|
|
04-22-2011, 02:19 PM
|
#61
|
one of those
2011 27 FB International
'03 F250 PSD
, Airstream summers, Catalac winters
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,091
|
I've owned a bunch of Japanese designed stuff, and in general had good luck with it. had Toyota Celica GT in 74 I put a lot of hard miles on. Have owned two Suzuki Samurai. I drove a mid 70's Land Cruiser in western Australia for a couple months, liked it just fine.
I keep hearing that the Toyota trucks are not as good as they were. But since I am looking for a used truck, maybe I could get a consensus on the last year they were still good?
We drive ( and I maintain) two 2005 Land Rover Defenders. A 110 and a ragtop 90. Can't have them in the USA. Not allowed.
I will say they are built like tanks and easy to work on. And we have two that are six years old in a neighborhood where everybody else changes US made trucks every two years, at most. The climate here eats iron. And aluminum. and fast.
|
|
|
04-22-2011, 04:48 PM
|
#62
|
Master of Universe
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction
, Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 12,711
|
Our best Toyotas were a 1999 Tacoma and a 2000 4Runner. The 2002 Tundra and the 2002 Sequoia were almost as good. The first generation Tundra is really not designed for a 27' trailer. The 2nd generation started in 2007 and that's what we have.
Though we don't think our '06 4Runner and the '07 Tundra are as well made as Toyotas used to be, according to Consumer Reports they are still better than other brands. CR does not like trucks, so they do look for comfort and trucks that are more like cars. They like the Honda Ridgeline also, but it doesn't seem to be the truck other full size trucks are and is more like a car. Ridgeline owners will disagree. Our Tundra has a smaller gas tank (26.3 gal I think) than the Fords and Chevy/GMC and I don't know if they have made it bigger. I can live with it, but will seriously consider a truck with a larger tank next time. Too many fillups with 26 gallons, though stopping often and walking around is a good idea.
Check the towing capacities, payload, torque, HP of trucks and large SUVs and see what works. Payload is the problem with 1/2 ton trucks because you have to be more careful what you can put in the truck and the tongue weight. Then see what reliability is and whatever else is important to you. CR is a good source for information (the annual auto issue came out a few months ago), but remember the anti-truck bias. There are other sources for information such as Edmunds and Kelly Blue Book.
Like others, I think the Tundra can be used with a 27'. The engine is very powerful and there is sufficient payload if you are careful. But if you like to load the truck up to the gills, brings a large family including 2 St. Bernards, go for a 3/4 ton.
Gene
|
|
|
04-25-2011, 10:44 AM
|
#63
|
Rivet Master
2020 30' Classic
Derwood
, Maryland
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,515
|
Again - lots of opinions here, but for me - modern F-250/F-350 (2500/3500) diesel is the best TV for an Airstream Classic 30 or 34 footer....
SUV - unless the Excursion were still available or a Suburban 2500 - no other SUV out there that I would use to tow anything larger than a modern 25 Classic.
Again - this is what I would do...
__________________
John "JFScheck" Scheck
2020 30’ Airstream Classic
**I Love U.S.A.**
|
|
|
04-25-2011, 09:03 PM
|
#64
|
Rivet Master
2002 30' Classic S/O
Garden Valley
, Idaho
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,631
|
I just re-read my Jan-Feb Truck Trend magazine which had a huge article on the new Ford Eco-boost turbo V-6. I guess I had forgotten how strong that engine really is. How about 365 hp and 420 lbs of torque! The test vehicle had a 3.15 rear end and they said it still towed great. Imagine that engine with a 3.73 rear!! The towing capacity is the same as the new Ford V-8 at 11,300 lbs, and on regular unleaded. Their test vehicle, which had few miles on it, got a combo city/highway of 22.8 mpg. The 6 speed Torqueshift is standard and the Eco-boost engine is only an additional $750 over the standard V-6 engine. The new HD V-8 has 411 hp-464 tq so I don't see that much difference in power and no doubt the mileage on the V-8 will be alot less. If I was in the market for a nice TV, I would look strongly at the new Eco-boost twin turbo V-6.
Pap
__________________
2008 F-250 4X4 Lariat V-10
2002 Airstream Classic 30' w/SO #2074
2007 Kubota 900 RTV
1996 Ford Bronco
2007 Lincoln LT
|
|
|
04-26-2011, 06:14 PM
|
#65
|
Master of Universe
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction
, Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 12,711
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrawfordGene
[Tundras,] according to Consumer Reports they are still better than other brands. CR does not like trucks, so they do look for comfort and trucks that are more like cars. They like the Honda Ridgeline also, but it doesn't seem to be the truck other full size trucks are and is more like a car. Ridgeline owners will disagree.
Gene
|
Thanks to extreme brainlock, I was looking at the 2007 CR auto issue. The 2011 auto issue rates Tundras best in reliability and Chevy Avalanche and Silverado best overall, but average in reliability. Ford is lower than Chevy overall, equal in reliability. Tundra in overall ratings has slipped down below them—they haven't changed since the 2nd generation came out with the 2007 model.
Gene
|
|
|
04-26-2011, 06:42 PM
|
#66
|
3 Rivet Member
2007 19' Safari SE
Laurel
, Montana
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 145
|
I really like my Ford Ecoboost so far. Around 17 highway at 80mph, and around 19 when I slow down to around 65. No towing yet, as only a month old. Lots of power, but remember it is a half ton (Heavy Half) so even if it can tow 11,300, do you want that behind you on mountain passes. We only have a 19'Bambi, and I am really feeling good about this truck.
|
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|