Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Toyota Tundra VS Ford F-150

12357…11

Comments

  • dbhulldbhull Member Posts: 150
    Yes, the Ford is a nice truck. I think the only real difference between the GM and Ford is cosmetics, at least in the 1/2 tons. Both are about equal in performance.

    You are correct. I like my Silverado, even with just three doors. I am just sick of hearing it ping. I know it is not a tragic thing, but when you pay as much for a truck as these things cost, I can't stand to have anything like this going on with it. I am not talking about an occasional ping under load, etc. This thing, at least until I switched to a colder plug, pinged all the time, even on straight level planes. I have cured most all the ping with a colder firing plug, but not all of it completely. I did not notice any ping today, so maybe when I re-gapped the plugs, I got something on the electrodes. I wiped them off with a shop towel that may have had some oil on it that I didn't realize. It wouldn't take much oil to cause a rough engine.

    I am also considering an autotap, which will give me the info on all the emission and ignition related stuff. Maybe that will turn up something else to go on.

    I really like my Silverado, and financially, it would be best for me to keep it and not have to trade it for anything else. But I am really growing tired of diagnosing a brand new truck, simply because GM won't!

    Please don't take my post as a slam on GM or their trucks. I can only blame myself for buying a first year model truck. I should have known better. Now I am paying the price. I just wish GM would help me out to make things right.
  • wfd146wfd146 Member Posts: 4
    When I said the Ford had 300 hp, I was referring to an earlier post saying that Ford was bumping up the 5.4 to 300hp's in 2001.
  • ferris47ferris47 Member Posts: 131
    Have you tried different brands of gas as well as different octanes. My experience with Chevy engines it seems that they like to run mid grade gas and they can be brand picky. Another thing to consider, maybe your truck doesn't like winter blend gasolines and now that we are moving into summer the new blends will help. I don't claim to be an expert on any of this, I am just trying to give you some options or ideas to look at. I would hate to see you loose a couple grand if you don't have to. One other thing, when you say pinging could it be the infamous exhaust leak, tap or whatever, many Silverado owners have experienced? Pacific Audio has a great GM forum and they might be able to help you out. It might even be worth your wild to go to a independent mechanic. Good luck with whatever you do.

    I don't think you will have to worry about piston slap in the 5.4, they are however a bit noisier then the vortechs, so maybe that was what you were hearing.

    Hope it all works out for you.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    Lets not forget the Tundra is the first full size to offer dual caliper piston brakes. This is a HEAVY DUTY option. These are big truck brakes.

    You have to admit one thing, the Big 3 REALLY have serious issues with making blatantly crappy brakes.

    Toyota makes a great brake.

    I remember when Ford used to use the Ford Escort brakes on its vans and full size picupks. Folks were having all kinds of problems with warped rotors, brakes lasting 8k miles, ect.
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    spoog
    Last year Chevy came out with 4 wheel disc Dual piston brakes. every trade rag and every testimonial around here say the new GM brakes outperform everything, loaded or unloaded.

    dbhull
    Have you confirmed that the ping really IS a problem. I still think that its normal for the Vortecs. Mine doesn't do it, but gasoline varies ALOT from region to region. Is it REALLY loud, or just noticeable?

    I don't think you will sacrifice any engine life by keeping your truck.
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    Cdean: Chevy brakes are definitely great. Ford recently went to rear discs and ABS standard. They made up quite a bit of ground. Not sure if they surpassed Chevy but I think the 2000 models are right up there, finally.
  • ferris47ferris47 Member Posts: 131
    My Tundra brakes better then any other truck I have driven. The brake feel is consistent, there is little to no fade, the ABS only kick in when they should. I like the brakes on the Tundra better then the 4 disc setup on the GMs. GM still has way to sensitive ABS for my tastes.
  • dbhulldbhull Member Posts: 150
    I think I have gotten it down to where it is not really a "problem" anymore, by changing to the colder plugs. Had I not changed to the colder firing plugs, yes, it would be a major problem. It pings very noticeably and all the time, not just under load, with the stock plugs. I should not have to do that for it to run correctly.

    There are too many owners complaining for everyone to just be picky about the noise. It is a problem. Actually, until I bought this GM truck, I never heard of ANY ping being normal. To me, that is GM just covering their butts. Any detonation will reduce engine longevity. Nobody can convince me otherwise. The pure nature of what causes the noise (combustion that opposes piston travel) is enough to know that it can and will decrease engine life, even if it is only a minute amount.

    Is it a drastic thing, no, not yet. The longer I own it with it pinging, the worse the ping will get. Detonation only grows worse with use, not better or remain the same. That is what I fear. If nothing else, it will deter an unknowing buyer from purchasing the truck if I go to sell it, which is a reduction in the trucks value.

    Don't get me wrong, I love the truck and would buy another GM truck. Is that blind loyalty? No, I don't think so. This could be happening in any truck, not just GM. Do I think that GM could be doing a better job of addressing the problem? Absolutely.

    I have failed to mention that GM has compensated me to an extent. They gave me a 6 year 60k bumper to bumper, no deduct warranty. That helps take the sting out of this and what has kept me from totally dissing GM, but I still have an abnormal ping that I now have to live with and it is a basically brand new truck. This was not a mild and occasional ping. Very annoying if nothing else. When you buy a brand new vehicle, you do so, so you don't have to deal with these types of things. It happens in all makes though.

    BTW: I think GM now easily reigns on the area of brakes. Top notch if you ask me. My brakes have been very impressive in panic stops and have given me virtually no problems.
  • rangerknowhowrangerknowhow Member Posts: 25
    well toyota got the run on motor trend, "BEST TRUCK OF THE YEAR" well i got news for the toyota guys, thats just because its new, sure it seems like a good truck...more expensive too, but once everybody settles down about the NEW TOYOTA FULL SIZE, toyota will still end up behind chevy and ford. OH yea toyota dont make a Tundra 250 or 2500 or Tundra 350 or 3500 do they...NO SIR!! i think Toyota should stick to cars...cant come to america and compete with the best. Oh yea, as far as the Topic goes..Tundra vs F-150, F-150 is the Top Selling VEHICLE in America. NOT truck..VEHICLE..blowing away all other competition. Dont expect TOYOTA to get that far.
  • page62page62 Member Posts: 30
    Let's not forget that ABS is a $600 OPTION in the Toyota. Not to mention drums in the back. Toyota had to cut several corners to put that fancy engine in there...

    Ford has discs on all corners, and they throw in the ABS for free. Just stomp on that pedal and you'll quickly learn the meaning of "breaking power."

    I've heard people justify not having ABS in their Tundras by saying, "I don't want it anyway." But once you learn how to use ABS (stomp and stop!), there's no going back.
  • tundrasaursrextundrasaursrex Member Posts: 49
    Personally I agree with page62. I wanted ABS. I also understand why some don't want it.

    For serious off-roading, ABS is more of a liability. Sometimes it's better to be able to lock 'em up and start pushing dirt/mud/snow around. Gives you more control in the deep stuff....
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    I didn't think that ANY truck was made for serious offroading (unless had some serious mods). More like Jeep's specialty...
  • modvptnlmodvptnl Member Posts: 1,352
    Even on the street ABS can be a liability in SOME situations. On fire roads, which I don't consider serious off roading, ABS can be dangerous.
  • tundrasaursrextundrasaursrex Member Posts: 49
    You missed My point: When you're ripping around in deep mud/sand/snow/rocks some off-roaders say that's when ABS can do more harm than good. I'm not validating it, I'm just explaining why some people don't want ABS.

    As for trucks not made for serious off-roading, that's a matter of opinion. I got my Tundra through snow drifts that claimed a Nissan 4x4 and a Chevy Blazer 4x4 in the Cascades this winter.

    Some may say anything short of a humvee isn't capable off serious off-roading. Personally I could care less. I'm not into that category of off-roading.
  • quadrunner500quadrunner500 Member Posts: 2,721
    I agree with all your points on ping. One thing, a dealer can help you out sometimes if you point them in the right direction. My dealer was willing to pull the heads to inspect for sharp edges, and possibly debur them if found. I just didn't feel my case was that severe, and has really been under control since I modified the thermostat.

    The autotap will let you monitor this condition, under the variable "knock retard," which is what the F-body racers are trying to get rid of for more hp. In your case, you want more of it to kill the ping. Some guys put a resistor in series with the knock sensors (microphones under the intake manifold) to reduce knock retard. The other option is to amplify it, but there may be a limit beyond which you don't get more knock retard.
  • dbhulldbhull Member Posts: 150
    Thanks for the info. I have exhausted the dealerships in my area. They all seem to want to help, but I keep getting the infamous line of "they all make that noise".

    I actually bought another set of plugs (TR55's). They are the same heat range of plug as the oem plugs only they are copper core. They come gapped at .060 like the stock Silverado plugs do. I put a set in gapped at about .052 and so far, no ping whatsoever. I am going to run them a while in varied temps and loads to make sure before calling it fixed. I was still getting a slight bit of ping on the TR6 plugs and I noticed it was really sucking the gas, so I decided to give the TR55 plugs a try. What is another $16 bucks, huh?

    If this doesn't rectify it, and only time will tell, I will go for the autotap to better diagnose. If nothing else, I can take the print out to the dealer as verification of a problem, if I find one.

    I will keep you informed.

    Dan
  • swede38swede38 Member Posts: 7
    Just bought a Tundra with the 4.7 L. engine. Also bought a 27 foot travel trailer that weighs in at 5,750 pounds empty weight. I was a bit apprehensive that I had too little truck or too much trailer. I pulled the trailer off the lot Saturday (wind was blowing a constant 25 with gusts to 40 mph) and towed it to my storage lot. The Tundra did very poorly. But I wasn't sure that the wind wasn't responsible for at least some of the problem. I graded the Tundra a D-.

    So, on Sunday, with the wind down to about 15 mph we decided to tow the sucker from Las Vegas, Nv to Mesquite, Nv and spend the night in a casino's RV lot (I put on 50 gallons of water). I locked out the overdrive and the Tundra pulled the trailer very well. Drove 65 MPH at 2,900 RPM in 3rd gear. Everything went just fine except the gas mileage. Only got 10 MPG. This trip was into the wind and the elevation increases about 1,000 feet in the 79 miles. So, it was slightly uphill. I gave the Tundra a grade of B on this trip.

    Today I drove the rig back to Las Vegas. No wind and slightly downhill. Again, I locked out the OD and drove 60 - 65 MPH. 79 miles and only took 6 gallons of gas. 13 MPG on the return trip. But I had no wind to contend with and I was 25 gallons of water lighter (that's about 210 pounds). I gave it a B+.

    So, if you are satisfied with pulling 6,500 pounds at 65 MPH, the Tundra definately will work for you. However, if you live in Colorado and will be pulling in the Rockies, you'll need more power.

    DHS
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    Did you ever try putting it into od on the trip? It seems to me it would have improved your MPG. I would use 3rd gear if I was driving on a hilly road, but when the road levels out - or is constant gradual slope for 10 miles (up or down) I would give o/d a chance.
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    sometimes putting OD actually can hurt mileage because you take the engine out of its biggest power range, making it work harder. my dad's '91 454 can pull pretty much anything in O/D. we've pulled up to around 13,000# trailer, and it will hold OD, but by playing with it, we found under really heavy loads, it got better mpg in 3rd. more efficient engine range under that work load.

    Can the Tundra pull in O/D? I know the highway geared Ford and GM's say not to pull in O/D.
  • swede38swede38 Member Posts: 7
    Yes, I did try using overdrive and it worked only marginally well. Downhill or down long slopes it did just fine and the RPMs dropped from around 2900 to 2000. But as soon as the grade leveled off, the speed started dropping so I just went back to third gear and locked out the overdrive. The Toyota owners manual suggested not using OD when towing. And I think they are right. The manual also says to keep the speed under 75 in third gear. But, 65 is plenty fast enough for this old coot.

    DHS
  • lemonjeep2lemonjeep2 Member Posts: 32
    Just drove home a new Tundra last week. Wow, fantastic quality control and boy is it one smooth driving machine. I ride a lot in a buddy's new F-150 and he has ridden in mine. Guess what, we both like each others trucks! Not that we would trade, but both trucks are nice and fit our needs.

    As far as our dealer making a deal, we were able to negotiate a sizable discount from the sticker and pay a few hundred over invoice and get the exact package that we wanted. Buying at the end of the month helps, because they are trying to make their quota and are a tad more flexible. This is true at most any dealer, Ford, Toyota, etc. So if you have time while shopping, wait till the end of a month, or even till a Sunday night when they want to just make a deal and go home after a hectic weekend.

    As far as quality: sure it is a new vehicle, but from a manufacturer with a extremely strong reputation for reliability, so it is a pretty safe bet. I don't see a major manufacturer willing to risk their reputation by putting a substandard quality product into such a highly visible (and profitable) market segment. I guess we will have to wait and see.

    I believe that the added competition into this market sector will benefit future buyers of Fords, Toyotas, Dodges, and GM's. This steps up the choices for the consumers, so all the manufacturers improve their products to meet higher consumer expectations. Guess what, whether you love or hate the Tundra, we all win!!!!

    P.S. Don't buy a Jeep Grand Cherokee. Major Lemon.
  • tundradudetundradude Member Posts: 588
    Going camping this week with the Tundra. It doesn't struggle a bit. I am pulling less weight because I have the V6 and the manual is nicer to tow with in my opinion. I have a 20 foot trailer.

    With the V6, I have seen between 15 and 16 while towing. I should have a better figure after I go to the beach this weekend.
  • swede38swede38 Member Posts: 7
    I also bought at the end of the month. I used AUTOBYTEL and got quotes from both a Toyota dealer and a Ford dealer. The Toyota wanted 1,000 over invoice and the Ford guy wanted 2 1/2 per cent over invoice but had a dealer prep charge that they added in. In the end, the Tundra and the F-150 XLT with the 5.3(or .4) similarily equipped were going to cost about the same, around $25K. The Toyota AUTOBYTEL rep called within 2 hours and gave me his price. It took the Ford guy 2 days to call. So, the Toyota guy got the business.

    DHS
  • kadavis8kadavis8 Member Posts: 1
    I have been looking at trucks since December and had narrowed it down to the Tundra and F150. I finally decided to buy the Tundra because of a few minor differences (Ford is tight in my garage, the Tundra ride seemed a little more comfortable and the ground clearance on the Ford wasn't very good). I started the tour of my local dealerships and got the normal treatment (my internet info on invoice was too low - one dealer changed his invoice 3 times during negotiations, Toyota quality justifies a premium - on a first year model with no track record, Truck of the Year justifies a premium - seems to me every new or highly modified model gets truck of the year, they wouldn't order me one because they are only allocated so many). Basically all the dealers in Salt Lake City gave me this treatment (although the Larry Miller dealer was pretty straight with me and just told me that $1000 above my invoice price was as low as he could go).

    At this point I was down to 26,900 (before TTL and doc handling fee) for a V8 the Off road package and a few other inexpensive options.

    I gave up, went to a Ford dealer (Autoland), priced out exactly the Ford I wanted, said "here is what I want, here is my calculated invoice, I'll give you that plus 500." He punched it up and ended up with an invoice $60 lower. It was so painless I didn't mind paying the 179 documentation fee (minus the $60 for his lower invoice). By ordering the manual transmission I saved another 1300-1400 dollars and with the $500 factory rebate, I ended up paying 23,500 (plus TTL and 179 documentation fee) with a few more options than I was getting with the Toyota (but with an auto trans) at 26,900. It was a "no-haggle" dealership, but I might have been able to get him down another 100 or 200 (I didn't bother trying).
  • devil1devil1 Member Posts: 74
    I'm in a similar situation deciding on the Tundra or the F-150. I like the looks of the F-150 more, but the reliability of the Tundra.

    Did you get the 4.6L (Or whatever midengine size it is) with the manual transmission? That's exactly what I wanted if it is.

    How do you like it?
  • barlitzbarlitz Member Posts: 752
    What makes you think the Tundra is more reliable than an F150 it hasn't even been out a year yet.The Ford F150 is the #1 selling vehicle not truck but vehicle in the world,There has to be a reason why many people purchase them.
  • arkie6arkie6 Member Posts: 198
    It's because they (Fords) are cheap, like McDonalds hamburgers.
  • bigboy3bigboy3 Member Posts: 22
    You are so right about the mcdonald/ford analogy.
    Mcdonalds is running 2 cheeseburgers for $1 in our area. I wonder if Ford may run a 2 for 1 deal sometime soon.
  • devil1devil1 Member Posts: 74
    C'mon, Toyota's are usuallY very reliable. Every model out there is. Almost every Ford is UNreliable, but the F-150 was rated pretty good.

    I like the F-150.
  • okioki Member Posts: 6
    the reason the f150 is the #1 selling vehicle. if such a correlation is true, then the kia sportage would be the #1 selling suv, while daewoo and hyundai would dominate US auto sales. why is the TOYOTA camry the #1 selling car in its class? because it offers quality and value -- like the f150.

    oki
  • tinmanhvactinmanhvac Member Posts: 2
    suport America buy american union made products
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    If F-150 is a McDonalds burger then

    GM would be the Burger King Whopper
    Dodge would be a Wendy's burger
    Toyota would be ???

    Does any body know who the #4 burger chain is?

    Sonic? Jack in the Box? Hardee's? Oh I know it must be White Castle they make those real small burgers.

    What the heck someone has to be #4 it may as well be the Toyota.
  • devil1devil1 Member Posts: 74
    I saw listed specs for F-150 towing with the 4.6 engine.

    For a manual tranny it listed about 3200 lbs,
    with an automatic, it was like 6500?

    Is this true about manual trannies don't tow as much.. if so WHY???

    I wanted a manual.
  • barlitzbarlitz Member Posts: 752
    The tundra would be a weiner,where's the beef! you got have beef to be a burger.
  • devil1devil1 Member Posts: 74
    I just test drove an F-150 4x4 with the 5.4L engine. I wanted to test drive the flareside, but they didn't have any, and this would ride the same. Here are pros/cons that I exprienced vs. the Tunda:

    PROS:
    1. Jacked up ride height (Feel like your above everyone else on the road)
    2. I liked the looks of the Flareside a little better than the Tundra.
    3. You get a 5.4L 260 HP engine in a BIGGER truck with slightly better MPG (How do they do it?)
    4. Bigger interior room especially the backseat. It was more comfy in the back and the carseat could actually fit for my baby.

    CONS:
    1. The interior dash board area seems kinda "Cheap" when compared to the stylish Tundra's (Just my opinion)
    2. The engine was not NEARLY as smooth as the Tundra's. The shifts were completely different, although power felt very similar.
    3. The truck sounds like I am driving the U-Haul that I used when I moved in to this house. It doesn't have a deep throaty sound like I thought it would have, but more of a American car-like humm.

    I liked the F-150 quite a bit overall. The only thing I really didn't like was the engine feel. Although nice and powerful, it just didn't feel give me the feel I would of expected. I really like the jacked up look, and overall looks.

    I'll post my tunda impressions in the next post.
  • devil1devil1 Member Posts: 74
    I test drove the Tundra the very next morning so I could get a good comparison. The Tundra was of course the 4.7 V8 Access Cab in Silver color with gray cloth interior. (No TRD). Here are the pros/cons:

    PROS:
    1. It's about 3/4 size of the Ford, and it felt much more maneuverable.
    2. The engine sounds much better than the Ford. It's got a deeper, throatier sound and was just as quick.
    3. The transmission that was mated with the 4.7 shifted SO much nicer and was SO much smoother than the Ford.
    4. The interior dashboard area was much more appealing to me than the Ford.

    CONS:
    1. Biggest complaint was I had a hell of a time getting the carseat in the back. With the bolt upright position of the backseat, I could only get the child seat to fit in the middle (Anyone else have this problem)
    2. The backseat was small compared to the F-150's, although the upright position was not quite as bad as it looked when riding in the back.
    3. The truck would need a 4" lift to compete with the height of the F-150.
    4. I thought the Tundra was not quite as appealing in terms of looks to the F-150.

    Overall I really like the Tundra as well. It felt like a luxury car, but again the child seat in back is going to be a problem. They need to angle the backseat a bit.

    Pricing was about the same for the Ford I was looking at and the Tundra. I didn't notice any pricing difference, although the Flareside would cost a bit more.

    I am still stuck even after testdriving them which one I want. If the Tundra had a bigger backseat I think it would be obvious to me, but we'll see.
  • barlitzbarlitz Member Posts: 752
    There are some aftermarket mods you could for the F150,I've installed a K&N fipk along with a superchip and a Gibson cat back.Ford tones down there factory computers,once I installed my chip and K&N fipk the truck completely hauled [non-permissible content removed] bumped Hp over 300 and can chirp tires from 1st to 2nd if I want.You said the price was even, you can probably get the F150 for $100 over dealer invoice which is roughly 10 to 15% less than msrp.My mods were about $600 and I installed myself very easy and they do not effect factory warranty.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    I know Ford is working hard at keeping up their #1 sales level. In Houston they have been advertising $6,000 discounts on the F-150. If the Tundra keeps up its current pace it will only sell 93,000 this year. I thought they hit 100,000 in the short year from May - December of 1999. Maybe they will spur sales by introducing the 2003 model year in November of 2000.
  • ricprricpr Member Posts: 24
    Devil1, man I agree with you in the backseat issue. I have been looking at all of the trucks and have a 9 year old son. While the Tundra has an adjustable headrest, there just isn't enough room! I started looking at the 4 door small trucks and have worked my way up to the SuperCrew F150. If you've got people to carry and need a truck, this appears to be it. While the Tundra is OK, the price of a well equipped one rivals the price of the SuperCrew. I've seen the price on the SuperCrew as low as $28500 with the 5.4L. That is sticker. Granted, you lose some bed length, but you gain a vehicle that smokes the competition for interior room. I know two people with a Dodge and a Ford extended cab and they both dislike the baby seat issue due to room. The Toyota seat must be a pain for install. While the Toyota is OK, the options and price go to show that Toyota is still unwilling to listen to customers by doing one simple thing ...observing the market!
  • 81chevy81chevy Member Posts: 37
    I know a whole lot of people with F150's, and they are all very happy, how many Tundra's have you seen on a construction site, people that rely on the truck everday buy the Ford's and the Chevy's, and Dodges, not toyotas.

    Have faith in fellow American's in Missouri and Kentucky, they are building top quality trucks that are every bit as reliable as any Toyota.

    I have a 81 Chevy C10, made in Fremont, California, with 326,000 on it with the Stock tranny that has never been rebuilt and the second motor that was replaced at 290,000. It has been used to tow, as a family truck, tree service truck, etc.
  • devil1devil1 Member Posts: 74
    Anyone out there own a 1999 or 2000 F-150 4x4... if so how do you like it and what problems have you had?
  • devil1devil1 Member Posts: 74
    Why should I buy a Tundra instead of an F-150, besides the smoothness?
  • dbhulldbhull Member Posts: 150
    I have a question for the F150 owners. How much difference will I be able to see in a 5.4l with 3:73 gear diff and the same 5.4l with a 3:55 gear.

    I know there was a big difference in power with my Silverado 5.3l w/3:73 and the F150 5.4l with 3:55. My Silverado would leave it in a dust cloud. I have not driven the 5.4l with 3:73 gear yet. Mainly because you can't find one on the lots. They order most of the trucks with a 3:55 gear. The ones they do order with 3:73 go quick. Most people seem to have to order one if they want 3:73 with the 5.4l F150.

    Another question. This can just be anyones perception or educated answer. Why does Ford not offer a 4:10 gear in the F150? I would think that a 4:10 gear in the F150 with 5.4l would pretty much rule the roost in 1/2 ton truck power.

    My perception is that the 5.4l has less umph than the 5.3l, but the 5.3l loses more of its power through the drivetrain than the 5.4l Ford does.

    Any comments?

    I am still considering an F150 Supercab 4X4. Came close, but got cold feet before sighning the papers. Still looking to trade for one though. Anyones input is appreciated.

    I like my Silverado and would most likely buy another one in the future when the bugs are worked out of them. I have just lost some confidence in some nitpicky quality issues.

    Thanks.

    Dan.
  • z71billz71bill Member Posts: 1,986
    I don't know about the 3.73 Silversdo Vs the 3.55 F-150, but the 4.1 Silverado beats the 3.55 F-150 by 87 feet in the 1/4 mile. I would guess you could cut that in half if you had the 3.73.

    This is per Motor Trend pickup shootout - May 2000
  • 81chevy81chevy Member Posts: 37
    Well I have some reason's to buy a F150

    More Room
    More Engine Power
    More Payload Capacity
    More Towing Capacity
    Actually Made for work

    Engine was designed for a truck, unlike the Tundra with a lexus engine

    Made by Union Members!
  • rooster9rooster9 Member Posts: 239
    You and I are in the same boat right now. I am gonna buy a truck also in the near future. What other trucks did you drive? Did you try out the Silverado and Ram or don't you have any interest in either of those? What do you need a truck for? Do you tow a lot, or occasionally? From what I've read on the other forum from people that tow with their Tundra, they are just as capable as the other 1/2 ton pickups at towing. I'm not saying better, but just as good. About that back seat, there was a topic started at www.tundrasolutions.com about that same issue, people wanting more room in the back to hold their baby seats. There solution was to put 1 inch spacers and longer bolts mounting the back seat. It angled the seat more, and was definitely noticable. One thing that I'm not sure of is Ford's 5.4L engine. I have 2 friends that own F-150's, a '97 and a '99. They both have the 4.6L engine. They are both die hard Ford fans, but both say that they would not consider a 5.4L engine because of all the problems they are having with them. Just something to think about.
  • dbhulldbhull Member Posts: 150
    Thanks for the info Quadrunner500. So you are saying that the Fords HP and Torque was mis-rated or the Chevy HP and Torque was mis-rated?

    I think the 5.4l with 3:55 had good pull, but nothing compared to my 5.3l with 3:73. I do think that if you put a 3:55 with the 5.3l, the 5.4l with the same 3:55 would have more pull. What I am trying to determine here is this....Is there a configuration in the F150 line, i.e. engine, transmission, and rear diff that will give me the same pull power as my Silverado with 5.3l and 3:73 gear. I am pretty impressed with my Silverados pulling power and do not want to go backwards from that. Ford doesn't offer a 4:10 gear and I am suspecting just from my seat o the pants meter, that the Ford needs a lower gear diff to match the Silverados pull power. I know the die hard Ford fans will probably not agree with that statement, but this is my perception from driving both.

    Where do you find the ET times, etc. of each to use in the formulas you provided?

    Thanks.

    Dan.

    Thanks.
  • quadrunner500quadrunner500 Member Posts: 2,721
    >>>So you are saying that the Fords HP and Torque was mis-rated or the Chevy HP and Torque was mis-rated?<<<

    In a Truck Trend comparison from 02/99, the 5.4L had more hp and torque than the 5.3L at the rear wheels. Chevy peak hp = 182, Ford peak hp = 207. If you plug these rear wheel numbers into the equations, you get 1/4 mile ET's about equal to what the magazine testers measured. The Ford was quicker in the Truck Trend test. This may have changed for 2000. A more recent test of 2000 models had the Chevy faster than Ford. Personally, I don't buy the notion that all the horsepower (on either) is lost through the drivetrain. If it was, the lost hp must be converted to heat, and the drivetrain simply doesn't get that hot.

    >>>I think the 5.4l with 3:55 had good pull, but nothing compared to my 5.3l with 3:73. I do think that if you put a 3:55 with the 5.3l, the 5.4l with the same 3:55 would have more pull.<<<

    I think "pull" is a very good way to describe the effect of rear axle ratios, and agree with you here.

    >>>What I am trying to determine here is this....Is there a configuration in the F150 line, i.e. engine, transmission, and rear diff that will give me the same pull power as my Silverado with 5.3l and 3:73 gear.<<<

    This I don't know. But the seat of the pants "pull" is also affected by the other ratios of the particular gear you are in. If for example, 3rd gear is the same for both trucks, then the difference you feel would be the difference in rear axles gears. But if the rear axle was up by 10%, and 3rd was down by 10%, you have a zero sum gain.

    >>>Where do you find the ET times, etc. of each to use in the formulas you provided?<<<

    Usually, you are using the equations to solve for ET when hp and weight are known. But if you know weight and ET, you can use the equation to solve for hp also.

    Bottom line, the trucks are close enough that seat of the pants impressions are as good as working through these numbers. I don't think the numbers make a definitive case in favor of either.

    Sorry about the long post.
  • devil1devil1 Member Posts: 74
    Since I am going to buy a 2001 truck, I have time to do research and test drives, and I have done a LOT of research. I originally started looking at the Tundra. I liked it alot but the backseat is small, and it's rather pricey. I then looked at the F-150, and liked it a lot (especially the looks of the flareside 4x4). I have done reliability research on both. The F-150 gets average reviews which is actually above average compared to the other domestic trucks. The Dodges and Chevy's get some horrible reviews.
    Besides the fact that I find the Chevy not as appealing in terms of looks, I didn't bother test driving that or the Dodge because of the horrible reviews. I don't want to spend 30K on something that breaks down alot. I looked at the Dakota Quad Cab, and it is pretty nice in 4x4 form, although the 2WD sits up about as high as a car. Again the reliability scares me away.

    I've heard issues about the F-150's 5.4 reliability problem, too. DOES ANYONE KNOW IF THIS HAS BEEN FIXED??

    I would sure like to know since I like the F-150 the best. However, I haven't tested the 4.6L.

    Have you had exprience with the 4.6 rooster?

    I also, for what it's worth, am going to look at even the Tacoma Double Cab when it comes out unless I buy sooner. I have a wide open mind and prefer Japanese vehicles because of reliability issues, but the Ford F-150 just seems so nice.


    Let me know any suggestions you have.
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    What reliability problem? Piston slap? That was never a reliablility problem, only an annoyance at start-up. It has been fixed. It was very rare to begin with, anyway.
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles