False reporting by ABC on Tundra??

[ebritt]

I just saw a piece on ABC this morning that said the NTSB called Tundra the "overall best pick" among trucks. I thought Tundra didnt fair so well under testing and that Ford had a higher rating.....did ABC just lie?

:reading:

[UltimateX]

They reported correctly. The Tundra only received 4 stars from the government. IIHS gave the Tundra a top rating of good all round, see the link below. Starting this year pickups are getting side impact ratings. Looks like the Toyota is the first and only full sized pickup to have the new side impact test so far. Basically Toyota is best of one.

 

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=444

 

Here is the ABC article

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=3868064

[NickF1011]

No wonder nobody watches network news anymore. :reading:

[jasonj80]

They reported correctly. The Tundra only received 4 stars from the government. IIHS gave the Tundra a top rating of good all round, see the link below. Starting this year pickups are getting side impact ratings. Looks like the Toyota is the first and only full sized pickup to have the new side impact test so far. Basically Toyota is best of one.

 

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=444

 

Here is the ABC article

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=3868064

 

 

Well being you can not get side airbags or stability control on a Ford it will fail this test, to pass the IIHS side impact test side-airbags are basically required. Toyota made those thing standard in the new Tundra, something Ford should have at at least optional from the time the truck launched in '04. Ford is the only Full size truck that doesn't even offer stability control or side airbags - even as an option. Safety is one place the current F-150 lags the competition - 5 stars or not. The Tundra isn't that far behind the F-150 if look at raw numbers. Also if I were Toyota I would advertise the crap out of this, come out and say something like the market leader F-150 is so behind it wouldn't even qualify for this award.

 

Ford - Driver/Pass

Head Injury Criterion 493/ 617

Chest Deceleration (g's) 38/ 34

Femur Load l/r1 (lbs) 1065/937 / 617/919

 

Toyota - Driver/Pass

Head Injury Criterion 476/ 486

Chest Deceleration (g's) 47/ 46

Femur Load l/r1 (lbs) 837/629 653/385

[NickF1011]

Well being you can not get side airbags or stability control on a Ford it will fail this test, to pass the IIHS side impact test side-airbags are basically required. Toyota made those thing standard in the new Tundra, something Ford should have at at least optional from the time the truck launched in '04. Ford is the only Full size truck that doesn't even offer stability control or side airbags - even as an option. Safety is one place the current F-150 lags the competition - 5 stars or not. The Tundra isn't that far behind the F-150 if look at raw numbers. Also if I were Toyota I would advertise the crap out of this, come out and say something like the market leader F-150 is so behind it wouldn't even qualify for this award.

 

Ford - Driver/Pass

Head Injury Criterion 493/ 617

Chest Deceleration (g's) 38/ 34

Femur Load l/r1 (lbs) 1065/937 / 617/919

 

Toyota - Driver/Pass

Head Injury Criterion 476/ 486

Chest Deceleration (g's) 47/ 46

Femur Load l/r1 (lbs) 837/629 653/385

 

And all of the F-150's "shortcomings" you mentioned will be addressed on the '09 refresh, which will be on the market in less than a year.

[ShockFX]

And all of the F-150's "shortcomings" you mentioned will be addressed on the '09 refresh, which will be on the market in less than a year.

 

Plus, the F-150 doesn't feel like it will fall apart after driving over a bumpy road. Cue the video where the Tundra bed vibrates against the cab.

[jasonj80]

And all of the F-150's "shortcomings" you mentioned will be addressed on the '09 refresh, which will be on the market in less than a year.

 

That was the only real short comings in the current F-150. I figured they would be updated and added for '09 basically the government is requiring it, so they can beat the requirement by couple years. It was just disappointing that they didn't do it in '04 to add those features at least as options. Did they lose sales because of it over the past 5 model years;?-- maybe 2,000 a year. I know safety didn't sell in full size pickup and the bottom line came into play. Ford started it in the F-150 as it was were they could beat the 381hp Turdra, you advertise where you beat your competition.

Edited November 15, 2007 by jasonj80

[suv_guy_19]

That was the only real short comings in the current F-150. I figured they would be updated and added for '09 basically the government is requiring it, so they can beat the requirement by couple years. It was just disappointing that they didn't do it in '04 to add those features at least as options. Did they lose sales because of it over the past 5 model years;?-- maybe 2,000 a year. I know safety didn't sell in full size pickup and the bottom line came into play. Ford started it in the F-150 as it was were they could beat the 381hp Turdra, you advertise where you beat your competition.

 

 

You know, in the advertisements they basically would talk about how it was almost impossible to roll over because of the outboard mounted shock. Let me tell you that they are 100% right. I'm glad they will be adding SC with the refresh, but its almost unnecessary.

[Hydro]

yep, they only mentioned thr tundra on this article.I love the headline though!

 

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insur...estCarList.aspx

[jonas1022]

They reported correctly. The Tundra only received 4 stars from the government. IIHS gave the Tundra a top rating of good all round, see the link below. Starting this year pickups are getting side impact ratings. Looks like the Toyota is the first and only full sized pickup to have the new side impact test so far. Basically Toyota is best of one.

 

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=444

 

Here is the ABC article

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=3868064

It's also making Toyota the worst of one...DOH! Stupid reporters writing about things they know nothing about and understand even less about them.

[sargranny]

It's also making Toyota the worst of one...DOH! Stupid reporters writing about things they know nothing about and understand even less about them.

 

I joined this Forum because I was open to buying my third Ford but wound up buying the Tundra in part because Ford did not come with the safety options I wanted, 5 star rating notwithstanding.

 

I was happy with the Fords on which I had put many years, was also happy with the Toyotas I grew up with and learned to drive on.

 

My Tundra gets excellent fuel economy, it does not bounce all over the place, is awesome offroad with seamless shifting, and I have been all over my tailgate many times with no issues, and I have had no transmission problems (actually everything has been right) in my first 2500 miles. I know everyone over here bashes them but Ford was not interested in what I wanted in a vehicle, which was REALLY a small safe truck that gets great fuel economy. So I went for a big truck that has everything else I wanted and good fuel economy for its size (I am getting 19-20 on the highway, honest.)

 

Ford has a long history of sweeping major safety issues under the rug and to be honest, safety does not seem to be a priority. I have looked at all the wrecked Tundra pictures and the thing that impresses me is that the passenger compartment seems to fare pretty well.

 

My ford Explorer served (and is still serving) me well even though it did eat O2 sensors and brake rotors, and had a cracked head at 50K as well as numerous recall repairs. It is at 210K.

 

When I look at the picture from the IIHS, it seems to confirm my decision. They are interested in the truth from an actuarial basis ( real life claims / insurance rates)

 

 

BTW, there IS more testing than just the best of ONE and Ford did not fare too well with rear impact

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=70

Edited November 15, 2007 by sargranny

[suv_guy_19]

I joined this Forum because I was open to buying my third Ford but wound up buying the Tundra in part because Ford did not come with the safety options I wanted, 5 star rating notwithstanding.

 

I was happy with the Fords on which I had put many years, was also happy with the Toyotas I grew up with and learned to drive on.

 

My Tundra gets excellent fuel economy, it does not bounce all over the place, is awesome offroad with seamless shifting, and I have been all over my tailgate many times with no issues, and I have had no transmission problems (actually everything has been right) in my first 2500 miles. I know everyone over here bashes them but Ford was not interested in what I wanted in a vehicle, which was REALLY a small safe truck that gets great fuel economy. So I went for a big truck that has everything else I wanted and good fuel economy for its size (I am getting 19-20 on the highway, honest.)

 

Ford has a long history of sweeping major safety issues under the rug and to be honest, safety does not seem to be a priority. I have looked at all the wrecked Tundra pictures and the thing that impresses me is that the passenger compartment seems to fare pretty well.

 

My ford Explorer served (and is still serving) me well even though it did eat O2 sensors and brake rotors, and had a cracked head at 50K as well as numerous recall repairs. It is at 210K.

 

When I look at the picture from the IIHS, it seems to confirm my decision. They are interested in the truth from an actuarial basis ( real life claims / insurance rates)

BTW, there IS more testing than just the best of ONE and Ford did not fare too well with rear impact

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/summary.aspx?class=70

 

Yes lacking in safety. Thats why Ford has more 5 star ratings than any other brand. As for the Tundra, if you were real truck customer, you would probably never have even considered it. By the way. The F150 gets 19 - 20 MPG on the freeway at 75 mph with a 4 speed auto. The Tundra should do better with a 6. The fact that the the Tundra can only be equipped with 2/3rds or the hauling capacity also speaks to a lack of understanding of what a truck is. The Tundra is behind not only the domestics, but also the Titan, in almost every way excluding horsepower. Oh, and the F150 passenger cab would survive just as well in an accident, if not better.

[sargranny]

As for the Tundra, if you were real truck customer, you would probably never have even considered it.

 

 

I don't know what it takes to qualify as a "real truck customer" Look I don't give a hoot about the Tundra bashing shit, I just wanted a good truck for on and off road for hauling search and rescue dogs and gear, camping, and for pulling a boat. I know plenty of folks doing the same thing with F-150s and 1st gen Tundras, Tacomas, and Silverados and the 1gen Tundra crowd sold me (realizing gen 2 was a gamble). I guess hauling horse trailers and working a farm (one of my references) is not real truck user either.

 

So I am not sure what a "real truck customer" really is and don't really care if you think I am not one I would like to know the "qualifications" one needs to be a "real" truck customer.

 

Not a troll, just reading the responses and wanted to respond to this one. I still have and drive my Explorer around town and like to keep up on the news.

 

My identity is not tied up in the truck I drive; it is simply a truck.

 

NHTSA is one particular frontal impact test. IIHS is another set of tests from all angles. It is more information for the consumer. You folks bash news when it is anti-Ford and embrace it when it is anti-Toyota. .

[NickF1011]

You folks bash news when it is anti-Ford and embrace it when it is anti-Toyota. .

 

Of course we do, because Toyota can suck a big fat one.

[Bored of Pisteon]

I don't know what it takes to qualify as a "real truck customer" Look I don't give a hoot about the Tundra bashing shit, I just wanted a good truck for on and off road for hauling search and rescue dogs and gear, camping, and for pulling a boat. I know plenty of folks doing the same thing with F-150s and 1st gen Tundras, Tacomas, and Silverados and the 1gen Tundra crowd sold me (realizing gen 2 was a gamble). I guess hauling horse trailers and working a farm (one of my references) is not real truck user either.

 

So I am not sure what a "real truck customer" really is and don't really care if you think I am not one I would like to know the "qualifications" one needs to be a "real" truck customer.

 

Not a troll, just reading the responses and wanted to respond to this one. I still have and drive my Explorer around town and like to keep up on the news.

 

My identity is not tied up in the truck I drive; it is simply a truck.

 

NHTSA is one particular frontal impact test. IIHS is another set of tests from all angles. It is more information for the consumer. You folks bash news when it is anti-Ford and embrace it when it is anti-Toyota. .

 

Just be forewarned of potential issues in the future and be aware of the consequences that may arise. Don't cry to us for sympathy if and when your Toyota takes a shit on you.

 

Otherwise... Enjoy the forum and Have a nice night (or day) or whatever time it is! :shades:

[Ford??-LOL!]

Looks like Toyota won this round. We'll see what the 09 F-150 redesign has to say about that. My guess, probably not much.......

[Ford-150]

Looks like Toyota won this round. We'll see what the 09 F-150 redesign has to say about that. My guess, probably not much.......

are you a fucking idiot....if you are talking about the 1/2 ton truck segment, Ford won it in 04 and GM won it in 07

and Ford will probably win it in 09 due to their truck history

 

the Titan is the best Japanese truck you can buy....and that is not saying a whole lot

 

due us a favor a stop using space on or monitors

Edited November 16, 2007 by Ford-150

[Ford??-LOL!]

are you a fucking idiot....if you are talking about the 1/2 ton truck segment, Ford won it in 04 and GM won it in 07

and Ford will probably win it in 09 due to their truck history

 

the Titan is the best Japanese truck you can buy....and that is not saying a whole lot

 

due us a favor a stop using space on or monitors

 

 

You are obviously as retarded as that thing in your Avatar. Toyota was the ONLY one tested so far. It did good. Other GM products might do good but the F-150 will NOT do good. The current model lacks side airbags or stability control. The 09 model will obviously address these glaring omissions but until then, Toyota wins this one. Ford will come stronger in 09 but i expect Toyota to raise the safety bar some more by then....

[suv_guy_19]

You are obviously as retarded as that thing in your Avatar. Toyota was the ONLY one tested so far. It did good. Other GM products might do good but the F-150 will NOT do good. The current model lacks side airbags or stability control. The 09 model will obviously address these glaring omissions but until then, Toyota wins this one. Ford will come stronger in 09 but i expect Toyota to raise the safety bar some more by then....

 

 

They could put you in an airbag bubble. If the structure is not good, then it doesn't mean anything.

[suv_guy_19]

I don't know what it takes to qualify as a "real truck customer" Look I don't give a hoot about the Tundra bashing shit, I just wanted a good truck for on and off road for hauling search and rescue dogs and gear, camping, and for pulling a boat. I know plenty of folks doing the same thing with F-150s and 1st gen Tundras, Tacomas, and Silverados and the 1gen Tundra crowd sold me (realizing gen 2 was a gamble). I guess hauling horse trailers and working a farm (one of my references) is not real truck user either.

 

So I am not sure what a "real truck customer" really is and don't really care if you think I am not one I would like to know the "qualifications" one needs to be a "real" truck customer.

 

Not a troll, just reading the responses and wanted to respond to this one. I still have and drive my Explorer around town and like to keep up on the news.

 

My identity is not tied up in the truck I drive; it is simply a truck.

 

NHTSA is one particular frontal impact test. IIHS is another set of tests from all angles. It is more information for the consumer. You folks bash news when it is anti-Ford and embrace it when it is anti-Toyota. .

 

 

To a real full size truck customer, payload would be important. 3000 for f150 vs 2000 for Tundra is a big difference. I was only informing you of the facts, and perhaps that part was a bit low, but I would buy any other truck before the Tundra.

[sargranny]

To a real full size truck customer, payload would be important. 3000 for f150 vs 2000 for Tundra is a big difference. I was only informing you of the facts, and perhaps that part was a bit low, but I would buy any other truck before the Tundra.

 

Ok, I realize the F150 has a bit bigger payload but when I look at specififications I honestly don't see the difference as dramatic as you report. You are right I don't need to carry heavy loads in the truck, but a truck is still the most practical solution for my application. My Tundra has a 1625 payload. The corresponding F150 has a 1760 payload. Both well exceed "half ton"

 

http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/f150/features/specs/

 

and I don't really understand the tow chart. It looks like 4x4 with shorter [145"] wheelbase (better for offroad) does not have the tow capacity the tundra has. Am I reading this right? A 4x4 with 145 inch wheelbase and a 5.4l engine can only tow 9600 lbs but I am stuck with a fixed axle ratio? (I have tow haul mode which changes the ratio for towing vs. regular driving and 10100 lb tow rating)

http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/f150/features/specs/

 

If I wanted more than a light truck or was regularly towing, I would have looked at the Super Crew with a Diesel Engine anyway. The Tundra is only a light truck-it is not competition for the Super Crew and 2500 series trucks. If I was regularly hauling plywood I would go for an 8' bed which would be hell offroad and get much worse fuel economy.

 

The comparisons on the Ford site pit the Ford 5.4 liter against the Tundra 4.7 liter even though the 5.7 liter engine waaaay outsells the 4.7 (and does come with bucket seats, btw) . Not comparing apples and apples.

 

Back to the safety testing - no it is not all complete. Yes the F150 will fail the side impact test and it did poorly on the rear impact test. I have been hit from behind several times by idiots who don't see the damned red light I am sitting at. I have not had a frontal collision and hope to never have one. I agree the driver test for the F150 is slightly better than for the driver in the Tundra but the passnger test is better in the Tundra. I will trade the broken femur for side airbags and stability control.

[kevinb120]

And all of the F-150's "shortcomings" you mentioned will be addressed on the '09 refresh, which will be on the market in less than a year.

 

 

Well considering the current F150 is light years ahead and exponentially stronger then the Tundra's frame, when they put the 'safety gizmos' in the 09 it will surely be reflected in the tests. Toyota also only builds safety in to specifically past tests, if they fail terribly with any forces outside of the testing regimen, so be it. They will not add one thread to a bolt or a mm of extra weld bead once they get the static test results they want. See accidents on the street and its a different story. Ford has the typically opposite situation this time where they have half a year to see everything there is to see in the new Toyota platform they will be devoted to for at least 5 years to pinpoint any weakness in the new model, in reality or static testing.

 

They made the mistake of not opting every Fusion at launch with SRS systems standard(although it was about an 80% order/take rate here) when toyota and honda jumped ahead and scrambled to get them in the cars just as the side impact test changed, so nobody would have any idea how they fare without them. Very smart move. With Ford's 'luck', OF COURSE the first ones tested were base models with no safety features....Why they did that it was a mystery because they were targeting underpricing the Sonata for base price, they still had it for well less then the Accamry even with the Safety Package.

 

And for the 'comparo' were they equal trucks? Same cab layouts?, both 4x4 or 4x2?, any extra-cost safety options used on the Tundra?

 

And once Ford mixes in the new engines and the 6-speed, everything will change. The 6-speed in the Expy EL over the outgoing standard-length Expy is night and day, even with the same engine. This kind reminds me when Consumer Reports, including the issue from last week, still lists the WINDSTAR(yes the 5-years out of production Windstar) as the 'unreliable' minivan for Ford in the NEW CAR EDITION.

 

Oh, and did ABC mention anything about recalls or CR's non-recommended swing? Or was it just a stroke-off.

Edited November 17, 2007 by kevinb120

[Ford-150]

You are obviously as retarded as that thing in your Avatar. Toyota was the ONLY one tested so far. It did good. Other GM products might do good but the F-150 will NOT do good. The current model lacks side airbags or stability control. The 09 model will obviously address these glaring omissions but until then, Toyota wins this one. Ford will come stronger in 09 but i expect Toyota to raise the safety bar some more by then....

im so sorry i thought you were talking about winning the round in the best TRUCK

 

sorry my bad......carry on with the trolling

 

oh and why would Toyota raise the bar by designing a new truck in two years, unless they design it with in the current structure which is doubtful maybe in 2011 they will have something better

 

and thanks for noticing my avatar!

[the_spaniard]

People are going to piss on Toyota product every chance they get here, don't take it personally. Toyota will have passed Ford in sales this year, and the Ford masses are obviously taking it personally. It IS a Ford forum

 

The tired broken records you hear playing are: " A REAL truck buyer/American/whatever would have done X." Ignorant thinking. Personally it makes me gag as much as the whole "buy American" garbage.

 

Sargranny bought the truck that best fits his/her needs, and it turned out to be a Toyota. 17,000+ people across the U.S. came to the same decision last month. For Christ sake, get over it.

 

I enjoy my F150, except for the shitty powertrain. Aside from that, complaint, it has been problem free for 99K miles now. I don't haul much of anything with it. Nothing significantly heavy. No boat, lumber, concrete...nothing. I'd guess MOST people who bought an F150 use it for the same thing, that is they DON'T use it to haul much of anything. If they want to haul something more significant, as Sargranny said, they buy a SuperDuty with a diesel. For my needs, the Tundra and the Titan are viable alternatives. I know I'll be test driving them and the Ram and Sierra when it comes time to replace my Lariat. And yeah, hopefully by then, Ford will have it's powertrain together.

Edited November 18, 2007 by the_spaniard

[sargranny]

And for the 'comparo' were they equal trucks? Same cab layouts?, both 4x4 or 4x2?, any extra-cost safety options used on the Tundra?

 

Oh, and did ABC mention anything about recalls or CR's non-recommended swing? Or was it just a stroke-off.

 

The Ford Tested was 2004 2WD Super Cab; I believe that was a model change year (The pre 2004 trucks were abysmal)

The Tundra Tested was 2007 Dbl cab (pre 2007 trucks were still good)

 

-so both were basically extended cab models - though I think the dbl cab in the Tundra is a bit bigger.

 

There are no "extra cost" safety options for the Tundra. All of the safety offerengs on the Tundra are standard.

 

The scope of the article was the insurance crash test ratings. Nothing more nothing less. I am not sure how the other topics relate and why you would consider it a stroke off. They were simply reporting independant crash test results used by the insurance industry.

 

I am not convinced that Ford Motor Company does any better at putting safety first than anyone else. How many people died in Pintos and Explorers before they were forced to make changes? I was aware of the Tundra issues when I bought - most vehicles have problems in the first production year. I have had no issues with my truck, built in August. There were PLENTY of recalls on my Explorer, BTW-most of which I heard of on the news long before getting a notice from Ford. I would have considered a Ford if there was one out there that met MY specifications as a customer and there was not. I have been basically happy with my past two Fords. I even wrote letters to Ford and called customer support to see if waiting for 2008 would do that.

 

I am still watching to see what Ford will do with the lighter pick up (Ranger Replacement) that is why I watch this forum {And I still have the Explorer} - I am still hoping for small common rail diesel compact truck that gets kick ass fuel economy and can tow up to 5,000lbs which is all I need. I have posted earlier that Mihindra is supposed to be coming in with one in 2009 but I have concerns about safety in an Indian truck- What about the hydraulic hybrid Ford was working on? That could be interesting etc because city mileage with braking and starting sucks in any truck.

 

I know is a Ford Forum, I just responding to factual inaccurracies in the thread. Just as people buying Tundras need to be aware of stated issues, (bed bounce, tailgate, transmissions (now seems to be resolved), people buying Fords need to be aware of the crash results and lack of safety options for the current models. Everybody gains when you get past the brand loyalty and look objectively at what the competition is doing better and what they are doing worse and push for improvements.

 

I found this link (not comparing vehicles) and it has some good general safety informaiton

http://www.suvsafety.info/carguide.html

Edited November 18, 2007 by sargranny