twintornados Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/trucks...ison/index.html Never would have believed it :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MY93SHO Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 This can't be right! The Toyota has the big bad engine! You can't have a competitive truck without a big bad engine! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydro Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 I love it, finally a test that looks at the little stuff (tailgate step, flat floor, Sync, etc...) rather than just the 1/4 mile times. It's funny though. The F-150 beat the tundra in figure 8, g's, and braking. I guess you can't utilise all the extra power with a shitbox frame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmm55 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Maybe the crappy Toyota Jello frame had something to do with it's ultimate failure, and that's a much more serious shortcoming that 0-60 times. (It's on U-Tube, quite enlightening!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 The only part of the article that matters: FIRST PLACE: FORD F-150Practice makes perfect, and Ford's been practicing its truck-building skills for decades. There's simply more design maturity here. SECOND PLACE: TOYOTA TUNDRA Faster and more fun to drive, but the new world order of trucks is likely to emphasize practical details over driving grins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 FIRST PLACE: FORD F-150Practice makes perfect, and Ford's been practicing its truck-building skills for decades. There's simply more design maturity here. SECOND PLACE: TOYOTA TUNDRA Faster and more fun to drive (until you get into a crash and your seat folds in half) but the new world order of trucks is likely to emphasize practical details over driving grins. Fixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Fixed. Good one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 "And like Clydesdales, the F-150 and Tundra are enormous beasts. Until you get acquainted with them, they seem to maneuver like two Thanksgiving Day Macy's balloons wafting down 34th Street. Which can be amusing. And periodically terrifying. Shoe-horning them down into our subterranean parking dungeon (replete with scraped overhead concrete beams and pokey, leaking water pipes) is perpetually terrifying, requiring a faith in geometry that that would impress Euclid." Really? Was that paragraph really needed? I abhor when someone has to discuss (where the hell they are driving the vehicle thru) or (analogies of how it acts, looks or behaves).... I dont need a visual, I need facts.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 "And like Clydesdales, the F-150 and Tundra are enormous beasts. Until you get acquainted with them, they seem to maneuver like two Thanksgiving Day Macy's balloons wafting down 34th Street. Which can be amusing. And periodically terrifying. Shoe-horning them down into our subterranean parking dungeon (replete with scraped overhead concrete beams and pokey, leaking water pipes) is perpetually terrifying, requiring a faith in geometry that that would impress Euclid." Really? Was that paragraph really needed? I abhor when someone has to discuss (where the hell they are driving the vehicle thru) or (analogies of how it acts, looks or behaves).... I dont need a visual, I need facts.... I didn't understand most of the first few paragraphs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Really? Was that paragraph really needed? I abhor when someone has to discuss (where the hell they are driving the vehicle thru) or (analogies of how it acts, looks or behaves).... I dont need a visual, I need facts.... What's so bad about a little ambiance? It makes the writer feel like they're contributing something a robot couldn't do.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 The only part of the article that matters: That must of really pained the people at MT to pick a Ford over a Toyota. I still think MT is a joke... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomaro Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 No mention of Fords E85 power figures or testing done on E85. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixt9coug Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 No mention of Fords E85 power figures or testing done on E85. They were in NorCal. (ive been past Sears Point recently. GORGEOUS scenery around there) I have yet to see ANY E85 available locally. I can get 114 octane race gas easier than i can get E85. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted May 19, 2009 Author Share Posted May 19, 2009 (edited) No mention of Fords E85 power figures or testing done on E85. Don't ask DC Car Examiner....it doesn't apply to his target market :hysterical: Edited May 19, 2009 by twintornados Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 Too funny! I agree the F150 is clearly the better truck, and not just saying that cause I own won or like Ford. The Tundra is a thin sheetmetal, chrome rusting, bed shaking, noodle frame imposter of a full-size truck. Still don't listen to anything this rag (MT) has to say. Not worth it. But it is funny what Tundra owners and the Tundra sites are saying and complaining about. http://www.tundraheadquarters.com/blog/200...nd-f150-tundra/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 But it is funny what Tundra owners and the Tundra sites are saying and complaining about. http://www.tundraheadquarters.com/blog/200...nd-f150-tundra/ Poor Tundra fans. It's gotta be tough being worst. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packardbob Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 I wonder how they are going to take it when Ford releases new engines in the F-150? They were already beaten with the 5.4, I think a 5.0 or God willing a 6.2 will just piss these Tundra fans off even more (hehe I hope that's what happens anyway). I noticed on some of the comments a few were saying how they pick the truck with the better engine and transmission, obviously he doesnt drive too much above 3000 RPMs (crack), or has seen too many pics of wrecks with the bent seats and steering columns that ended up in the driver crotch (ouch). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted May 19, 2009 Share Posted May 19, 2009 and steering columns that ended up in the driver crotch (ouch). Introducing the International Tundra Soprano Choir. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted May 20, 2009 Share Posted May 20, 2009 (edited) Poor Tundra fans. It's gotta be tough being worst. Well, they might still be ahead of the Titan, when it comes to worst, but that may depend on your likes/dislikes and wants/needs. Personally, I prefer the Titan over the Tundra. Then again I like Nissans much more than Toyota's. I wonder how they are going to take it when Ford releases new engines in the F-150? They were already beaten with the 5.4, I think a 5.0 or God willing a 6.2 will just piss these Tundra fans off even more (hehe I hope that's what happens anyway). I noticed on some of the comments a few were saying how they pick the truck with the better engine and transmission, obviously he doesnt drive too much above 3000 RPMs (crack), or has seen too many pics of wrecks with the bent seats and steering columns that ended up in the driver crotch (ouch). They'll simply say Ford was late to the game on the motor, as they are now. They will either deny or discredit all the bed bounce, center reclining seats and the crotch mounted steering columns. Cause evidently to most Tundra owners, these are all photoshop pics or people destroying the Tundra while at the yard to give Toyota & the Tundra a bad name. Should have seen the huffing and puffing they all did after the pickuptrucks.com review a few months back when the Tundra came in last or second to last. While the Ram & F150 came away with the top two spots. Edited May 20, 2009 by V8-X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.