Dear Bill Bateman,

Very interesting point about rear-gear ratios! Do you know what gears the Toy has available? Did you happen to see any particulars on any stickers while you were at the dealer, gear ratios, gas mileage estimates, etc.?

Just curious,

------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com

 

54regcab, this one tested said it had a 3.73. They also stated that it was an open rear-end. No limited slip on these I guess.

------------------
1998 F-150 XLT 4x4, Regular Cab, Short-Bed, 4.6L V-8, 5-Speed, 3.55 Rear Gears, Dark Toreador Red

 

There's a couple things that are a little contraversial in the TT mag with the big 4 comparo. They mentioned that the front design of the Tundra closely resembles the F-150, yet they rate the Tundra's styling the best at just over 7 out of 10, and the F-150 the worst at 4.5 out of 10. And how can the Silverado have the best EPA rating, yet its the least efficient because of the outdated pushrod design compared to the sohc Ford and dohc Toyota. The Chevy even loses the most hp & torque through the drivetrain. I'm pretty sure thats the manufacturer rating, so no telling if they tested it with a good tail wind, or going down hill, or if it was being towed by a Ford, so I won't let it bother me.

------------------
'98 F-150 XLT Reg. Cab Flareside 4x4, Black, 5.4l, 3.55LS, tow package, K&N, GTS headlight covers, Alpine changer w/FM mod, Clifford alarm system w/keyless entry & starter disable // Future considerations: 285/75/r16 Mud Terrain BFG's, bed mat, tonneau cover, suspension lift.



[This message has been edited by fordification (edited 09-16-1999).]

 

I'm not worried at all. My blood has run blue since the day I was born and will until the day I die. The comparisons in the magazines are good and bad. They're good because it tells you, for the most part, what these trucks are capable of. They're bad because none of these trucks are identical to another, and that's not a true way to get a good comparison. I sound like I'm double-talking, but that's how they are. The Toyota was atually going to be called the "T-150" until Ford said no way. We must also keep in mind that these "judges" are human and have their own opinions, as we all do. That important to remember because it can go against one manufacturer and go for another. But, and I'm sure I'm not alone, Ford is the best in my book in all aspects and no survey or comparison is going to change my mind.

------------------
1998 F-150 XLT 4x4, Regular Cab, Short-Bed, 4.6L V-8, 5-Speed, 3.55 Rear Gears, Dark Toreador Red

 

Mike, No problem! I was more than happy to post the info I had. I just want to be as helpful to those who have been helpful to me.

------------------
1998 F-150 XLT 4x4, Regular Cab, Short-Bed, 4.6L V-8, 5-Speed, 3.55 Rear Gears, Dark Toreador Red

 

Imagine what would happen if ford dohcammed the 4.6.

------------------
1997 4x4 5.4 ORP XLT extended cab Dark Toreador red Westin nerf bars tint HARDER THAN A ROCK AND FASTER THAN A HEART BEAT

 

ford-tough1, you dohc the 4.6 and you get the Cobra motor. 300+ hoursepower.

------------------
98 SC/XL/4.2/5 speed/3.08/MoonLight Blue Metalic/Mobil One Synthetic/235.70S.16 Michelin XC LT4/AR-136 Wheels/Chrome Nerf Bars/Bug Shield/Aluminum Tool Box/K&N/Superchip/NOS maybe. Soon.

 

Dear Gearjammer,

Excellent post, very well done, perfect amount of detail. Very, very nice. Thanks! That tells a lot of the story, and sure brings me much more up to speed. I have to say that I'm somewhat impressed that a Toyota has over 300 lbs./ft. of torque, but after seeing all this, I still say the commercial was a *real* stretch. And assuming the magazine's numbers were correct and accurate, they sure don't make the Toyota the champion in acceleration while towing, even with it's gear ratio advantage or so it seems!



------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com

 

Dear Bill Bateman,

OK, thanks. Good call on the size, and gearjammer's post on dimensions etc. confirms your suspicions!

------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com

 

Dear CAF150,

Very interesting! Sounds like the Toyota didn't do top bad a job of keeping you in his sights at least, though of course he was seeing your taillights. With 4:10 gears and the Superhcip, it should get very interesting indeed! Our buddy Neal the HP freak is doing the same on his truck, 4.10's and the Superchip, so hopefully we'll be able to see what it does for his.

------------------
Mike Troyer
Performance Products, Inc.
National Distributor of Superchips
(540) 862-9515
Email: mtroyer@compuserve.com

 

FWIW the Tundra is about the size that "full-size" American pickups used to be 15 or so years ago. Toyota has done their market research and found that a lot of potential buyers think the current generation are just too big and unwieldy. Combined with their very well deserved reputation for quality control (no piston slap, door cracks, brake rotor warpage, paint swirls, etc.) and Toyota will be a major player in the full-size truck market, whether you all consider it full-size or not. I'd be real interested in one myself but they don't offer a standard cab 6.5' bed model. Ford had better get their act together on quality and really make it Job 1, instead of just spouting it as a slogan or Toyota is going to eat their lunch in the large truck market just like they did in the small car market in the 70s

 

Strange indeed. All the articles on trucks I've ever read say 'American's like their trucks big and this truck is BIG' when they are evaluating a full size truck. I personally like mine big and heavy. On your other point, Ford makes the best truck on the road and has sold more trucks every year than any other truck and even any automobile of any kind. The reason is the quality of the trucks unless you want to say all those millions of Ford truck buyers are fools. The Tundra will not succeed in the American market because they made a little truck for the little Japanese streets. The new Tundra is a Dakota in disguise...

------------------
98 SC/XL/4.2/5 speed/3.08/MoonLight Blue Metalic/Mobil One Synthetic/235.70S.16 Michelin XC LT4/AR-136 Wheels/Chrome Nerf Bars/Bug Shield/Aluminum Tool Box/K&N/Superchip/NOS maybe. Soon.

 

DOHC the Ford motor? Don't need to. Ford's got the Lightning! And Toyota doesn't.

I can't figure out how Toyota got it wrong AGAIN (just like their under-powered, over-priced 4-cyl Previa mini-van, which followed that spooky other van that looked like it would fall over frontwards, like a 60s-vintage old Econoline).

The new Tundra has the smallest rear seating area, yet Toyota should have been able to figure out that this would be be next major area of competition (witness Dakota Crew Cab, F-150 SuperCrew, Explorer similar). Toyota had a chance to make a "great leap forward" but they blew it.

Unlike Toyota, Honda got it right when they went after the Windstar - Honda "out-bigged" it. And out-did it on crash tests. The new Odyssey is a real competitor, for a rice-burner (built in Ontario, Canada, like the Crown Vic, I might add).

Toyota, however, didn't even keep up. The Tundra is still a T-100 + 50 per cent of the difference short of the real thing. Now, if HONDA took on the best of the pick-ups, then Ford might have to worry and - only then - would I think about changing brands.

------------------
1998 XL SC short-box 4.2 5-speed 3.55LS, Pacific Green, A/C, factory box liner, factory dark tinted rear glass (like the XLT), cassette, carpet, Canadian XLS package (split bench, chrome wheels, side mouldings, box light, tailgate lock), sill guards, Windstar (driver's) wiper blade (the one with the air scoop). Oh ya: snazzy Tweetie Bird floor mats.

New 2000 F-150 on order Sept. 2 - sure hope they don't go on strike up here in Canada! Same mechanically as the current one except black, XLT, CD and side steps. Great trucks!

 

Attention! Do not let Toyota brainwash you like they have so many soccer moms. I used to work at a local Toyota and went up to see my old boss shortly after the Tundra came out. I did MY comparison. He let me drive the ones they had, of course they were all loaded Access Cabs with V-8s and two wheel drive except for one V-6 (dog).

Parked next to each other the Ford dwarfs the Tundra big time, Ford bed is more user friendly, step in height is better on Ford, wheels, trim and overall styling on Ford not as "cheesy". Inside, the Ford is built just as well but the materials are even better on the Ford in my opinion and the space is just better used on Ford. The Toyota has more comfortable seats but the center console and armrests with the captians chairs are too small, almost useless. In the Ford, the seating position is more chairlike, the Tundra is more like a beach chair the way your legs stick out in front of you (I have always hated that about Toyotas). both trucks drive great, the Toy is more like a souped up T-100 with a V-8 or very much like a Dakota V-8, my Ford drives and handles even better not as neck snapping (rear diff ratio I suspect) but more of a sewing machine smooth, robust, torquy feel. I would feel more comfortable towing with my Ford. I did not even consider the Tundra V-6 for this one. Then came the sticker prices. The Tundra v-8s were overall very similarly equipped to my truck, with almost all available options inside and out and the cheapest Tundra this dealer had was $32,236.00 (excluding the v-6, it lost it's sticker). None of the Tundras were 4x4 or the top model Limited by the way. Tundras are not a big hit in my area, I have only seen maybe five of them on the roads and the dealer always has 6-7 on the lot, the same amount as the T-100 stock they usually had when I worked there seven years ago.

The verdict: the Tundra is much better than the T-100 but not a much better idea. If my grandmother wanted a truck tomorrow then I would suggest a Tundra. If you use a truck for something more than a novelty or hauling plants then stick to Ford.

Toyota had their hey-day in the seventies when America had Vegas, Pintos, Mavericks, Chevettes, Pacers and other junk. They offered stylish quality cars that could go 100,000 plus with no problem in our eyes. Well, things have improved much in the last 20 years. Now Toyota plays the same tricks that Americans played in the seventies. Toyota has decontented thier cars and trucks to a new low, that is why their cars are so boring. Toyota also uses a bump sticker on pricing which is basically another sticker affixed by the dealer right next to the window sticker. It makes you think you are getting more options except the ones that are checked off on the bump sticker are either standard or not listed on the window sticker. Toyota's minimum car bump was $1,499 in 1993, pure profit, who knows now? Also you would be hard pressed to find the real dealer cost if your an invoice shopper.

Ford makes a lot of vehicles every year, everything from semi trucks to farm tractors, and yes they are gonna have engineering glitches (door cracks, piston slap, etc. etc.). Toyota builds no where close to the same amount and plays Americans like fiddles. Even my neighbor with his troublesome T-100 (can you say head gaskets?) will not switch to Ford or American anything. If for no other reason just to have a truck with "character". He is brainwashed beyond recovery. So sad.

Sorry for the long post, I needed to vent!

 

Speaking of the Honda oddessy I wish I waited another year.
My 98 is ok but is not nearly a good as the 99s.
Wife loves the 98 thought so instead of trading I'll just use the extra $ for truck mods when the van is paid off.
Get your grandmother a compact truck.
Maybe a Ranger or something