10th Jan 2007, 18:42
I am the writer of comment 19:26. I put (Writer of comment 19:26) in the last comment to show who this comment was coming from. Yes this comment is launched at the 12:50 and the 10:14. Thank you for the clarification.
10th Jan 2007, 19:01
Yes, I see now. perhaps a closing line or identifying name could be used in later comments for clarification because with all the comments that are posted with specific dates in them, it can get quite confusing as to which comment is being addressed.
Thanks!
11th Jan 2007, 13:58
Here's how things work: just because an F-150's frame is physically larger does not mean that it is stronger. A solid piece of rod will bend easier than a hollow pipe of the same size, yet the rod is solid and the pipe is hollow. It's the same principles of engineering used when building a bridge: simply adding more metal everywhere will NOT make a stronger bridge, nor will it make a stronger truck frame. Same goes for the suspension. A Tundra is a more rigid, stronger, better engineered truck than any F-150. It is a shame to mention it in the same sentence as a Toyota truck. The Tundra will prove to be the tougher, longer lasting, MUCH longer running truck than any F-150, just as their earlier compact Trucks and Tacoma's have already clearly done. They also embarrass Ford when it comes to the metal on the body panels and how they are reinforced, (notice a Ford's loose, floppy quarter panels after a few years, and notice the Toyota's, which will have no flex, and will rock the truck when you pull on them without giving, like a Ford does). Toyotas are better trucks.
11th Jan 2007, 15:07
Ford's flimsy panels??? Have any of you ever seen the short video on "The Truth About Trucks"? In the video it compared the new F-150, Nissan Titan, Chevrolet Silverado 1500, Dodge Ram 1500, and the new Toyota Tundra. In this video they did a small test, in which each vehicle was driven over the meanest piece of pavement on the planet, at 35 MPH. It contained large swells and bumps up to 1.5 feet high. The Toyota Tundra did the worse, with significant flex in the bed, quarter panels, cabin doors, and best of all was the tail pipes were so unsettled that they bounced up and hit the underside of the truck with significant force. The next worse in line was the Nissan Titan, which started out fine, but got to a level as bad as the Tundra, minus the exhaust issues. And next up we had the Chevrolet Silverado 1500, which did fine for a truck, with a lot of flex, but no where near the ammount as the foreigners. The Dodge Ram 1500 came in second, proving remarkably rigid and right, but the flex in the rear was moderate. And, of course, the Ford F-150 came in first, with very very very minimal flex in the body or chassis. The exhaust remained settled and didn't budge the slightest bit. The body of the truck remained strait and poised, and the suspension did an excellent job of hiding the monsterous bumps under the truck.
Commment 13:58 is another example of a hot headed Toyota fan who's facts aren't even facts! You cannot tell a single person that the Tundra will prove superior to any other truck on the market because IT HASN'T YET!!! How many times must a person tell you, YOU CANNOT SAY SOMETHING WILL HAPPEN UNTIL IT HAS HAPPENED! And your solid peice of metal vs. pipe fact is out the window, because the F-150's frame isn't solid, its pipe-like, like you said. So, you pretty much proved yourself wrong in that statement. Nice try, come again later.
11th Jan 2007, 15:56
I agree that people claiming how long-lasting and reliable a brand new Toyota is are driven more by emotion than by any facts. My 1985 Dodge Ramcharger with 255,000 miles has already stood the test of time, and proves that Dodge has a history of making rugged vehicles. When your Toyota gets to be 20 years old and has over 200,000 miles then you can talk about what a reliable, long-lasting vehicle it is. Don't tell us this hype about "This Toyota is the greatest because it will easily go 300,000 miles!" and meanwhile you only have 500 miles on it. You look foolish. This commentary about how your Toyota is so great because the tailgate still closes smoothly after a year is silly and sad. Is this really your defining criteria for quality? Is that the best you can offer? Do you honestly think that means something?
11th Jan 2007, 15:58
Sorry, the Tundra IS superior, just like it was yesterday and will be tomorrow. I could cite the many, many auto magazines, and the studies by Edmunds and CNN, (yes, the news channel) that rated Toyota the very best in a series of categories such as build quality, future resale value, reliability, etc.
The F-150 never even made the list, except for being #8 in a list of the 10 WORST trucks as far as losing their value over the years; of course because they fall apart easily and are not worth much after a 5 or 6 years. Sorry about the bad news, but facts are facts.
Ford isn't selling much and not doing well, and Toyota's jump off the lot without a sales pitch. Wonder why? They've proven over the years to be the best, and people know it and are buying.
11th Jan 2007, 17:39
I own my own business and (like almost all small businesses that use small trucks) drive Rangers. They are less expensive to buy, ride smoother, cost FAR LESS on maintenance and will go 300,000 miles with virtually no required repairs other than routine servicing (which, incidentally, is much cheaper than on the less reliable Tacomas). Now what was that about Tacomas being more rugged and LONGER LASTING??? AS usual, not a shred of proof.
My money goes on proven vehicles with a history of reliability and quality. That ISN'T Toyota. I don't call faulty brakes, non-inflating airbags, sticking accelerators, defective transmissions, peeling paint and engines that fail at 34,000 miles (see Corolla reviews) "quality". Even the bias Consumer Reports gives Ranger an equal reliability rating to Tacoma.
11th Jan 2007, 18:55
Would someone provide the URL for the video "The Truth About Trucks"?
I can't seem to find it, and the one that I have found doesn't work...
11th Jan 2007, 21:24
(It's me the 19:26 guy again) You can find this "Truth About Trucks" Video on the Ford website.
Of course, Ford made the video to show why the F-150 is better than all of them, but either way, all of the other competition still did better than the Tundra (big surprise).
They still take the vehicles and analyze components of each one.
Remember, Ford is in competition with Chevy, Dodge, Nissan, and Toyota - so it's not like this video was swayed just to attack Toyota.
10th Jan 2007, 18:15
Comment 19:26 was written in defense of domestic trucks. it is comments 10:14 and 12:50 that the last comment should have been addressed to.