tundra: 14.021 @ 98.86 mph
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Texas
Honda trucks arent even trucks. I like the toyota trucks but they are WAY over priced. And if you decide to get the 5.7 liter option you are paying a lot more money than if you bought a 5.4 liter ford. I love my Ford and no Toyota, Honda, or Nissan is going to change that. I have owned 4 vehicles in my life. Two of them have been Ford trucks and I think I will always own a Ford truck till the day I die.
I found this...
"Drivetrain
The Ford F-150's engine is substantially more massive than the Tundra's. Note that more sizeable engines may use more gasoline than smaller ones. Torque is the force that lets you accelerate quickly, and in this respect, the Ford F-150 is markedly more powerful than the Toyota Tundra. The Toyota Tundra could learn a lesson or two from the Ford in terms of torque. "
"Utility
The Ford and the Toyota Tundra can accommodate the same number of passengers. The Ford F-150 is likely a better choice than the Toyota Tundra when it comes to transporting cargo, especially if you often need to carry a lot of cargo or sizeable pets. Towing is significantly more the Ford F-150's forte than it is the Tundra's. "
"Comfort
While the front cabin in the F-150 offers a bit more head room than the Toyota Tundra, there really isn't much of a difference. The F-150 provides more head- and leg-room to your passengers than the Toyota Tundra does. "
I found this...
"Drivetrain
The Ford F-150's engine is substantially more massive than the Tundra's. Note that more sizeable engines may use more gasoline than smaller ones. Torque is the force that lets you accelerate quickly, and in this respect, the Ford F-150 is markedly more powerful than the Toyota Tundra. The Toyota Tundra could learn a lesson or two from the Ford in terms of torque. "
"Utility
The Ford and the Toyota Tundra can accommodate the same number of passengers. The Ford F-150 is likely a better choice than the Toyota Tundra when it comes to transporting cargo, especially if you often need to carry a lot of cargo or sizeable pets. Towing is significantly more the Ford F-150's forte than it is the Tundra's. "
"Comfort
While the front cabin in the F-150 offers a bit more head room than the Toyota Tundra, there really isn't much of a difference. The F-150 provides more head- and leg-room to your passengers than the Toyota Tundra does. "
Last edited by Daveg99; Sep 18, 2007 at 10:30 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Texas
I am not sure if I am alone on this but I would much rather say I drive a Ford than a toyota. When I think toyota I think little tiny corollas or camrys. Saying you drive a toyota just seems a little gay to me. Fords are trucks made for men.
Suspended
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,622
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
The Tundra is not a 2nd generation truck 
Toyota first tried with the T100, which failed miserably. Followed by the Tundra, which also failed fairly badly. And now this truck, which from a sales perspective even still isn't doing so well. For a BRAND NEW supposedly "best truck ever" they sure had to offer "Ford like" rebates and incentives awfully quickly
As for claiming the Toyota is more reliable, and hard to beat? Guess we have another victim to marketing 101...
Toyota first tried with the T100, which failed miserably. Followed by the Tundra, which also failed fairly badly. And now this truck, which from a sales perspective even still isn't doing so well. For a BRAND NEW supposedly "best truck ever" they sure had to offer "Ford like" rebates and incentives awfully quickly
As for claiming the Toyota is more reliable, and hard to beat? Guess we have another victim to marketing 101...
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,862
Likes: 0
From: Northern California
Originally Posted by Daveg99
"Drivetrain
The Ford F-150's engine is substantially more massive than the Tundra's. Note that more sizeable engines may use more gasoline than smaller ones. Torque is the force that lets you accelerate quickly, and in this respect, the Ford F-150 is markedly more powerful than the Toyota Tundra. The Toyota Tundra could learn a lesson or two from the Ford in terms of torque. "
The Ford F-150's engine is substantially more massive than the Tundra's. Note that more sizeable engines may use more gasoline than smaller ones. Torque is the force that lets you accelerate quickly, and in this respect, the Ford F-150 is markedly more powerful than the Toyota Tundra. The Toyota Tundra could learn a lesson or two from the Ford in terms of torque. "
the new 5.7 tundra out-torques our F150s by a mile, im sorry. you cannot deny that. when it comes with a 6spd transmission and 4.10 gears and 401 ft lbs of torque stock, the F150 just cant match that. i still think the F150 is a far better vehicle because of hauling, safety, and reliability as well as comfort and interior (and exterior looks by a longshot), but the tundra has the upper hand in drivetrain hands down. BUT once the new engines and trannys are available in the F150, it will be not only the most durable and reliable half ton, but also the most powerful. THEN the tundra is in big trouble
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,009
Likes: 0
From: In a van down by the river
You guys are going about this ALL WRONG.
Just keep the fat chicks out of your truck and you won't have acceleration problems. It's a lot easier, cheaper and has definite perks vs. buying something that accelerates fast because it has a big engine.
Duke
Just keep the fat chicks out of your truck and you won't have acceleration problems. It's a lot easier, cheaper and has definite perks vs. buying something that accelerates fast because it has a big engine.
Duke
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 10,390
Likes: 10
Originally Posted by F150 Duke
You guys are going about this ALL WRONG.
Just keep the fat chicks out of your truck and you won't have acceleration problems. It's a lot easier, cheaper and has definite perks vs. buying something that accelerates fast because it has a big engine.
Duke
Just keep the fat chicks out of your truck and you won't have acceleration problems. It's a lot easier, cheaper and has definite perks vs. buying something that accelerates fast because it has a big engine.
Duke
Power-to-weight is still fekked.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,121
Likes: 0
From: Hammer Lane
Originally Posted by captain morgan8
I just dont understand why everyone compares and judges new trucks based on how fast they run.
Obviously, not everyone does. It's one of those "If I have to explain it to you, then you wouldn't understand anyway" kind of deals.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,009
Likes: 0
From: In a van down by the river
Originally Posted by MGDfan
Nice theory, but, alas, what still remains is the beer-swillin', chikin wing gorfin', twinky-snortin' obese pumpkins behind the wheel. The ones who don't get cyclin' jokes
Power-to-weight is still fekked.
Power-to-weight is still fekked.
Suspended
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,622
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by MSH
I never included the T100 becouse it is not a full size 1/2 ton pickup and it's not a Tundra. Should we be counting the Tacoma too then? You can count it if you want.....that would make the current Tundra a 3rd generation. The Tundra is still an excellent for a third generation.
Marketing 101........, I guess. 225k on a Honda civic, 300k on a Honda Accord, 196k on a Toyota Camry with no major problems..........with all still going strong.........That's marketing. I'm a victim then.
It's a little early to say the Tundra will average 250k on the orginal engine and transmission but history has a tendency to speak the real truth. We'll see in a few years after the first (or second generation Tundras, depending on how you count) start to age a rack up the miles. I have a feeling they will do better than their domestic rivals.
Marketing 101........, I guess. 225k on a Honda civic, 300k on a Honda Accord, 196k on a Toyota Camry with no major problems..........with all still going strong.........That's marketing. I'm a victim then.
It's a little early to say the Tundra will average 250k on the orginal engine and transmission but history has a tendency to speak the real truth. We'll see in a few years after the first (or second generation Tundras, depending on how you count) start to age a rack up the miles. I have a feeling they will do better than their domestic rivals.
So you have seen 3 Japanese cars produce relatively high mileage with limited problems? Wow, then the Japanese MUST all be perfect and last longer than American cars then! Well, I guess the only problem with your logic being that A.) You failed to compare it to American counter parts (Esp. whats currently on the market) B.) Statistics 101 will also tell you that using a convenience sample like that with 3 examples if just about the worst and least reliable sample possible. C.) People continually compare cars, typically with small engines and their longevity to the larger engines and drive trains commonly found in work trucks that see much more stress. It's common knowledge that smaller engines in general have more potential for longer life... and that also plays into the misconception that the Japanese build longer lasting vehicles... they also have (in the past where this reputation was built) only produced large quantities of very small engines. Where as by comparison American automakers tend to produce larger vehicles with larger power plants. It's an apples and oranges comparison.
But, that aside Ford still has large V6s and V8s that are world renowned for their longevity (UPS and Law Enforcement across America can attest to that...)