New Tundra?

I have an '08, 4x4, double-cab, 5.7L, Tundra--I love it; it is the best truck I have ever had.

I previously had '90 Ford--every component that held fluid also leaked it and it left me stranded in every Rocky Mountain state except for Montana and Wyoming.

My Tundra has towed my race car, skidded trees, hauled firewood, traversed 18" of snow, and hauled 6 people in comfort.

I have had number of people comment on how roomy AND comfortable the back seat is.

It has been as reliable as an anvil--except for the stereo--is a POS and I had it replaced under warranty.

It is rather huge, but when I bought it, it was actually cheaper than a Tacoma. I paid $25.4K out the door in 2008. I personally would never buy a Crew Max as I don't understand the point of a pickup with a bed shorter than at least 6.5', but if you can get a 5.7, 4x4, Crew Max for $25K OTD, that is a SMOKING deal.

Finally, don't bother with the TRD package--I don't know why someone said they are faster--any 5.7 with the tow package is essentially the same. The TRD package is basically some stickers, cheap Bilsteins, and a paper-thin fuel tank skid-plate.

Osterkraut wrote: The new, smaller F-150: Because your penis is huge.

voted up for best marketing slogan EVER!

mattbatson wrote:

DILYSI Dave wrote: Plenty of power. They are fast. We ended up in a stop light drag to 60 against a buddy in an MR2 who had also just left the event. We won. While towing a Civic. They are sprung kinda soft for big loads. That would be my concern with the enclosed. For the occasional tow - yeah, it will do fine. If you see yourself pulling around a heavy enclosed a lot, I'd want something 3/4 or 1-ton.

how much is your tow load? I cant see myself ever towing over 9K. I would hope that with an equalizing hitch it would tow this fine? If not, and the tundra isnt that great for towing an enclosed, then I will begin to seriously consider a tacoma again...

If you can't see towing over 9k, and occasionally at that, then the Tundra is probably fine. The load I've seen that made one struggle had to be over 12k, and 15k wouldn't surprise me. It had an equalizing hitch, but still. That said, the Ram 3500 that now tows the same trailer simply laughs at the load.

Dav wrote: I have an '08, 4x4, double-cab, 5.7L, Tundra--I love it; it is the best truck I have ever had. I previously had '90 Ford--every component that held fluid also leaked it and it left me stranded in every Rocky Mountain state except for Montana and Wyoming. My Tundra has towed my race car, skidded trees, hauled firewood, traversed 18" of snow, and hauled 6 people in comfort. I have had number of people comment on how roomy AND comfortable the back seat is. It has been as reliable as an anvil--except for the stereo--is a POS and I had it replaced under warranty. It is rather huge, but when I bought it, it was actually cheaper than a Tacoma. I paid $25.4K out the door in 2008. I personally would never buy a Crew Max as I don't understand the point of a pickup with a bed shorter than at least 6.5', but if you can get a 5.7, 4x4, Crew Max for $25K OTD, that is a SMOKING deal. Finally, don't bother with the TRD package--I don't know why someone said they are faster--any 5.7 with the tow package is essentially the same. The TRD package is basically some stickers, cheap Bilsteins, and a paper-thin fuel tank skid-plate.

I'm willing to bet that way back in 1992, when the Ford was 2 years old, it was pretty reliable too...

My BIL has a 08 Tundra he uses to pull his 16' enclosed trailer for motocross. It's got a bit better power than my 6.0 Chev, but doesn't feel NEARLY as comfortable in a cross wind with a trailer as my 2000 Silvy 2500...(the same trailer). We use about the same amount of fuel when towing, and the Tundra is not much better empty. My Chev is an LT, so it's got heated seats etc. From a comfort/capability:$$ POV, the Tundra doesn't really impress me much.

Javelin wrote: Why not the EcoBoost F150 and get better mileage, bette resale, and better comfort (the backseats in the Tundra are horrendous for full-size adults)?

I'm lucky to have two, and they are pretty amazing. Who comes up with all of this stuff, sometimes, is beyond me. The truck is so much a better vehicle than our past F150, it's not even funny. Big, tall, for sure.

Unoffically, I can manage just about 20mpg on the highway.

Note- if you don't remember, I'm pretty darned bias toward the F150, especially the EcoBoost.

BTW, I'm pretty sure you all don't know this, but SAE has changed the tow ratings. So if it says it can, it can. Up a steep hill, maintaing speed 45mph, fully loaded + highest drag, at 120F ambient. That goes for all 2011's. Tough test.

(i hear the EcoBoost will tow over 10k,but have not heard anything offical.)

doc_speeder wrote:

Dav wrote: I have an '08, 4x4, double-cab, 5.7L, Tundra--I love it; it is the best truck I have ever had. I previously had '90 Ford--every component that held fluid also leaked it and it left me stranded in every Rocky Mountain state except for Montana and Wyoming. My Tundra has towed my race car, skidded trees, hauled firewood, traversed 18" of snow, and hauled 6 people in comfort. I have had number of people comment on how roomy AND comfortable the back seat is. It has been as reliable as an anvil--except for the stereo--is a POS and I had it replaced under warranty. It is rather huge, but when I bought it, it was actually cheaper than a Tacoma. I paid $25.4K out the door in 2008. I personally would never buy a Crew Max as I don't understand the point of a pickup with a bed shorter than at least 6.5', but if you can get a 5.7, 4x4, Crew Max for $25K OTD, that is a SMOKING deal. Finally, don't bother with the TRD package--I don't know why someone said they are faster--any 5.7 with the tow package is essentially the same. The TRD package is basically some stickers, cheap Bilsteins, and a paper-thin fuel tank skid-plate.

I'm willing to bet that way back in 1992, when the Ford was 2 years old, it was pretty reliable too... My BIL has a 08 Tundra he uses to pull his 16' enclosed trailer for motocross. It's got a bit better power than my 6.0 Chev, but doesn't feel NEARLY as comfortable in a cross wind with a trailer as my 2000 Silvy 2500...(the same trailer). We use about the same amount of fuel when towing, and the Tundra is not much better empty. My Chev is an LT, so it's got heated seats etc. From a comfort/capability:$$ POV, the Tundra doesn't really impress me much.

my problem is i just dont trust american trucks as much as i do toyota for long term reliability

JohnGalt wrote: How can a modern full size get such horrible mileage? I have a 96 Chevy with the 5.7 that gets better than that.

STOP IT! STOP IT RIGHT NOW! Don't try to ask a sensible question about new cars, you're hurtin' ma brainz!

mattbatson wrote:

doc_speeder wrote:

Dav wrote: I have an '08, 4x4, double-cab, 5.7L, Tundra--I love it; it is the best truck I have ever had. I previously had '90 Ford--every component that held fluid also leaked it and it left me stranded in every Rocky Mountain state except for Montana and Wyoming. My Tundra has towed my race car, skidded trees, hauled firewood, traversed 18" of snow, and hauled 6 people in comfort. I have had number of people comment on how roomy AND comfortable the back seat is. It has been as reliable as an anvil--except for the stereo--is a POS and I had it replaced under warranty. It is rather huge, but when I bought it, it was actually cheaper than a Tacoma. I paid $25.4K out the door in 2008. I personally would never buy a Crew Max as I don't understand the point of a pickup with a bed shorter than at least 6.5', but if you can get a 5.7, 4x4, Crew Max for $25K OTD, that is a SMOKING deal. Finally, don't bother with the TRD package--I don't know why someone said they are faster--any 5.7 with the tow package is essentially the same. The TRD package is basically some stickers, cheap Bilsteins, and a paper-thin fuel tank skid-plate.

I'm willing to bet that way back in 1992, when the Ford was 2 years old, it was pretty reliable too... My BIL has a 08 Tundra he uses to pull his 16' enclosed trailer for motocross. It's got a bit better power than my 6.0 Chev, but doesn't feel NEARLY as comfortable in a cross wind with a trailer as my 2000 Silvy 2500...(the same trailer). We use about the same amount of fuel when towing, and the Tundra is not much better empty. My Chev is an LT, so it's got heated seats etc. From a comfort/capability:$$ POV, the Tundra doesn't really impress me much.

my problem is i just dont trust american trucks as much as i do toyota for long term reliability

(and here it comes...)

Well, since the Tundra is built here for the North American market, it's pretty much an American truck. He also paid less for it than a decently equipped Tacoma, because it was during that time when gas was $4/gal.

Funny fact: My dad's previous truck was a 1992 F150 4x4 Flareside with the rare and elusive Nite package. It was a pretty truck, and if the tinworm didn't eat the bed mounts, I'd probably have it in my possession now. It did have its share of problems since we bought it (picked it up used at a Toyota dealer in '94, the irony is uncanny), like the brakes that failed one week after buying it, the rear main seal leaking all over the place, intermittent ignition issues, the auto locking hubs crapping out, it spitting it's rear driveshaft out while I was on a date (and the only place I could pull over was an adult store's parking lot, and that's no BS, and I never found the shaft), unintentionally accelerating down the road when the throttle cable stuck at full throttle, and many, many other times when it flat out left me or my dad stranded. But that 5.0 and the tranny went for well over 200,000 miles and I bet its still running now. For some reason, like an idiot, I liked that truck a lot, even though it embarrassed me and acted like a POS sometimes.

SilverFleet wrote:

mattbatson wrote:

doc_speeder wrote:

Dav wrote: I have an '08, 4x4, double-cab, 5.7L, Tundra--I love it; it is the best truck I have ever had. I previously had '90 Ford--every component that held fluid also leaked it and it left me stranded in every Rocky Mountain state except for Montana and Wyoming. My Tundra has towed my race car, skidded trees, hauled firewood, traversed 18" of snow, and hauled 6 people in comfort. I have had number of people comment on how roomy AND comfortable the back seat is. It has been as reliable as an anvil--except for the stereo--is a POS and I had it replaced under warranty. It is rather huge, but when I bought it, it was actually cheaper than a Tacoma. I paid $25.4K out the door in 2008. I personally would never buy a Crew Max as I don't understand the point of a pickup with a bed shorter than at least 6.5', but if you can get a 5.7, 4x4, Crew Max for $25K OTD, that is a SMOKING deal. Finally, don't bother with the TRD package--I don't know why someone said they are faster--any 5.7 with the tow package is essentially the same. The TRD package is basically some stickers, cheap Bilsteins, and a paper-thin fuel tank skid-plate.

I'm willing to bet that way back in 1992, when the Ford was 2 years old, it was pretty reliable too... My BIL has a 08 Tundra he uses to pull his 16' enclosed trailer for motocross. It's got a bit better power than my 6.0 Chev, but doesn't feel NEARLY as comfortable in a cross wind with a trailer as my 2000 Silvy 2500...(the same trailer). We use about the same amount of fuel when towing, and the Tundra is not much better empty. My Chev is an LT, so it's got heated seats etc. From a comfort/capability:$$ POV, the Tundra doesn't really impress me much.

my problem is i just dont trust american trucks as much as i do toyota for long term reliability

(and here it comes...) Well, since the Tundra is built here for the North American market, it's pretty much an American truck. He also paid less for it than a decently equipped Tacoma, because it was during that time when gas was $4/gal. Funny fact: My dad's previous truck was a 1992 F150 4x4 Flareside with the rare and elusive Nite package. It was a pretty truck, and if the tinworm didn't eat the bed mounts, I'd probably have it in my possession now. It did have its share of problems since we bought it (picked it up used at a Toyota dealer in '94, the irony is uncanny), like the brakes that failed one week after buying it, the rear main seal leaking all over the place, intermittent ignition issues, the auto locking hubs crapping out, it spitting it's rear driveshaft out while I was on a date (and the only place I could pull over was an adult store's parking lot, and that's no BS, and I never found the shaft), unintentionally accelerating down the road when the throttle cable stuck at full throttle, and many, many other times when it flat out left me or my dad stranded. But that 5.0 and the tranny went for well over 200,000 miles and I bet its still running now. For some reason, like an idiot, I liked that truck a lot, even though it embarrassed me and acted like a POS sometimes.

I actually loved my Ford too despite its problems--I owned it longer than I had any other vehicle. I just got to the point where I was worried it would breakdown when I had my kids with me.

I actually looked at the F150 when I bought my Tundra. It was a nice pickup, but in 2008, the powetrains were a joke compared to the competition.

The ecoboost is an interesting concept, but I can't help but wonder why NO ONE has used a larger gasoline turbo engine in a pickup in the past. I mean Ford has had their Aussie turbo six for years. I live at 6500', so it would be great for me, but my gut says a standard V8 will likely be less worrisome for the long haul.

Dav wrote: I have an '08, 4x4, double-cab, 5.7L, Tundra--I love it; it is the best truck I have ever had. I previously had '90 Ford--every component that held fluid also leaked it and it left me stranded in every Rocky Mountain state except for Montana and Wyoming. My Tundra has towed my race car, skidded trees, hauled firewood, traversed 18" of snow, and hauled 6 people in comfort. I have had number of people comment on how roomy AND comfortable the back seat is. It has been as reliable as an anvil--except for the stereo--is a POS and I had it replaced under warranty. It is rather huge, but when I bought it, it was actually cheaper than a Tacoma. I paid $25.4K out the door in 2008. I personally would never buy a Crew Max as I don't understand the point of a pickup with a bed shorter than at least 6.5', but if you can get a 5.7, 4x4, Crew Max for $25K OTD, that is a SMOKING deal. Finally, don't bother with the TRD package--I don't know why someone said they are faster--any 5.7 with the tow package is essentially the same. The TRD package is basically some stickers, cheap Bilsteins, and a paper-thin fuel tank skid-plate.

I was referring to the TRD Supercharged Tundra, my bad.

HiTempguy wrote:

JohnGalt wrote: How can a modern full size get such horrible mileage? I have a 96 Chevy with the 5.7 that gets better than that.

STOP IT! STOP IT RIGHT NOW! Don't try to ask a sensible question about new cars, you're hurtin' ma brainz!

Because a modern full size is more like a full size and a half.

93celicaGT2 wrote:

HiTempguy wrote:

JohnGalt wrote: How can a modern full size get such horrible mileage? I have a 96 Chevy with the 5.7 that gets better than that.

STOP IT! STOP IT RIGHT NOW! Don't try to ask a sensible question about new cars, you're hurtin' ma brainz!

Because a modern full size is more like a full size and a half.

also the 1996 5.7 chevy made 255 HP and 335 lb-ft

The tundra 5.7 makes 381 HP and 401 lb-ft

The more powah = more fuel used..

In reply to mattbatson:

Well... my 1 gen Tundra was pretty reliable but it still needs an unavoidable timing belt replacement that costs $1000. It also needed a radiator, exhaust, 2 O2 sensors, front rotors and one front caliper by 95k. It had frame rot that the factory needed to cut off and weld in a new part to make safe. The driver window motor failed. All before its 7th birthday and 100k miles.

When I was shopping for my Chevy 2500HD I came across many an F-250, 350 & Chevy 25/3500 diesel with 300k+ on them and a repair history of just regular maintenance. Now... if you don't get a diesel... make sure its an SD or HD and you still get the same truck. So... food for thought anyway. Also... the rotors for my "new to me" 2500HD cost about $40 each. The Toyota's were $120 each. That sort of premium differential seems to be the norm so as far as solid trucks go... call me a domestic convert.

Javelin wrote: (the backseats in the Tundra are horrendous for full-size adults)?

You talking extended cab (does that exist still?) or 4 door. In the 4 door, I'll disagree pretty adamantly. I'm 6'-1", 320#, and I had zero issues with the Tundra back seat. Also zero issues with the crew cab chevy back seat. Never been in the ford, but I assume it's fine also.

ECOBOOST-150:
-365 hp, 420 torks
-tows a massive 11,300 lbs
-won't suddenly accelerate you into places you don't want to go
-looks good

TUNDRA 5.7:
-381 hp, 401 torks
-tows only 10,800 lbs
-will suddenly accelerate you into places you don't want to go
-is a bit ugly

The winner in this class should be clear, but I would have to reject both and go with the SVT Raptor.

i'm sure its a nice truck but i couldnt get over how ugly that interior was at the new car show. plus i couldnt reach ANY of the dash controls with the seat positioned for proper driving. i'd like a nice simple pushrod v8 in my truck if it isnt going to be turbodiesel.

and i second the Raptor ftw.

RoosterSauce wrote: ECOBOOST-150: -365 hp, 420 torks -tows a massive 11,300 lbs -won't suddenly accelerate you into places you don't want to go -looks good TUNDRA 5.7: -381 hp, 401 torks -tows only 10,800 lbs -will suddenly accelerate you into places you don't want to go -is a bit ugly The winner in this class should be clear, but I would have to reject both and go with the SVT Raptor.

The ecoboost will get better mileage due to the ability to stay out of boost on the highway. This WILL save fuel.

Am I the only one who hates the SVT Raptor. Sure it's a nice bit of kit, but everyone I see seems to be driven by aging douchbag/musclehead/guido... Is the SVT Raptor the new I have money but no taste vehicle?

Shim wrote: Am I the only one who hates the SVT Raptor. Sure it's a nice bit of kit, but everyone I see seems to be driven by aging douchbag/musclehead/guido... Is the SVT Raptor the new I have money but no taste vehicle?

I just went to see what one was. For that kind of coin you can load up an F-250 SD with a turbo diesel and a crew cab. That is just redonkulous money for an F-150 with a doodad package. So... umm... yes. Its the the budget version of the F-150 Harley Davidson Edition which is not even defensible at $50k unless it comes with a free, color matched Fat Boy.

I like to add my pointless opinion on topics too!!

My brother is a Toyota salesman and has had a Tundra for about two years now. He loves it. He says that if he were to buy a new truck today, it would be Ford or Dodge without a doubt. According to his opinion, they are just much better trucks. Interestingly, he says that what he really wants is a new 4Runner. Go figure.

I think the Raptor is more designed for off-roading. Or my morning commute over backroads that haven't been touched since the Yankees came through....

As far as Ford vs Toytota vs whatever, my father has one with 280K on it, the oil screen clogged and cost him the engine at 270K.

Other than that it has been solid. Only normal maintenance and he uses it for collections.

If you think Toyota is better than Ford on reliability, congrats, the Toyota propaganda machine is working just fine.

As far as resale let's compare depreciation on the same two base model trucks. 2007 Tundra Tundra Limited Crew Max 6AT 4X4 and a 2007 Ford F150 SuperCrew FX4. Same truck different manufacturers.

Tundra MSRP: $41,850 F150 MSRP: $34,625

Edmunds.com value today assuming standard mileage Tundra: $27,872 F150: $18,672

differences Tundra: $13,978
F150: $15,953

So over the 4 years it costs you $500 more a year in depreciation for the Ford.

Hardly a ground breaking or wallet breaking difference.

Now the depreciation myth has been explored. Here is my $500/25,000 worth.

Get what you want. Both are good trucks and you will experience the +/- of both. Sounds like you got a good deal I would comp shop CarMax new dealership in Maryland also. Give them a call and use it to negotiate with your local dealer.

Enjoy what ever you get!

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: In reply to mattbatson: Well... my 1 gen Tundra was pretty reliable but it still needs an unavoidable timing belt replacement that costs $1000. It also needed a radiator, exhaust, 2 O2 sensors, front rotors and one front caliper by 95k. It had frame rot that the factory needed to cut off and weld in a new part to make safe. The driver window motor failed. All before its 7th birthday and 100k miles. When I was shopping for my Chevy 2500HD I came across many an F-250, 350 & Chevy 25/3500 diesel with 300k+ on them and a repair history of just regular maintenance. Now... if you don't get a diesel... make sure its an SD or HD and you still get the same truck. So... food for thought anyway. Also... the rotors for my "new to me" 2500HD cost about $40 each. The Toyota's were $120 each. That sort of premium differential seems to be the norm so as far as solid trucks go... call me a domestic convert.

I do understand that american trucks can still have the original engines and trannies in them after 300K miles...but I would be surprised if this was common? I've owned both american and jap trucks in the past, and the american ones always gave me much more trouble. My 97 Dodge cummins pk had only 120K miles on it when I sold it, but the tranny had already been rebuilt, the a/c had been repaired many times over, the front suspension bits had been replaced, etc. My 97 toyota 4runner now has almost double that mileage at 230K. The a/c has never been touched, not even recharged...the front suspension is all original (as are the wheel bearings/brake calipers/etc), except for new shocks at the 100K mark. I have never adjusted or even checked the valves (and yes, your supposed to on these). Water pump once during a timing belt change...

With american vehicles it often seems to be the peripherals that go...odd electrical components and such.

I just dont have the trust for american built right now

In reply to mattbatson:

Dodge had transmission issues, and more torq than that Yota would ever put out.

I do hope/wish that Toyota will bring the new diesel they are building to the U.S.

That thing is Nice.

I understand your gun shy on American but remember you are comparing 2011. If you want to go old our boat race team used a 500K mile 6.8L 84 Ford. No tranny other than normal services, but it did go through a front end, glow plugs, and an AC compressor. So it seems high mileage domestics seem to be normal around my house.

I am gun shy on Toyota because my wifes 1997 4Runner Limited's rack and pinion split, causing her to almost loose control. I would rather blow a transmission than a rack any day.

Like I said good luck with what ever you get.

DoctorBlade wrote: I think the Raptor is more designed for off-roading. Or my morning commute over backroads that haven't been touched since the Yankees came through....

The raptor was designed to be a prerunner and therefore is really only good offroad in certain circumstances.. Not really what normal people want in a trail rig.

The new dodge powerwagon is quite frankly more useful to anyone outside of the south west. Solid axles and lockers front and rear...