Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Half-ton Pickups - The full field



  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    way of the ranger. From class leading to the bottom of the heap with the last major redesign in 1998. Sometimes you just can't figure out what they are thinking.

    Here's some additional background about the Ranger. There is now a Free Trade Agreement ( FTA ) with Thailand sitting waiting to be signed by both countries. So what.

    Well Thailand is the 2nd largest producer of trucks in the world after the US. They make most of the trucks for Asia. The manufacturers are Toyota, Nissan, Ford !!! et al. The redesigned Ford Ranger diesel has been out in Asia for at least 2 yrs now. It's every bit as up-to-date as the Toyota HiLux diesel ( Tacoma ) which is considered the best truck in the world for most of the world. Nissan's diesel is also world class.

    Why aren't these three world class diesels here already and why is Ford letting the Ranger and the St Paul plant wither away? Well when the FTA with Thailand is finally approved all those world class diesels will be free of the 25% 'chicken tax' and will be allowed to come here. There is no need to keep a UAW-controlled plant in existance if they can import more profitable up-to-date diesels.

    One article from link
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    I think Ford is content to leave the Ranger where it is, as it's now the only true "compact" truck - the Tacoma, Frontier, and Colorado/Canyon have all grown to the Dakota "midsize" class.

    But since this is the half-ton discussion, I'd suggest drumming up some interest in the What would the ideal redesigned Ranger be like? discussion :)

    kcram - Pickups Host
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    From earlier this year?

    I thought the Chevy 5.3 would be much more efficient than that. Pretty decisive test! :surprise:

  • What would Toyota fans do without that CR crutch to lean on? Fall right on their face? I know you will refuse to believe that CR is biased and/or has no idea how to conduct a test, so I won't even go there. But let me bring up the towing test that pitted the top of the line 5.7 Tundra with 4.30 gears against the middle-pack 5.3 Silvy with 3.73's. You call that apples to apples? Was it biased or just plain ignorant? You tell me. Why were they afraid to use the Vmax 6.0 with 4.10's? hmmm?
  • gotoyotagotoyota Posts: 280
    Afraid? I think not, but go ahead and keep dreaming if that makes you feel better. The Tundra would have slaughtered the 6.0 Chevy in terms of driveline performance under towing conditions, due to its stronger, broader powerband and more efficient use of gearing. The 6.0 may not have been available at the time of testing. But surely the Tundra's "inferior" frame would have bent in half as it tried in vain to keep up with the mighty Chevy 6.0, so at least you have that to lean on. :surprise:
  • The 6.0 Chevy was available before the first Tundra came off the line. So, then why didn't CR use it?

    Slaughtered huh? Even after the Tranny failed? Or like you mentioned, the frame buckled? Surely you do know there is more to towing capacity than just HP/Torque, right? Why else do you think the Crewcab Vmax with 4.10's has a higher towing cap than the 5.7 Crewmax? Even with 14 less HP. Why is that?
  • h20h20 Posts: 42
    I know you are not fond of toyota. But could you tell me if you like anything about the 07 SR5 crewmax 4WD tundra? This is not a dig at you I am just curious. h20 btw this is for anythingbutoy
  • obyoneobyone Posts: 8,054
    to tow a SD....a little sag in the bed...just a little but seriously noticeable

    Tundra bed sag

    Could it be that new frame?
  • I get a big laugh every time you guys talk about your domestic trucks and how great they are,i have been building houses now for 13 years,i have seen them all,drove them all,so please, tell that crap to someone else,back in 2002 we got a brand new F250 4door 8ft bed ,we put a READIND cap on it for all the tools,about 2 months down the road the bed started to spread at the tailgate ,not too long after the bed started to sag ,before it actualy got fixed ,it sagged about 4 inches,this truck was such crap ,they had to add two extra leaf springs in the rear on each side,from that time until now that thing spatted 8 sparkplugs,WOW GREAT TRUCKS :sick: later that same year we got a 2002 silverado HD2500,after dealing with the FORD we didnot hesitate to also beaf up the silverado springs before it hit the job site,try driving that chevy on loose gravle, :sick: that thing is very weak,try merging on to the highway ,you better make sure there is nothing at all coming,you need atleast 20 seconds to getup to 50 mph,we have now traded 1 siera and one f150 for 2 tundra 4.7 crew cab and 1 5.7 crew max,the only complain so far from the guys ,15 mpg average,hard to get useto blind spot,to all who are yappind about great domestic trucks, tell that crap to people online,who knows no better,i for one knows the tundras cannot be any worste,i know you are going to say i am comparing older trucks to the tundra,but are you going to admit they are just starting to build decent trucks? :P atleast i thaught they was,check consumeraffairs to see a brand new f150 burning to the ground :lemon: , .......October 5, 2007
    A new risk of fire in Ford SUVs has prompted a recall from the Ford Motor Corp. Ford is recalling about 1,500 2008 Explorer, Explorer Sport Track and Mercury Mountaineer SUVs equipped with the 4.6 liter engine and 6R transmission.

    A bolt securing the oil cooler line fittings at the transmission may not have been tightened sufficiently at the Ford assembly plant.

    If the bolt loosens, the transmission cooler lines can leak fluid on to the vehicle's the catalytic converter posing the fire risk
  • To All,

    With freedom comes responsibility. I think anyone who posts should disclose whether they have any finacial interest in either advocating for or against the vehicle they are discussing. A lot of people read these posts and they help to inform the buying public, which is a fantastic public service which Edmunds is to be commended for.

    Here's my pledge regarding all the posts I've made, especially regarding the Tundra and the Silverado:
    "I swear I have no financial interest in either General Motors or Toyota. I have never sold, nor do I sell now, any vehicles on a commercial basis. I am not currently employed by a car maker or one of their suppliers, nor have I ever been."

    Full disclosure: I have sold a few vehicles, but they have all been my personal cars, and I sold them used to other private parties. I own a few shares of Ford stock, which I inherited. I keep it for sentimental reasons only - Lord knows it has been a lousy investment. I am just a consumer, and I am loyal to no brand. I have owned GMs, Toyotas, Fords, VWs, Mazdas, Isuzus, Nissans, and others. I have no ax to grind with any car maker.

    If you are a salesman (my condolences) or are involved in any financial way with the vehicles you discuss, you have a duty to disclose it. It does not invalidate your opinion, but it does put it into proper perspective. Those who stand to profit or lose due to auto sales should "man up" and admit it.

    drfill and others - are you man enough to take The Pledge? If not, I am going to rag you on every post you make that expresses a strong advocacy one way or another. Your refusal to take The Pledge will say volumes about you, and others will form their opinions based on that. Fair enuf?

    All you have to do to take The Pledge is post "I take The Pledge". You don't have to repeat the whole thing. Simple, and fast. Then we can move on.

    Oh, and one more thing. There will be no discussing what the definition of "is", is, or any foolishness like that. You either take it and mean it, or you don't, and accept the consequences of your personal decision.

  • So, in summary, are you proclaiming the 1/2 ton Tundra superior to the Ford SD's and Chevy HDs in capability?
    Please say "yes" so I can have a good laugh for the day.

    BTW, I call BS to your entire story.
  • I know you are not fond of toyota. But could you tell me if you like anything about the 07 SR5 crewmax 4WD tundra? This is not a dig at you I am just curious. h20 btw this is for anythingbutoy

    Hmmm, let me think? Nope. Not when comparing it to the GMT900's. There simply is NO comparison. The closest thing would be the engine, but based on my experience, I'll still take the GM LS engine. It is proven and keeps getting better and better. You asked, I answered, honestly.
  • Call my story BS all you want,but i live it every day,and no you wont be laughing at me, i am the one ,along with others ,who gets a good laugh at those trucks on the job sites,we all chuckly at BUILT FORD TUFF,and CHEVY LIKE A ROCK,PATHETIC TRUCKS :sick: again feel free to call what i say BS,what else would you call it?like i said ,tell people on here all you want how great your trucks are,but for me ,i have seen them all,and they are nothing special,and just so you know ,my crew still have the chevy,the company is planing to swapout all the other trucks for the tundra,and i cannot wait for the day!makes me sick every time i have to drive the silverado,do you want to see black hard plastic?chevy got that covered,so like i said, keep raving about your trucks,me and the guys will have a good laugh,we had a meeting last week for fall safety protection,and the tundras got so much attention,i was very please :P the 5.7 crew max got every one drewling,when i said to one of the guys ,man thats a nice truck,his reply,YES IT IS,wish i could afford one, but like i said ,call my statement BS,that just make us laugh at you more,the tundra have yet to prove itself ,but it can never be any worse than those contraptions
  • drfilldrfill Posts: 2,484
    Since I don't subscribe, or really buy CR, I'm not here to defend them.

    They have stated they used the 5.3 because that is the engine most people buy, and the 5.7 is the one for Toyota.

    My question to you is why was the Tundra the most efficient truck in the test? Stronger, faster, more safety features, roomier, and more efficient, sounds like a winner to me.

    I see the bias now....with eyes wide open. :surprise:

  • They have stated they used the 5.3 because that is the engine most people buy, and the 5.7 is the one for Toyota.

    What does popularity have to do with capability? You buy what you need. Right?

    My question to you is why was the Tundra the most efficient truck in the test? Stronger, faster, more safety features, roomier, and more efficient, sounds like a winner to me.

    More efficient? I see plenty of reports of poor mileage, 12-13mpg on TS, among reports of 17-18 mpg? WTF?

    Stronger? Yep, 14 HP 5.7 vs 6.0. How about the 5.7 vs 6.2? hmm? Yep, WEAKER!!! Faster? again 5.7 vs 5.3/6.0 yes, 6.2"? Debateable. But who cares about 0-60 times in a 6000 lb truck. Irrelevant. More safety features? Such as??? Roomier? Crewcab VS Crewmax cab, yes, but box is smaller. DC vs crewcab...nope. Guess it depends on what you need the room for huh?

    Bias is a 2-way street dude.

    Before you play the "yeah, but Toyota offers the 5.7 in all configs" card...Remember, GM has the 2500 with Duramax and 6.0 gasser in the 2500 series in RC's. So, they have the bases covered for people who need all that power in a Reg cab.
  • Take the pledge, fill. Or don't talk about bias.

    BTW, you aren't a real doctor, either, are you?

  • obyoneobyone Posts: 8,054
    "the company is planing to swapout all the other trucks for the tundra,and i cannot wait for the day!"

    Your company? You own this company?

    Any company in construction would be nuts to replace 3500s with Tundras. What you going to do when you need a pallet of 12" block? Send the Tundra? Right, it may bring it back but not in one piece. We buy WT series. Stripped down models with nothing fancy. I could careless what the interior looks like as I don't drive them. But they do get the work done.

    So you drive these company trucks? Why would they pay for a dressed up 1/2 ton for work? Makes no sense to me? Having sweaty, dirty, construction workers driving a $40K 1/2 ton truck. I can just see it!! Well to each their own.
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516

    If the personal shots continue, some of you will be sent packing.

    Knock it off!

    kcram - Pickups Host
  • gotoyotagotoyota Posts: 280
    This "pledge" business is pretty ridiculous. While you're at it, why not try to shake out some of the trolls, too, so we know where everyone's loyalty is. I don't care who sells what, it's obvious to any thinking person who reads these posts that we ALL have bias. We like what we like and we all have our reasons. You guys are kidding yourselves if you think you are free of any - that's the real BS story here. :shades:
  • amen to that... so whos got some sweet [non-permissible content removed] truck action vids?
This discussion has been closed.