Last post on Jan 18, 2013 at 7:53 AM
You are in the Ford F-Series
What is this discussion about?
Ford F-150, Toyota Tundra, Chevrolet Silverado 1500, Dodge Ram Pickup 1500, GMC Sierra 1500, Nissan Titan, Car Buying, Truck
#418 of 577 Re: Flexy beds cant be worked hard in fields! [farmerrube]
Dec 31, 2007 (1:24 pm)
Hey Rube...we grew up on farms too with F 250's and Cheyenne 2500's with 454 V8's. You know as well as i do that real farm work must be done with heavy duty 3/4 tons or more. Half tons are not and never will be designed for heavy duty use. You can put as big a springs and lift kits and big tires on half tons all you want but that does not change the fact that the frame is not designed for extreme duty work. The Super Duty Fords today still use a version of the Twin I beam suspension, which to this day is unmatched by anyone in terms of payload and towing capacities simply because its the strongest known design to be used in light to medium duty pickups such as the F-450 and 550.
Ford, Chevy, and Dodge all must be loaded with options and properly equipt to do any kind of heavy work anyway. I agree 100 percent that the bed flex is unacceptable but any auto manufacturer tries to get away with putting as little strength into a vehicle structure as possible to see what they can get away with before adding more strength to it. Its so they can maximize profits. Its just good business. Ever slam the door on a 2007 Ford F-150 extended cab? The doors wobble and shake like waves in lake michigan. The dash is cheap plastics held together with spit and glue. The days of 200,000 mile gas pickups are over.
Anyone can beat the hell out of a vehicle but there is no comparing trucks from the glory days when you could work on them and they used heavier steel. Those trucks are dying out. Plus they were a pain to start in the winter, rusted bad, sucked fuel, and did not provide much horsepower. The gearing was so low in some you didn't dare to go over 55 miles an hour with split rims and 8 ply tall tires.
Todays trucks are better by leaps in bounds in every category. The Tundra will fix the problems it has, quickly. God knows the somewhat Big Three has had more than their share of recalls, fires, trans problems, four wheel drive problems, and everything else under the sun. The 2008 F-Series Super Duty Diesel just had early problems with flames shooting out of the tail pipe due to the emissions control system. Dont let the most dependable slogan from GM fool you either.
That is based on active full line truck registrations, that does not tell you how many of those trucks have rebuilt engines, transmissions, or rebuilt titles. Plus, GM has manufactured far more trucks combined than Ford so simply saying more are on the road is misguided. Of course their are because more are manufactured so odds are more will be on the road.
Their was nothing wrong with the first generation Tundra. It got excellent fuel economy, offered an 8 foot bed, had a decent payload amount, towed a decent amount, and had a very strong frame. It was fully boxed with eight crossmembers, something Ford and GM did not have on their half tons. We were still given the soft suspension, squishy brakes GM half tons and Fords crash test failing F-150.
Its GM and Ford who played catch up design wise to the structural integraty of the Tundra and towing duties of the Nissan Titan at the time of their introduction. The Tundra was squeak and rattle free. The same trucks built at the same time from Ford, GM, and Dodge were not. The Nissan Titan set the new standard in half ton towing capacities in its introduction. Ford simply bumped its numbers up with no changes to the drivetrain whatsoever. This is not the first time Ford has been accused of overreporting numbers...remember the Mustang Cobra?
I think all light truck companies tend to overexaggerate the vehicles true capabilities.....they may be able to do those maximum numbers...but i sure would not do it for very long.
Bottom line is, Toyota has more work to do. So does Nissan. But GM, Ford, and Dodge certainly are not the perfect half tons either. Anything will break if you beat it long enough, no matter who makes it.
#420 of 577 Re: Tundra vs. GMC Sierra [kcram]
Jan 01, 2008 (6:21 pm)
I agree no payola on Edmonds, (100%). understood. I will toe the line boss.
#421 of 577 2009 Ford F-150?
Jan 02, 2008 (4:08 pm)
What surprise does NAIAS hold in store? What the 2009 F-150 better offer if Ford wants to stay on top.
1st are given. Things that Ford needs or they should just close.
- Stability Control standard.
- Curtain air bags standard.
- Interior upgraded to similar to Expedition only with push through controls for radio and HVAC as Focus and Escape
Now things I think Ford MUST do for the 2009 Ford F-150.
- 6 speed Auto trans.
- 3.5L V6 with 250HP and 250LBFT of Torque possibly replacing the 4.6L
- Keep the 4.6L only with the 3V head from the Mustang/Explorer for 290hp and 325 LBFT of torque.
- Enhance the 5.4L to at least 350hp/390 LBFT
- BOSS 6.2L V8 with 380hp/450 lbft of torque
- 4.4L Diesel 330 hp/ 500+ lbft of torque.
- tail gate step and bed extended from Super Duty.
IRS from Expedition
3.5L V6 twin force with 28mpg.
Hydraulic Hybrid with 60mpg city.
#422 of 577 Re: Yeah right... [andrew9]
Jan 02, 2008 (6:03 pm)
all you guys arguing about whos the better truck. Now as for payload and all that i'll tell you right now. To the average consumer anymore nobody cares anymore. Shameful fact about today's consumer is that people only care about looks; if it looks tough then it must be strong. Right now the truck that has it beat with tough looks is the Tundra, sorry to those who feel i'm and idiot but you know its the truth. Now i'm not saying the Tundra has highest payload, I'm not even saying its the strongest pickup out there. But you gotta admit, it looks like a tough truck, therefore everyone's gonna go for it for its looks not its power. So out of who i think is gonna go out on top? Unless the F-150 can step up its tough looking game, then the Tundra currently has it beat and it will continue until Ford changes the F-150's look to a more, tough and powerful look.
Tough Looks Ratings:
1) 2008 Toyota Tundra
2) 2008 Ford F-150
3) 2008 Dodge Ram 1500
4) 2008 GM Silverado/Sierra
5) 2008 Nissan Titan
6) 2008 Honda Ridgeline (as for looks, its not pretty with non tough looks like Titan, but its rediculous on how hard Honda tried, thierfore it got last on my list)
#423 of 577 Folks chasin fads and looks.. but what bout them that works them ones?
Jan 02, 2008 (6:16 pm)
We need ones with haul... like them big3 ones. We work them trucks, on that farm now. Trouble with them forien ones is they bust or rust... so they aint last long or workin hard.
We still work this 52 haulin...
We haul these trains... six to seven of them ones... nose to tail now...
Can that tundra work them fields and last long? Can that tundra haul six to seven trains, day in and out, year to year? Them big3 ones do now, thats for sure. What say too this one now? Good luck on this one now!
#424 of 577 Re: Yeah right... [kboynton1]
Jan 02, 2008 (8:05 pm)
Tough looks rating?
Looks are subjective. Some might say the Tundra is ugly. Does ugly equate to toughness? One thing Toyota is not known for is styling.
#425 of 577 Re: Folks chasin fads and looks.. but what bout them that works them ones? [farmerrube]
Jan 03, 2008 (8:46 am)
Rube the picture would have looked better if the truck would have been hooked to the trailers. There are a lot of old trucks setting in fields that are broke down.I own a new tundra that pulls a Jayco 34 ft. tt 7500# dry wt. 9500# loaded.1115# tongue wt. It pulls it good in hills & mts.I have out pulled chev. & fords in the mts.The frames that posters say are weak Don't seem to be a problem.About some posters saying the truck is ugly that don't matter to me.The new chev. p/u looks like a sway back horse.The cab sets lower than the front & the bed.Besides that we all have different views on looks.The tundra is the best truck i've owned equal to a dodge diesel i had.Some folks think the new chev. & fords are the best & are not having trouble go to their forums & look & look again in 2 or 3 years Lots of problems will be showing up by then.
#427 of 577 December and full-year sales
by KCRam@Edmunds HOST
Jan 03, 2008 (1:35 pm)
..............Dec 07 / Dec 06 / +/- / CY 2007 / CY 2006 / +/-
F-Series / 55,069 / 70,580 / -22.0 / 690,589 / 796,039 / -13.2
Silverado / 53,560 / 52,396 / 2.2 / 618,257 / 636,069 / -2.8
Ram / 32,118 / 32,875 / -2.0 / 358,295 / 364,177 / -2.0
Sierra / 19,782 / 17,541 / 12.8 / 208,243 / 210,736 / -1.2
Tundra / 19,219 / 12,468 / 54.1 / 196,555 / 124,508 / 57.4
Titan / 4,785 / 5,575 / -14.2 / 65,746 / 72,192 / -9.2
Mark LT / 551 / 1,155 / -52.3 / 8,382 / 12,753 / -34.3
Toyota damn near made their target... give 'em credit, although it took some massive incentives to do it.
Ford took a beating this year; loss of over 100,000 units is a problem.
The 09 F150 and Ram 1500 will both debut at Detroit/NAIAS in a couple of weeks, so Toyota and GM will see if the bar was matched or raised.
kcram - Pickups Host