2022 Tundra vs 2022 F-150 opinion?

One of Ford's big things is that trucks are used by people who work and wear gloves. I was watching a video a while back where their engineers explained how that evolved into the truck's design. For example, that's why the keyless entry number pad still uses physical buttons on the F-series, but not on other models.

So, unless they backpedal on that I could see them keeping physical buttons as much as possible in the F-series.

 

Fords on record saying they are going to reduce part count by 2,400 on the F-150 and I don’t think it’ll stop there. Times are changing and most F-150 trims are being used as grocery getters.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if buttons and knobs are killed on the Lariat and up trims in the future.

 

Who cares, the f-150 is a pos anyways , tundras rule

 

I haven't seen mainstream models set up like this yet but I do think it's coming. On my work Charger and on my Powerboost I can set temps and probably a couple other climate control functions with voice controls. I don't actually know how extensive the capability is with each system because I don't fiddle with it much myself or read up on it in the manual. I don't think most owners use it often.
And if my wife tried to do it by voice the way she is with the climate controls she'd be barking at the truck every 30 seconds to change something every time we're driving.

But I think voice commands and computer modules can eventually operate most climate control functions and the screen will be there for redundancy. At this point the way economy of scale works a couple more chips and modules and a simpler dash with fewer openings and buttons is probly cheaper for them to build.

 

Ford never gave me a loaner made me loose my boner, Toyota gave me my boner back!
Nothing is really comparable between the two. Ford sucks-Toyota does not.
Toyota is smart enough to know they have no ability to profit in the HD segment. Nissan tried and failed. Toyota didn't jump on the EV wagon and now look who was right the whole time despite Toyota being frowned on for not pushing Ev's and even had the Toyota President akio Toyoda step down last year because he wouldn't budge on it(he was right) Toyota is smarter period in the long run.
https://www.thedrive.com/news/akio-toyoda-says-slowing-ev-demand-proves-he-was-right-all-along

 

Tesla did it with an I pad. I used (speak) feature a couple of times on my past f150 but was faster just hitting the buttons. I'm having an easier time with the nav on the toyota as you can talk more fluidly.

 

Check engine light just came on today in my transit 350 with only 30k miles, ford said too bad on the loaners we don’t do that

gee thanks ford, phuckers

Toyota gives me one anytime I want

 

Post #5719 Is there an echo in here? Lol, if ford gave out loaners they'd have empty out Enterprise rental car and still would not have enough.

 

Ya more shit vehicles from ford , but there is no options if you need a high roof cargo van, I also have a ram promaster that I’ve had to put a ton into as well

hey, Toyota, t-350 high roof van please ? Haha

 

I get it. I mean, if I were to buy another half ton, it would be the Tundra, no question. But I was hoping it would be less hamstrung by payload. All that torque just to max out GVWR at nearly the same load as the previous truck that came out 15 years prior.

 

My shop is slowly dropping the Ford high roofs for the rams for our road techs. Are the rams front wheel drive? I know the rams battery is alot easier to get to! Stupid ford under the driver seat WTF!

 

you seem focused on torque and payload , one doesn’t have anything to do with the other.

So less torque and more payload is what you’re asking for ?

Again, it’s still a half ton, there is only so much left in it when you have to satisfy such a diverse use crowd.

go up to a 3/4 or 1 ton ford and then you can have the same bs as I have on my transit 350 at the moment , shit load of payload but issues already

 

yes my promaster is fwd, chews rotors like crazy

 

No, I want enough payload to actually take advantage of the torque. Payload has always been the Tundra’s weakness. I expected a leap in payload capacity after 15 years. But it seems to me that the 3rd gen does basically the same job, just smoother at lower RPMs.

The hybrid 3rd gen puts out more torque than every gas HD truck available, but with 1400 lb of payload, it can barely pull more than the 5.7 without being overloaded. Payload is the limiting factor. Always has been for the Tundra. 3rd gen has a lower rear axle rating, too. It’s a head scratcher for me.

“But it’s a ‘half ton’…” That term means nothing these days. I’ve seen F150s with 2800 lb of payload on the door jamb. Crazy, right? ...Or is it? That's a half ton short bed crew cab 4x4 that can actually tow a lot with the family in the truck.

Sweers says Toyota doesn't play the "numbers game". I don't know, but a system of payload ratings on paper that no single truck has been found to actually meet which renders max tow ratings useless sounds like a numbers game to me...

 

1/2 tons and HD trucks use different SAE rating standards.

The SAE rating for NON-HD vehicles measures transient (or instantaneous) output. The SAE rating for HD vehicle is about sustained output (over a duration of time).

To put this in perspective, think of the SAE rating for HD trucks as measuring whether the engine would turn into kibbles and bits after climb of a constant grade at WOT for 30 mins. Most 1/2 ton gas engines would probably not do well in this use case. They are not designed to sustain maximum output over a long duration.

This is why it's not unusual to see higher advertised output figures for 1/2 ton trucks compared to gas HD trucks.

As for the F150s with 2800lbs of payload - those are unicorns. The F150s with the HDPP package. The biggest difference in those trucks is really the effective spring rate of the rear leaf spring pack. It's a compromise, but effective rear spring rate is usually the limiting factor on 1/2 ton trucks.

 

The Open C rear frame of the 2.5 Gen ensures the rear tires never leave the ground and are there to support.
This is one reason.
Attached pic of older F350 HD illustrates this.
It is also a reason the 2.5 Gen is like a lizard when offroading.

 

Yeah, your only other option would be from the Germans or find a used Nissan, but those are gambles as well.

 

Just a guess, but I would expect it comes down to how Toyota perceives the average buyer uses their trucks. I remember the frustration of the 3rd gen Taco STILL having drum brakes in the rear but it came down to the owner surverys ranking towing as the 23rd most important feature buyers considered when buying a Tacoma. Basically nobody buys a Tacoma to tow and as long as you dont tow, rear drums are fine.

I'd bet the average Tundra(or 1/2 ton) buyer doesn't need 1800 pounds of payload.

 

The flex is not always a good thing, have you seen the cracked pinch weld thread? I love my Tundra, but not a real fan of the C-channel frame. Flex causes fatigue.

 

IMO - It just depends on how you use your truck.
If I was commuting on bad pavement with an empty bed - forgetaboutit.
I use my truck as a utility vehicle. It is always loaded down. Its ride is ok too loaded down.
With 1300 lbs of crush ...it becomes level. The rake disappears. Just saying.

 

Look up greatlakes big rig challenge

 

I agree on the use. For 90% of folks it’s a none-issue. I still wish it was fully boxed like my old F-150.

 

ya I understand, if you really want to push the 1/2 ton platform harder, for me my 1300-1400 I have is fine. That said, toyota did increase the payload this time around, I can put a 1,000 lbs (1/2 ton) in the bed and still get in and have some left finally.

toyota sandbagged a bit with this as well, everyone who weighs their truck is finding 200-300 more as well.

but like I said, toyota has some really low hanging fruit, just give the non hybrid the higher GWVR of the hybrid and call it a payload package, they could do that so easy, and with the hidden extra , hell you'd probably have 2K ish

 

ya, the new ones are fully boxed, I like it better, it doesn't flop all over on shitty roads and uses the suspension for ride compliance instead of frame flex.

but Im not an off-roader, so I don't give a shit about the smaller amount less of articulation, I much prefer the handling, stability while towing and ride improvements , all of which are significant .

 

ya, I looked at sprinters but way too much money, stupid expensive and its not like they are any better on reliability.

Nissan doesnt have a high roof like the others and I dont even think they make those anymore

 

Nissan did in the past, but they are all out of production here. It would have to be on the used market, but buying a used work van....idk.

https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/...hp2PC5P4910CtZ04kZ-s8dDAdKPoSvbhoCgmMQAvD_BwE

 

If they put me in charge of the design of the Tundra today, my first question to the engineers would be how high it might be possible to raise the GVWR without making any changes to the truck. My next question would be what the GVWR of each of the various components is and what would have to be modified to increase it and how much you could get out of changing each component.

 

If the 3rd gen had come out with 2500 lb of payload in a crew cab 4x4 configuration, I would’ve bought it immediately with an extended warranty.

But now my choices are:

1) go HD, which would require another daily driver vehicle and no longer allow me to fit in the places we go hunting and dispersed camping.

2) stick with what I have and buy a small trailer more geared toward off-grid boondocking anyway. Something that allows me to tow within axle limits (GVWR is 7200 but axles are 4K/4150). That way I keep my daily driver and off roader that fits where we like to go.

The one thing I don’t see myself ever doing is buying another half ton.

 

2500 lbs, lol.

 

You've just described a 3/4+ truck.