The really sad thing is that next year the results for the F150 are going to be the same-- last. But maybe if Ford releases the "new" truck early in 2008 then the next test might show different results (for 2009) but if ford is slow on the release then in 2009 the F150 is gonna be last again.. But hey we should win in 2010--- unless one of the other companies updates again?


But hey I don't like these magazines they suck.. Why wouldn't a truck thats 3yrs (2007) or 4yrs (2008) or 5yrs (2009) old win. Hell Ford makes the best truck period these editors are smokin something. J/K

 

Im suprised noone mentioned the obvious yet.

They tested Screw models for Ford/Chevy/Dodge/Nissan.
They tested a SCAB for Toyota.

Like the others said..

Bashed the ford for 5.5' bed, when a 6.5' bed available
Bashed the ford for having a speaker under the seat (optional)
Bashed for poor suspension (tested with 18" tires) when 20" avail.

Praised the long bed on the Yota (only 5.5' on the Screw) but tested a Scab
Also.. makes all comparisons not valid (accel/braking/etc)
Did you see the SMALL back seat in that thing?!?

Idiots I tell ya.. the lot of them.

Chris

 

Ya the back seats on a Dodge are a joke. And the interior really does feel cheap. I'll take comfort, class and reliability over any other pos.

 

If I'm being honest, one of the main reasons I bought my F150 was because of the interior. At the time it was the largest interior space and it proved to be really safe. I new that someday soon my kids would be sitting in those back seats and I wanted to make damn sure that 1.) they were safe 2.) A carseat could fit back there with room to spare 3.) anyone riding in the truck would not mistake the interior for a POS minivan.

 

Anyone who started coming to this site before the new 2004's came out for info and just plain excitement will recall that the two big things people complained about were the lack of power and no NAV option. All we can do is hope that Ford has listened to everything over the past 4 years and makes a really good truck this time, one that no one will be able to complain about in terms of basic functionality while still remaining the best-looking truck out there, inside and out.

I'd rather be complaining that the 2009 doesn't have heated/cooled cupholders rather than that my 2004 truck is underpowered or that the engine whines like a supersonic jet every time I step on the gas.

As for the competiton, Ford needs it to stay on their toes. Other than that, I plan to buy an '09 because Ford trucks have always been #1 to me, doesn't matter what some magazine says - that's their opinion, not mine.

I loved all 3 F-150's that I've owned, but I can't wait for the 2009, if for nothing else than to have a QUIET truck like my '97 and '98 were. As the spy photos start to come in and info starts to flow, it'll be exciting all over again.

 

All magazines tend not to get apples to apples. They'll test a 3.08 geared small v8 against a 3.73 geared largest v8. SCAB vs SCREW.
XLT vs king ranch (you get the point).

You would think that they would mention oh yeah that is available on this model, but we couldnt get it due to deadlines etc.

The frame, interior, etc on the F150 are still holding up with the competition. When they get the 6 speed and possibly a better tune, It will be more competitive. We are all probably a bit biased, but the F150 is a good looking, rugged and usable truck.

 

I just read the article in the new Car and Driver. I am not sure why the F-150 was last. Here is what they said:

The highs:
- Limo space back in the crew
- Compartment, plush interior
- Details, throne-like front buckets

The lows:
- Shaky steering column (not a problem for me), weak engine (weakest in the test, slowest truck in the test, heaviest in the test)
- Torpid handling, heavy understeer when the going gets brisk (I love the handling and I guess I don't know what understeer really is)

The Verdict:
- Plush inside, not much load space behind, think passenger truck

The criticized the trucks from a contractor's perspective and made comments about the short bed (option to get a longer bed), high bed sides that you cannot lift stuff into, truck feels heavy due to weight and engine.

0-60 was 8.8 sec (next slowest was Dodge Ram at 7.9)
1/4 mi was 16.7 sec(next slowest was Dodge Ram at 16.2)

Tundra 0-60 was 6.1 sec and 1/4 mi was 14.9 sec.

I may just have to write them a letter for the first time (I have been a subscriber since 1985).

 

Here is my letter to the editor:

I have been a subscriber since 1985 (since I was 15) and I have never been moved to write you until now. I just finished reading the comparison test between the big 5 trucks. I am the proud owner of a 2005 F-150 SuperCrew Lariat.

My problems with the article are with some of your complaints concerning the F-150. You complained about the length of the bed but there is an option to get a 6.5’ bed on the SuperCrew. You complained about the subwoofer under the rear seat, which is also an option to have it or not. You complained about the height of the bed sides, but I love that the sides are high when carrying taller items where they are more secure against those tall sides. You stated that “average guys” have an impossible time reaching over the sides. That makes sense because “average guys” don’t drive Fords.

You raved about the Tundra’s bed length but you tested their Double Cab version, which would of course have a longer bed. That back seat is a joke. I cannot believe you did not say anything about a $39,000 truck that was not a crew cab. You should have tested their crew cab. Of course it would have been at least $41,000 and the bed would have been 5.55’ long. That’s the same length as the F-150 SuperCrew’s standard bed. The Tundra does not have an optional 6.5’ bed for their CrewMax.

You also loved the “slick detail” of the counterbalanced tailgate. Ford came up with that idea when the 2004 F-150 came out. Nice copying that “slick detail” Toyota.

I do agree with you that Ford needs to step up in the engine and HP game and I am sure they will in 2009. I will keep my Ford and only consider another option when someone else produces a truck as nice as the F-150 is on the inside as it is on the outside. Everyone who rides in my trucks comments on the luxury interior and that they cannot believe it is a truck.

Steve McWilliams
Winter Springs, FL

 

You'll have to let us know if they ever give you a response. Until then, we'll just keep driving our 150's.

 

Well, I haven't driven the Tundra yet, but if they let me list them in order on factors that are important to me, such as towing, hauling, off road capability, driving comfort, styling, expected long term servicability, and cost. I think the order would have been...

1. Ford F150 (FX-4 thank you...)
2. Dodge Ram. Yeah I know, so sue me. If I hadn't have gotten the F150, it would have been a quad cab Ram 1500. Oh, and yeah, the Quad cab is the same size inside as my Supercab Ford. And yes I have ridden in the back of one of those. And they are SMALL back there!
3 Nissan Titan. (With big dings on long term durability, I HATE Nissans...).
4. Toyota Tundra. They still seem awfully weak frame and suspension wise, and Japanese seats hurt my oversized American behind, but I will give Yota their props where they deserve it. This thing should last. And they dang well better for the price!
5. Chevy Silverado. Yeah the Silverado is a new restyle this year. And it didn't help. The interior still looks ultra cheap. The Z71 package gives it a rear locker which is cool, and it has plenty of HP, but that is about it. Overpriced for what it is, uncomfortable, and cheaply made.

 

Very well put!!

 

I find it interesting that the Toyota keeps missing the mark in the comparo's. Besides the C&D and Popular Mechanics mentioned, Motor Trend compared just the Tundra and Silverado with the Chevy winning out. For the media darling that is Toyota to go spend over a billion dollars on the plant andd another billion on the truck with a few hundred million in advertising to keep getting something other than first is a little refreshing to me.

As for the comparisons themselves they frequently can get an apple to apple version to compare but it is surprising they didn't mention that some of their complaints have options from Ford to correct. Also, I do not know how price factored in but the Ford does have heavy discounts available, great for buying sucks for resale.

As for the trucks themselves I obviously have my reasons for buying my third F150. I like them, I still think it's the best looking truck on the road, none of the others have an interior that can even come close to My Lariat, and I just don't like how they drive. Now I have not driven the new tundra, but I have driven previous model years. I feel more confident and in control of my truck. Finally, the only other one of them I would even seriously consider at this point would be the Silverado, it's got some very appealing features with it's 4WD system, tranny and engine. All of which makes me salivate at what Ford can do in '09 if they want to knock one out of the park.