Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-27-2012, 08:16 PM   #43
Rivet Master
 
Goal15's Avatar
 
2006 23' Safari SE
Dallas , Texas
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,673
Images: 1
So, Ramble, bought a truck yet?
__________________

__________________
Dana and Olga
2006 Safari 23
2011 Tundra Double Cab
Goal15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 12:18 PM   #44
3 Rivet Member
 
Ramble On's Avatar
 
2004 28' International CCD
rockwall , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 124
Images: 2
I test drove the Tundra and the f 150 that were similarly equipped. I was impressed with the Toyota build quality, not so much with the styling (subjective opinion). Tough decision to make.

Here is my analysis based on each manufacturers specifications:

EcoBoost® V6
FORD F150 4X4 SUPERCREW LARIAT

INVOICE $45,189
0.0% 60 MONTHS
EPA Estimated Fuel Consumption
(city/highway MPG)
15/21

HP 365 TORQUE 420 LBS-FT



GVWR (lbs.) Max. Payload (lbs.)
7650* 1900*
GCWR (Lbs.) Maximum Towing Capabilities
17100 11200*

(1) *Requires Max. Trailer Tow Package



TOYOTA TUNDRA LIMITED INVOICE $47,531
4x4
CrewMax 5.7 V-8
0.0% 60 MONTHS
EPA Estimated Fuel Consumption
(city/highway MPG)
13/17

HP 381 TORQUE 401 LBS-FT

GVWR (lbs.) Max. Payload (lbs.)
7,200 1,575

GCWR (Lbs.) Maximum Towing Capabilities
16,000 9,000

Per the new SAE J2807 Methodology

The scales are tilting.
__________________

__________________
Ramble On is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 01:26 PM   #45
4 Rivet Member
 
bike_addict's Avatar
 
2012 25' FB Flying Cloud
Pearland , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 318
That is a tough call. I have that Tundra and can say I love it. The styling is definitely subjective. The styling was one of the major factors that brought me to the Tundra, both the interior and exterior. I'm not a wood grain fan and it's hard to find a truck with all the bells and whistles who's dash isn't covered in wood grain. I believe the FX4 F150 is void of wood grain as well. My Tundra has a little bit, just the shifter and some small panels on the doors.

Really don't see how you'd be unhappy with either of those. I do believe (could be wrong) that the bed on the F150 is longer. The back seat on the Tundra is bigger and it eats into bed space.

And the price difference will probably get bigger once you negotiate. Typically Ford is more willing to negotiate than Toyota is. But I'd buy the Tundra again in a heartbeat, but that's just me.
__________________
- Ronnie
bike_addict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 02:18 PM   #46
Moderator
 
DKB_SATX's Avatar

 
2017 26' Flying Cloud
1976 Argosy 28
Alamo Heights , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,400
Images: 1
Blog Entries: 7
One point I'll make about forced-induction direction-injection magic: The Ecoboost delivers its 420 lb-ft peak torque at 2500 rpm, and delivers more than 380 lb-ft from 1700 rpm until 5000. That peak torque is 1100 rpm earlier than the Tundra's 401 lb-ft peak.
__________________
— David

Zero Gravitas — 2017 Flying Cloud 26U | Il Progetto — 1976 Argosy 28 Center Bath | WBCCI# 15566

He has all of the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire. — Sir Winston Churchill
DKB_SATX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 04:52 PM   #47
Rivet Master
 
Goal15's Avatar
 
2006 23' Safari SE
Dallas , Texas
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,673
Images: 1
I drove F-150 as well as the Tundra. I'm not as tech oriented as David clearly is..... but the thing that sold me on the Tundra is that I felt like the truck had a strong stance on the road, whereas with the F-150 I felt like it sat more vertical than I liked. I'm sure the width of the wheelbase is the same but it felt funny to me. Of course it wasn't a 4x4 in either case so that could make a difference.

But it does seem like you probably can't go wrong either way, especially in that you are paying twice as much for a truck as I was willing to
__________________
Dana and Olga
2006 Safari 23
2011 Tundra Double Cab
Goal15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 05:28 PM   #48
Rivet Master
 
1988 32' Excella
Robbinsville , New Jersey
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,008
If you go into the mountains a lot the ford wont loose as much power with high altitudes thanks to being turbo charged, from what I have been told anyway.
__________________
Wazbro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 07:34 PM   #49
Moderator
 
DKB_SATX's Avatar

 
2017 26' Flying Cloud
1976 Argosy 28
Alamo Heights , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,400
Images: 1
Blog Entries: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goal15 View Post
I drove F-150 as well as the Tundra. I'm not as tech oriented as David clearly is..... but the thing that sold me on the Tundra is that I felt like the truck had a strong stance on the road, whereas with the F-150 I felt like it sat more vertical than I liked. I'm sure the width of the wheelbase is the same but it felt funny to me. Of course it wasn't a 4x4 in either case so that could make a difference.

But it does seem like you probably can't go wrong either way, especially in that you are paying twice as much for a truck as I was willing to
I'm pretty sure that's an optical illusion from the styling. The trucks are within an inch of each other in most of the external dimensions (the Tundra's track is 0.9" wider and its body width is 0.7" greater but the Ford is 1" lower in overall height (comparing 4x2 to 4x2) so the actual proportions are essentially identical.

I can't deny that I'm seriously (insanely?) tech-oriented, but making peak torque 1100 rpm lower is important for drivability too... at a comparable overall gear ratio, you can stay in a higher gear longer with more torque available. Lower-rpm torque is the drug that diesel addicts are hooked on, after all.
__________________
— David

Zero Gravitas — 2017 Flying Cloud 26U | Il Progetto — 1976 Argosy 28 Center Bath | WBCCI# 15566

He has all of the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire. — Sir Winston Churchill
DKB_SATX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 03:31 PM   #50
3 Rivet Member
 
Ramble On's Avatar
 
2004 28' International CCD
rockwall , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 124
Images: 2
I've made may decision, but I am apprehensive to divulge since there are so many passionate owners. I feel like I'm at a NASCAR event. You got your Chevy guys, your Dodge guys, your Toyota guys and your Ford guys.
__________________
Ramble On is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 03:37 PM   #51
4 Rivet Member
 
bike_addict's Avatar
 
2012 25' FB Flying Cloud
Pearland , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 318
oh we'll forgive you. and we're all so easily distracted by silver that we barely notice the truck once the trailers on it.
__________________
- Ronnie
bike_addict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 03:58 PM   #52
Rivet Master
 
aftermath's Avatar
 
2006 25' Safari FB SE
Spokane , Washington
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,133
Wow, a trailer and a new truck. You are making a lot of us envious. I am sure that your choice will be the right one for you. I think that the trucks you have looked at have more in common than not.

I am a Tundra guy and have been very happy with our combination. But, I will have to tell you that I am now retired so I drive the truck very little between trips. If I was still driving it daily I would look very closely at the Eco-Boost for the mileage alone. Achieving the torque ratings at lower RPMs would also be a plus for me but I would still be a little leary of the whole turbocharged system since it is so new. From all the stories I have heard about Ford not standing behind their 6.0 diesel disasters I would be a little concerned about getting into such a new system. I am hoping that it will prove itself over time and that they will start looking at putting something similar into a 3/4 ton. That would be a real money maker for sure.

When you build up enough courage, post up and let us know which truck you purchased. They are all good in my opinion.
__________________
aftermath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 04:47 PM   #53
Moderator
 
DKB_SATX's Avatar

 
2017 26' Flying Cloud
1976 Argosy 28
Alamo Heights , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,400
Images: 1
Blog Entries: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramble On View Post
I've made may decision, but I am apprehensive to divulge since there are so many passionate owners. I feel like I'm at a NASCAR event. You got your Chevy guys, your Dodge guys, your Toyota guys and your Ford guys.
Hehe... even though I have an F150 at the moment, call me a "forced induction" guy. I was never evangelical about a "half ton" until Ford introduced the 3.5l Ecoboost, for years I was hoping that one of the big 3 would come out with a small turbodiesel for half-tons and the Ecoboost is the closest thing that's made it to market.
__________________
— David

Zero Gravitas — 2017 Flying Cloud 26U | Il Progetto — 1976 Argosy 28 Center Bath | WBCCI# 15566

He has all of the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire. — Sir Winston Churchill
DKB_SATX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 05:17 PM   #54
3 Rivet Member
 
Ramble On's Avatar
 
2004 28' International CCD
rockwall , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 124
Images: 2
FORD F150 4X4 SUPERCREW LARIAT, closed the deal last night. I convinced them to switch out the tires with Michelin LTX A/T2 at no charge, I did that this morning. Soon i will be able to see if all of the ones advocating a 3/4 ton TV is right. For better or for worse. for richer or for poorer, I'm married to my decision, at least 60 months. (The poorer part came to soon).
__________________
Ramble On is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 05:20 PM   #55
Moderator
 
DKB_SATX's Avatar

 
2017 26' Flying Cloud
1976 Argosy 28
Alamo Heights , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,400
Images: 1
Blog Entries: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramble On View Post
FORD F150 4X4 SUPERCREW LARIAT, closed the deal last night. I convinced them to switch out the tires with Michelin LTX A/T2 at no charge, I did that this morning. Soon i will be able to see if all of the ones advocating a 3/4 ton TV is right. For better or for worse. for richer or for poorer, I'm married to my decision, at least 60 months. (The poorer part came to soon).
Did you get the Ecoboost or the 5.0?

I bought my '07 used and have had it for less than 2 years, but I've had (and resolved) only 1 problem with it, which it had when I bought it but Carmax pretended it didn't. It was an AC issue that Ford resolved.
__________________
— David

Zero Gravitas — 2017 Flying Cloud 26U | Il Progetto — 1976 Argosy 28 Center Bath | WBCCI# 15566

He has all of the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire. — Sir Winston Churchill
DKB_SATX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 06:36 PM   #56
Rivet Master
 
Goal15's Avatar
 
2006 23' Safari SE
Dallas , Texas
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,673
Images: 1
Congrats on the new truck. Will look forward to seeing you guys at Piney Woods!
__________________

__________________
Dana and Olga
2006 Safari 23
2011 Tundra Double Cab
Goal15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.