12th Jan 2007, 05:08

15:58 watch the video and provide us your evaluation afterward. You may buy a domestic the same day.

12th Jan 2007, 09:00

My only hope is that Ford updates the testing to include a Honda Ridgeline. I would love to see the Ridgeline go down the test road of bumps, can you imagine the damage that would occur? Of course, the test was meant to compare trucks only, not cars, which would exclude the Ridgeline.

12th Jan 2007, 10:06

Funny, when Automobile Magazine had a Ridgeline for a year, they put it through endless such tests, rated it the best truck they had ever driven, and voted it an All Star.

12th Jan 2007, 10:49

You're joking, right? Manufacturers release video BECAUSE they have something to hide. Just look at the Corvair. When Ralph Nader got it in his sites GM created all these videos showing how the Corvair was superior in handling and never did what Ralph said it did. Of course, it was all staged.

I trust a corporate video about as much as I trust our current government.

12th Jan 2007, 11:07

A friend told me about this site. I thought I'd share my experience with the Tundra. In 2002 after driving a 1992 GMC Sierra for 136,000 trouble free miles I bought a 4.7 automatic Tundra extended cab. In the first 6 months it was in the shop 5 times. Most of the problems were minor, and Toyota was great about taking care of them. At 24,000 miles the transmission started shifting very hard. It took 3 more trips to the dealer to correct that. I also began to notice how "tinny" the truck felt compared to my GMC. It had a lighter, less solid feel. It was also not as powerful and it was a hassle pulling my large boat. Finally, in June of 2005 I decided I'd had enough and test drove a new Ford F-150. There was NO COMPARISON!! The F-150 is without a doubt the smoothest, quietest and most solid truck I have ever driven. I traded the Tundra then and there and don't have a second of regret. In 22,000 miles the F-150 has performed FLAWLESSLY. I'm an F-150 man from now on!!

12th Jan 2007, 16:29

(It's me again - you know - the 19:26 writer guy)

Please don't try and use CNN as any kind of source to prove a Tundra's strength. What would a bunch of yuppies that work for CNN know about any kind of work truck? Name one time in any of those reporters' lives they ever had to do any real exhausting work, let alone put a truck through exhausting work. They, like everyone else, listen to the hype (which is what drives the Tundra's value up) or use their own "yuppified" opinion to decide which truck is better.

Speaking of opinion, I have said this a hundred times about magazines: Motor Trend and any other magazines that do these tests are written by opinionated yuppies that, just like the CNN staff, wouldn't know what real hard work is, nor would they have ever used any vehicle for hard work.

The Tundra will place last in any hauling or pulling contest with the other full size entry-level trucks; and it will still get declared the winner. Why? Because of the praise of its smooth, refined ride, its silky "sthmooooooooooooooooooooooooth" engine, and its "pwitty wittle interwior".

As I have said before, "Yeah! THAT'S really what any real worker is looking for in a truck." Forget all of that steel, heavy-duty suspension, hardened frame, heavy-duty engine, re-enforced drive-train (from engine, to transmission, drive-shaft, and axles) and all of that. That doesn't matter in a truck. What matters is how nice and cozy the interior feels and how soft and fluffy the suspension handles.

Yes everyone, it's true. The pretty interior, the squishy leaf springs, the light-weight front control arms, and the "sthilkeeeee sthmooooooooth" engine is what moves the load. Yes, those are the attributes you should be looking for in a "tough" truck. Yep, sure is.

Oh yeah. Today after I got back from putting yet another 200 miles on my F-150 delivery truck, (300,000 miles, here I come) I noticed a Tundra had been traded in and placed on the lot. I went over to it and squatted down at the back wheel to re-check my analysis since it had been a while since I had paid any attention to a Tundra.

Sure enough, the frame (though not as thin as I thought) is still a thinner sheet of metal, the fold of the frame is only about half of my C20 or my F-150 (let alone the new F-150) in width, and the fold of the frame is about one or two inches less in height to my C20 or my F-150. Do I need to say it again?

The leaf springs (as I had remembered) were not as wide as the C20 and definitely not as wide as the 3.0" wide leaf springs on my F-150. Also, each spring was by far skinnier in thickness than either of my trucks. However, this Tundra did have a fourth leaf spring. I guess someone paid the extra few thousand dollars (on top of its ridiculously high price) for the T (u) RD package upgrade and got an extra leaf spring. Wow. What a deal. Still not nine leaves like my 3/4 ton C20.

The axle housing was definitely not as large in circumference as the F-150 and even smaller compared to the C20 (heavy-duty axles and housing). This would mean that the axle shafts are smaller, too.

Anyone want to make anymore excuses for this inadequacy of metal?

As if the physical specs weren't enough, the Silver Creek Shoot-out really demonstrated what all these short-comings in re-enforcement resulted in when put through the motions. Like I have said, "Talk is cheap and useless." I guess your words don't have magical powers after all.

Does anyone notice that the opposition is running out of defense?

First they say that the Tundra is simply just as strong or stronger...Wrong.

Then they say that it may not be able to haul as much, but it can still withstand more abuse...Wrong.

Then they say, Okay, maybe it has less metal, but that doesn't matter because it is still just as strong. More metal doesn't make the others stronger (pipe vs. rod)..........Wrong.

Now they just say, well the (oh so trustworthy) media says the truck is better and the (notoriously bias) magazines say the truck is better, so it must be better.

Can anyone guess what the answer is? Say it with me children.

WRONG!

What's your next excuse? I'm eager with anticipation.

12th Jan 2007, 16:44

That's pretty impressive for a Ford to get 22,000 miles without breaking down, practically unheard of.

12th Jan 2007, 16:58

It's kind of a miracle that the FOUR guys in America with F-150's that run right all showed up on a Toyota Tundra site. They must all be depressed from what they read from truthful Ford owners on the F-150 section of this site, where every other comment explains how they leak, break down, blow up, catch fire, don't start, and the transmission practically fell out.

A large percentage of the Ford comments on this site are from disgusted, last time Ford owners that wised up and are switching to almost ANY imported vehicle. People don't make the "Fix Or Repair Daily" joke because Fords are known to be reliable! Who's paying you guys to make so many long winded "pro Ford" comments?