest opening. I would be so distracted trying to throw my empty beer cans in the bed of the truck.
 
D

Deleted member 9101

Guest
Well played but I have never understood why only the 4Runner and Tundra have this feature. Is a glass hatch (SUV) or tiny window (truck) some how superior? I walked passed a new Ranger today and it has the tiniest opening. I would be so distracted trying to throw my empty beer cans in the bed of the truck.

That's where a sunroof is nice... You toss the can up, the wind takes it back to the bed.
 

nickw

Adventurer
I originally offered the 3/4 & 1 Ton comparison as a pre-owned vehicle alternative at a comparable price point to a new, reasonably optioned F-150. Diesel economy is fair comparison because F-150 comes in diesel.

Dudes, im not sure what sort of Flat Earth Mathematics you Diesel-Disbelievers subscribe to... The quantifiable reality is that on the whole, diesels perform better while hauling or towing. Some people actually put their full size trucks to work beyond hauling beer & groceries. The 25-40% increase in fuel economy absolutely pays financial dividends if your annual mileage is high enough.

Story Time:

I had a few evening beers in Death Valley with a German couple who were on a 3 year expedition through North and South America. Their 78 Series Landcruiser tows a small utility trailer and has 1600 miles of range. They had already completed Australia, South Africa, Western Europe and Iceland. They traveled the breadth of most states and some small countries without having to refuel. Epic! Only possible because of diesel.

Diesel makes sense virtually everywhere around the world besides ‘Merica. But our inordinate fuel subsidies work differently ‘round these parts, so i digress.

Its a sad day when the primary sales point going for the Tundra is that “Its Reliable Bruh”. Toyota’s offering the same reliability in equally capable but more efficient products in other marketplaces. I cant blame an objective shopper to lean towards Ford...

If your point is you can't do big international tours with gas, these folks would disagree:

https://www.autoblog.com/2012/05/07/land-cruiser-world-record/

http://www.weltrekordreise.ch/a_starte.html

If your point is you can't travel 1600 miles between refills, well, even judging by how many Jerry cans they have, you are probably right...but certainly not needed for international travel.
 

Neosapian

Innate Outdoor Co
******** @ annual mileage... It can easily take hundreds of thousands of miles for a diesel to reach a break even point ... And that can be increased exponentially by one out of warranty repair. The 8-9k upcharge for the diesel can take over a decade to balance out.

Clearly you have either never owned a full size diesel, or if you did you never tracked the operating cost. I can tell you for an absolute fact that any savings in fuel economy is more than offset by every other increased cost.

Here is a fun game: compare the price of an oil change for a 2019 6.2 gas and a 2019 6.7 powerstroke. (Every third oil change will cost more because you have to change the fuel filters on the 6.7)


Now take the price difference and see how long your 25-40% increased fuel economy will take to make up that difference. Suddenly a diesel makes less sense.

You are correct. Although you may have missed my point about the price similarity between a new, well optioned F150 gasser & lightly used Diesels.

If you need to change the narrative and add “$8-9k” to initial cost of diesel in order to validate your absolute facts and figures, well i can’t contest that. Its your reality, who am I to convince you otherwise?

I’ve never known a diesel truck owner with regrets. Many people spend nearly $60k on a 1/2 ton gasser, then loose their shirt on a trade when they realize they want/need a bigger truck to tow that boat or RV they want - regardless of what a Ford’s 1/2 Ton tow & payload numbers suggest.


If your point is you can't do big international tours with gas, these folks would disagree:

The moral of that story is that their diesel was efficient enough to offer range that gasoline could not match. They would not physically be able to carry enough gas on their Troop Carrier to achieve that range because of payload and space constraints. They didn’t carry jerry cans, because they had two large tanks.

Technically neither gas nor diesel is required for international travel... You can travel on a bicycle dude. An internal combustion engine would improve long distance travel efficiency in some regards, right? Okay, now enter diesel fuel, which is more efficient in some regards than gasoline, right?

I didn’t realize that the efficiency of diesels was such a difficult concept for people to grasp. Yikes. Its okay to prefer gasoline. We enjoy inordinately low prices in America. Most other places its $7/gallon or more.

I sure wouldn’t complain if Toyota brought over their twin turbo V8 diesel and put into the new Tundra. Ford Rapter killer maybe? ??
 
Last edited:

Buliwyf

Viking with a Hammer
I got out of a 6.0 diesel before people figured out how bad they were. So I have regrets. I got lucky, I didn't lose any more than normal trading a truck, plus discounts on a dusty new one...

A friend of mine bought a new diesel during that weird year where Ford had 6.0's and 7.3's on the lot at the same time. Guess what...........
 

Neosapian

Innate Outdoor Co
Im glad you didnt loose to much cash on that truck! Is it safe to say the 6.0 is an exception? Its kind of a different can of worms. An old employer of mine, a reasonable guy, owned both a 7.3 and the 6.0 and had a bad experience with his 6.0, but he didn’t exchange it for a gasoline truck... Diesel wasn’t this issue, it was Ford’s 6.0 in his/your case.

Its my understanding that all of the new generation diesel powertrains from the big 3 are pretty good. I don't own any of them because i don’t have a use for a heavy duty pickup, yet. I cant comment on the dependability of Ford diesels besides my remark about personally requiring an extended 100k mile warranty for me to consider owning a Ford as a tow vehicle.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 9101

Guest
I didn’t realize that the efficiency of diesels was such a difficult concept for people to grasp. Yikes. Its okay to prefer gasoline. We enjoy inordinately low prices in America. Most other places its $7/gallon or more.

I sure wouldn’t complain if Toyota brought over their twin turbo V8 diesel and put into the new Tundra. Ford Rapter killer maybe? ??

I didn't know that reading comprehension was such a difficult concept for you to grasp... No one is saying that a diesel is not more fuel efficient... What we are saying is that the overall operating cost negate any savings in fuel economy.

Seriously, call any Ford dealership and compare the cost of a 6.2 oil change to a 6.7. Many owners are one out of warranty repair away from having to trade their diesel truck in, or take on a large loan or credit card debt to repair it. It's not at all uncommon for diesel repairs to cost many thousands of dollars. Oh wait... Diesel fuel also cost more per gallon. Also, don't forget the cost of DEF or the fuel filters every 20k.

I just got a brand new work truck. It has the 6.2 instead of the 6.7. No matter how we looked at it, the 6.7 never had a lower operating cost. Even using the worst case fuel economy for the 6.2 and the best case fuel economy for the 6.7 the diesel cost more per mile to operate. We never looked at the purchase price of the truck (it's paid for through a trust set up by the utility companies) and we don't pay sales tax.

As for Toyota building a "Raptor killer"... Hahahahahahahahahahaha... I can promise you that will never happen.
 

Attachments

  • 20190708_140715~2.jpg
    20190708_140715~2.jpg
    2 MB · Views: 18

tacollie

Glamper
I sure wouldn’t complain if Toyota brought over their twin turbo V8 diesel and put into the new Tundra. Ford Rapter killer maybe? ??
Me either! It would bring down the cost of the gas trucks. My lifted tundra still gets 16mpg on the highway and doesn't require emissions testing or DEF. When we were in New Zealand diesel was cheaper but you had to pay a usage tax which made it more expensive than gas. We were paying almost $2NZD per litter for gas there. When we got back gas was just over $2 per gallon here which made it feel like it was almost free ?. Also, check out what the model land cruiser with modern diesels are getting milage wise. It's not as good as Toyota claims.
 

bkg

Explorer
I do, as do many others... You'd have to have a serious mental deficiency to not care about the operating cost of a vehicle. But hey.... If you want to burn extra money so you can get to the top of the hill first... Be my guest.

you realize you're posting this statement on a place dedicated to the exact opposite of operating efficiency and TCO... right??? The cost of adding all of the mods to get to the top of the hill faster doesn't seem to be a concern for most...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
185,529
Messages
2,875,555
Members
224,922
Latest member
Randy Towles
Top