Ford Vrs Toyota course

[Fireman78]

Hey guys, I am a Dodge guy, but I found this video highly amusing.. watch the Tundras deflection from the rear camera angle... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrieIkkTx7Y remind me not to put a cooler back there.

[brianjwilson]

The Dodge wasn't a whole lot better either. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmSVIXgiuvM

[The Adam Blaster]

I can't watch youtube at work, but are these the vids of the trucks going over the cement corrugated sections set up by Ford to try and show it's strengths vs. the competition?

[4Rescue]

That's the one... Just another Sahmeful attemt by Ford to make their trucks look like the toughest. From waht I remember didn't they un-bolt the bed of the Tundra and do a few other odd-ball things to skew the results??? Sorry, but the Tundra is built like a Tank and those vids are not a very fair representation of either truck. I find it funny that Ford tries to do these kind of things. Like other truck makers are just completely incompotent and ONLY Ford could possibly build a good truck... So stupid.

Cheers

Dave

[Larry]

I wonder if Ford hired someone from Dateline (i.e GM C/K truck fuel tanks) or ABC news (i.e. Toyota ETC) to help them manipulate the filming to their advantage.

I'll double down and say Ford has 500 to 1000 lbs of ballast in the bed near the tailgate. Oldest trick in the book.

[Strizzo]

That's the one... Just another Sahmeful attemt by Ford to make their trucks look like the toughest. From waht I remember didn't they un-bolt the bed of the Tundra and do a few other odd-ball things to skew the results??? Sorry, but the Tundra is built like a Tank and those vids are not a very fair representation of either truck. I find it funny that Ford tries to do these kind of things. Like other truck makers are just completely incompotent and ONLY Ford could possibly build a good truck... So stupid.

Cheers

Dave
you mean like the late night "shows" that GM used to run where they talk about how their trucks are so much better than all the rest in obviously biased tests to make the chevy look better?

and more weight in the truck is supposed to make the chassis flex less?

how so?

[Desert Dan]

very interesting

lot of possible variables

air pressure type and profile of tires spring rates

[ujoint]

Do you really think Ford would jeopardize their reputation to skew the results? It would result in a backlash of BS that no one would benefit from. No automaker today can take chances like that.

[Larry]

and more weight in the truck is supposed to make the chassis flex less?

how so?

Absolutely…

When we do our durability testing on an unladen vehicle it bounces all over the test track and often off the track (Bosch Proving Grounds in New Carlisle, IN to be exact) but once you add ballest (dead weight) to the load box it settles right down. You can actually watch the Hz frequencies go from a buzz to huge lumpy low digits when ballast is added. It is obvious to me the Ford has had ballest added.

Another durability testing thing that seems backassards is vehicles break less componets when fully laden (at GVWR) than unladen. Seems backwards but the data is there to prove it every time.

[Regcabguy]

I read in one of the four wheel rags an account of the Aussies shearing off the axle studs of a new Tundra imported for their opinion. They were disappointed. They are quick,I'll grant you that.

[john101477]

most expensive car commercials in the world? transformers, what a great commercial though. everyone tries to steer folks in there direction.

[brianjwilson]

I don't know, I work for a coal mining company and their trucks are driving off road all day every day. They don't use any Dodge trucks but they have Chevy, Totota and Ford trucks.
While driving their tundras on washboard roads, they really do shimmy bad like that. Over 20 mph they get scary. They are fast and the interiors are quiet but the entire chassis twists like a red vine and the rear end hops around like crazy.
They Chevy trucks are the same way only with a lot more squeaks and rattles. If you watch in the mirror you worry about the bed bouncing right off the truck.
But the ford trucks are so much more solid. Less shimmy, less shake and they can travel comfortably at higher speeds.
Maybe if you only occasionally go off road you wouldn't notice, but to me it says a lot about the strength and long term durability seeing each truck performs off road every day.
So I don't believe the test is fixed. Maybe you have seen test about the torsionally rigidity of the f150 frame over other half tons? Or that must have been fixed too?
Each truck has it's own strengths and weaknesses and people will buy what they like. But my personal experience shows that those tests are fairly accurate in the real world.
I'm not trying to bash any particular manufacturer, these are just my observations.

[Strizzo]

Absolutely…

When we do our durability testing on an unladen vehicle it bounces all over the test track and often off the track (Bosch Proving Grounds in New Carlisle, IN to be exact) but once you add ballest (dead weight) to the load box it settles right down. You can actually watch the Hz frequencies go from a buzz to huge lumpy low digits when ballast is added. It is obvious to me the Ford has had ballest added.

Another durability testing thing that seems backassards is vehicles break less componets when fully laden (at GVWR) than unladen. Seems backwards but the data is there to prove it every time.
i understand what you're saying, but that is not what is being shown, they're not showing how the rear end isn't skipping all over the place, they're showing how little the chassis and bed area are flexing.

i find it interesting that you say you're sure that the test is rigged and theres no way that the ford truck can just be better, especially since the ford was the only truck with a fully boxed frame and outboard mounted shocks in the test.

i suppose if you saw a comparison between a 4 wheel independent suspended suv and a live axle/ ifs truck, that test must have been rigged too eh?

[R_Lefebvre]

I'm sorry, but there's a whole lot of Toyota Fanboys around here. The test was not rigged. The F-150 was that much better than the Tundra. The Tundra frame was a weakling compared to the F-150.

Check out this video, which was done in front of media who were able to see what was going on. Just look at the frame comparison side by side! Channel vs. Fully Boxed. Skip ahead to about 3 minutes if you want to get to the good stuff where they actually start twisting the frames.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRfE_XAk2mE

Guess it's all smoke and mirrors too eh? I don't know how anybody could watch that, or actually crawl under a Toyota and Ford and look at the frame themselves, and not see how frame strength is a huge factor here.

Even other Toyota Fanboys acknowledge this problem, and don't think the Ford video was "faked", but they do think it may have been exaggerated. They know the problem is real because they experience "Bed Bounce" on paved freeways!

http://www.tundraheadquarters.com/blog/2007/08/30/toyota-tundra-bed-bounce-issue-our-position/

I know it's hard for some to believe, but Toyota doesn't always build the best-in-class vehicles.

[Schattenjager]

My name is Don and I'm a Toyota Man.

Lets start by saying I am very proud of Ford for being the only non-government owned car company based in the USA! I'm sure they were able to avoid the reaper by building cool cars and trucks with great reliability at affordable prices.

My 2005 Tacoma was totaled because of a puny frame. Insurance adjusters commented on how many total losses they were seeing on otherwise repairable Tacos. Made me very sad to learn this. I know there is a night and day difference in the Tundra and Tacoma vs an F150, but I think a new Toyota SOP is surfacing.

As for a little older stuff - I've never seen a 1997 Ford or any American made rig look as nice nor run as well nor holds value like a Land Cruiser. Different times, no?

[AmericaOverland]

Absolutely…

When we do our durability testing on an unladen vehicle it bounces all over the test track and often off the track (Bosch Proving Grounds in New Carlisle, IN to be exact) but once you add ballest (dead weight) to the load box it settles right down. You can actually watch the Hz frequencies go from a buzz to huge lumpy low digits when ballast is added. It is obvious to me the Ford has had ballest added.

Another durability testing thing that seems backassards is vehicles break less componets when fully laden (at GVWR) than unladen. Seems backwards but the data is there to prove it every time.


It's the inertia of weight. it takes more power or force to move something heavier in the same direction at the same speed.

[The Adam Blaster]

Even other Toyota Fanboys acknowledge this problem, and don't think the Ford video was "faked", but they do think it may have been exaggerated.

To be honest, I would tend to agree with this sentiment. Of course Ford is going to design a course with obstacles that suit it's vehicle's strangths the best. I don't think this should be surprsing at all, it seems like a normal thing to do when you are selling a product.
When I first saw the video, sometime last year in the fall I think... The one thing I thought of was "What would happen if they changed the spacing on those blocks ever so slightly?"
It's likely a specific frequency that favours the Ford, and if it were changed by a few centimeters, maybe the Chevy would look better, or the Dodge? Who knows...
But, every year one of the Big 3 seem to re-engineer their truck line, and things have been generally getting better, well, except for the price of course. :Wow1:
10 years ago, what was the average towing capacity of a 1/2 ton?
Today, it's hovering right around 10,000 pounds. ;)

[R_Lefebvre]

They didn't build that course just for that test. That is the Silver Creek test track. It's been around a while, and they've actually been shooting those videos for a few years. Ford (as do all OEM's) is constantly reverse engineering everybody else's offerings. Notice that the spacing of the bumps changes, speed is held constant. Therefore the tests sweeps a range of frequencies, not just one.

The Ford, in this case, is just flat out better.

[El Guapo]

That's the one... Just another Sahmeful attemt by Ford to make their trucks look like the toughest. From waht I remember didn't they un-bolt the bed of the Tundra and do a few other odd-ball things to skew the results??? Sorry, but the Tundra is built like a Tank and those vids are not a very fair representation of either truck. I find it funny that Ford tries to do these kind of things. Like other truck makers are just completely incompotent and ONLY Ford could possibly build a good truck... So stupid.

Cheers

Dave
-er NO. simply put, no. that is a standard durability course and the trucks were tested in their showroom condition. i think maybe, just maybe some people have drunk a little too much of the Toyota Kool Aid....

that is a real test and a rigorous test that the f150 must pass. "unbolting the bed" sure! and it didn't fall off the c section frame because they must have bungee corded it in right?

oh, i got another one, maybe Ford and GM have developed a satellite based beam that jams the electronic signal on Toyotas' accelerator pedals? (i'm sure this one will be a next claim from the die hard Toyota fans....)

[Bella PSD]

oh, i got another one, maybe Ford and GM have developed a satellite based beam that jams the electronic signal on Toyotas' accelerator pedals? (i'm sure this one will be a next claim from the die hard Toyota fans....)

OK, I needed a good laugh....


i think maybe, just maybe some people have drunk a little too much of the Toyota Kool Aid...

I had a 2000 Taco that was a buy back because the frame rusted in half. I was drinking the Toyota cool aid that day, $14K of it. To bad really, it was a nice truck. But it was crushed after the buy back.

[R_Lefebvre]

And in other news... Today Toyota announced the expansion of the Tundra frame rust recall...

[Bella PSD]

Is the Tundra frame rust recall about the same as the Tacoma rusty frame buy back?

[ignorant]

Is the Tundra frame rust recall about the same as the Tacoma rusty frame buy back?

more or less.

If they can't fix it, they'll buy it for 1.5x blue book.

[bronconut]

Given that the test wasn't the best but go to any oil field town and look at the trucks that are out in the field everyday and Fords are what you will see 90% of the time.

[ignorant]

Given that the test wasn't the best but go to any oil field town and look at the trucks that are out in the field everyday and Fords are what you will see 90% of the time.

I'm going to preface what I'm going to say with.. I owned a ranger for a while and it was tougher than snot. I'd get another in a heartbeat. But, you need to understand that any vehicle purchased by a company is purchased because it is the cheapest(that can do the job, OK) and not necessarily the best.

[El Guapo]

I'm going to preface what I'm going to say with.. I owned a ranger for a while and it was tougher than snot. I'd get another in a heartbeat. But, you need to understand that any vehicle purchased by a company is purchased because it is the cheapest(that can do the job, OK) and not necessarily the best.


i'd differ from your opinion in that you must define what is "the best" first.

To me (and i believe also for most or all companies maintaining fleets of work vehicles) the best = lowest priced highest performance package (or in other words, best value for the money invested). This translates to what i assume we would all want on a personal vehicle as well eh?

So if someone insists that toyota trucks are better; then they are biased in only wanting a portion of what's best. be it cost or performance OR, in my opinion; simply the brand name. To me, as you may deduct from my posts; toyota vehicles (including the high end ones) simply do not do it. i don't like their styling, their layout; their ergonomics, etc. i do however, acknowledge that they DID have higher quality (KEYWORD: DID) than most other american brands. But as time has shown this is NOT the case anymore. They are plagued with quality issues and this to me is just natural for the industry in which they are a part of. In the past they did not have a full selection of products like GM or Ford do. As they became the largest vehicle manufacturer in the world, well guess what - they are facing larger problems. This is simply put and comes as no surprise.

[bronconut]

I'm going to preface what I'm going to say with.. I owned a ranger for a while and it was tougher than snot. I'd get another in a heartbeat. But, you need to understand that any vehicle purchased by a company is purchased because it is the cheapest(that can do the job, OK) and not necessarily the best.

Might be the case for general fleet type trucks but I'm guessing you've never seen trucks out in the oil field? Oil field trucks are a different breed and they are not picked because they are the cheapest the company's pick the best for the job at hand and right now those tend to be made by Ford. Next week I'll take some pictures of your typical oil field truck and post them up.

[ignorant]

Might be the case for general fleet type trucks but I'm guessing you've never seen trucks out in the oil field? Oil field trucks are a different breed and they are not picked because they are the cheapest the company's pick the best for the job at hand and right now those tend to be made by Ford. Next week I'll take some pictures of your typical oil field truck and post them up.

after having worked in a few corporate purchasing groups, I'm going to tell you they're picked because they're cheap.

The purchasing groups are rated by how much money they spent and usually the cost to repair the vehicles don't hit their metrics.

I'm not trying to argue with you, just provide a different perspective. I don't think any toyota available in the country would do the job. I don't doubt the fords are stout. I'm looking for a superduty myself.

btw.. there was this company converting old dodge M37's with 4bt's for oilfield service.

[ignorant]

i'd differ from your opinion in that you must define what is "the best" first.

To me (and i believe also for most or all companies maintaining fleets of work vehicles) the best = lowest priced highest performance package (or in other words, best value for the money invested). This translates to what i assume we would all want on a personal vehicle as well eh?

So if someone insists that toyota trucks are better; then they are biased in only wanting a portion of what's best. be it cost or performance OR, in my opinion; simply the brand name. To me, as you may deduct from my posts; toyota vehicles (including the high end ones) simply do not do it. i don't like their styling, their layout; their ergonomics, etc. i do however, acknowledge that they DID have higher quality (KEYWORD: DID) than most other american brands. But as time has shown this is NOT the case anymore. They are plagued with quality issues and this to me is just natural for the industry in which they are a part of. In the past they did not have a full selection of products like GM or Ford do. As they became the largest vehicle manufacturer in the world, well guess what - they are facing larger problems. This is simply put and comes as no surprise.

how did you read that I was saying toyota trucks were best? I just have some experience in corporate purchasing, and purchasing dosen't always make the best choices.

However, you immediately jumped to conclusions and jumped down my throat so, thanks for that. I'll make sure I highly regard your opinion in the future.

[bronconut]

after having worked in a few corporate purchasing groups, I'm going to tell you they're picked because they're cheap.

The purchasing groups are rated by how much money they spent and usually the cost to repair the vehicles don't hit their metrics.

I'm not trying to argue with you, just provide a different perspective. I don't think any toyota available in the country would do the job. I don't doubt the fords are stout. I'm looking for a superduty myself.

btw.. there was this company converting old dodge M37's with 4bt's for oilfield service.

I always thought Unimogs would work well but the oil field guys like to drive fast although a lot are being tracked now via GPS units. We put a lot of slightly larger tires on like 255/80/17 the drivers never really cared about the speedo being off but now that they are being watched they want the sppedo's dead on.

[ignorant]

I always thought Unimogs would work well but the oil field guys like to drive fast although a lot are being tracked now via GPS units.

company truck, right? HA!!!:sombrero::sombrero:

[El Guapo]

how did you read that I was saying toyota trucks were best? I just have some experience in corporate purchasing, and purchasing dosen't always make the best choices.

However, you immediately jumped to conclusions and jumped down my throat so, thanks for that. I'll make sure I highly regard your opinion in the future.

well sorry if my reply ruffled your feathers. if you read it carefully you'll note i was generalizing precisely to not pin it on YOU. my response is aimed at the general public that refuses to see the issues that this company is currently having. If you consider yourself to be part of that general public well then there's not much i can do.....

and if that wasn't clear i'll state it again . my reply is generalized and not aimed at you singularly. AND it is still my opinion. you don't have to like it and i am not changing it.

[bjowett]

Stiffness dosn't necessarily equal strenth. What Toyota has done with recent frames is move to a reinforced C chanel. It's a cheap way to make a strong frame. Most 3/4 and 1 ton trucks use them for the same reason. Personally, I would rather have a boxed frame... so that's what I did to my truck.

Now, the Tundra's drivetrain is overbuilt, plain and simple. There isn't another 1/2 ton that approaches it. We can talk more about this if you would like.

Ford's quality has been improving, and this is good... and while they currently match Toyota in initial quality, I still don't agree that they have the long term durabilty of a Toyota.

[nobodyspecial]

What about the previously mentioned frame rust issues?

[ignorant]

What about the previously mentioned frame rust issues?

they buy them back at 1.5x value. If someone was smart, they'd buy one off an unspsecting owner for little value and then sell it to a dealership...

Pr0fit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ignorant]

well sorry if my reply ruffled your feathers. if you read it carefully you'll note i was generalizing precisely to not pin it on YOU. my response is aimed at the general public that refuses to see the issues that this company is currently having. If you consider yourself to be part of that general public well then there's not much i can do.....

and if that wasn't clear i'll state it again . my reply is generalized and not aimed at you singularly. AND it is still my opinion. you don't have to like it and i am not changing it.

Yeah, sorry my response was a bit harsh as well. No hard feelings. You get kinda snappy when you got a 1 year old who likes to get up at 4am everyday.

[beast1210]

I'm sure they all handle better than my 77' scout, not much high tech anything on her, but i have a feeling my scout will still be on the road a time.

[Fireman78]

I love how this thread evolved.. thanks. I would put my Power Wagon up against ANY of these trucks in a rough and tumble, till the wheels fall off, pure off road/ work truck test. Ford, Toyota, even standard Dodge trucks couldn't compete.. that is a promise. Nobody wants to take on a challenge like that. I am not being brand specific here.. I've owned just about every brand around. I work in the woods almost everyday and can say this 100%.

[R_Lefebvre]

Stiffness dosn't necessarily equal strenth. What Toyota has done with recent frames is move to a reinforced C chanel. It's a cheap way to make a strong frame. Most 3/4 and 1 ton trucks use them for the same reason. Personally, I would rather have a boxed frame... so that's what I did to my truck..

No, it's just cheap. A C-frame can't have the same strength/weight as a box section because of the way the flanges buckle when under a bending load. Boxes and I beams can't do that.

You can make a C-frame strong, it just takes a lot more metal, which isn't a big deal for larger trucks.

[nickw]

I love how this thread evolved.. thanks. I would put my Power Wagon up against ANY of these trucks in a rough and tumble, till the wheels fall off, pure off road/ work truck test. Ford, Toyota, even standard Dodge trucks couldn't compete.. that is a promise. Nobody wants to take on a challenge like that. I am not being brand specific here.. I've owned just about every brand around. I work in the woods almost everyday and can say this 100%.

Any of 'these' trucks, I think there was mention of a M37 and Unimog, so I would take that bet. Your confidence is astounding, considering your rig is only 4 years old...

Whats the big deal about frames anyways, how often do they break? Sure there is the odd rear end of a Tacoma, but that is really only an issue when hanging heavy bumpers/tires/cans off the back.

IMO, durability/reliability is more associated with the complicated systems of a vehicle, e.g. drivetrain.

[El Guapo]

Now, the Tundra's drivetrain is overbuilt, plain and simple. There isn't another 1/2 ton that approaches it. We can talk more about this if you would like.

Ford's quality has been improving, and this is good... and while they currently match Toyota in initial quality, I still don't agree that they have the long term durabilty of a Toyota.

i would LOVE to hear the analysis of this statement- please...please start with the durability one of the F series all the way back to its origins in comparison to the Tundra's.

[Fireman78]

Trust me you don't want none of this... :sombrero:

[Fireman78]

Well, it would have been a much cooler response above if I could have got the entire picture in there... LOL

[FreeManDan]

Well then get it in there or I kill these cute kittens

[Fireman78]

I can't figure out how to make the picture fit.. Anybody know of a good picture program that makes it easy to change the size?

[Saline]

Sometimes this board strays towards other 4x4 BB banter. Sad

My dog is bigger than your dog.

[UK4X4]

mm Oilfield......mmm lets see i work for the largest oilfield service company in the world ...



Primary concern safety systems 4 wheel abs dual airbags roll cage
Second parts availability
3rd cost.

In the US my company - uses ford mainly, but does have other trucks.

In venezuela ford again - they had a veno factory and parts, we even had to buy the larriot leather models just to get the second airbag !, no other truck supplier in the country had the safety features required by our policies

In the middle east - all toyota no tacomas though- hilux-cruiser then a jump to Dynas.

Death while driving was the highest fatality type in the company- they spend millions every year on vehicles - GPS tracking and journey management.

The last two years heart attacks beat driving .......now I have to have a full medical every year !

[Fireman78]

Whats sad to me is how so many people have zero sence of humor.

[bjowett]

i would LOVE to hear the analysis of this statement- please...please start with the durability one of the F series all the way back to its origins in comparison to the Tundra's.

Well, I'll quote you "DID have higher quality". Why discuss all the way back to the F series origins, when you have already conceded the point that in your opinion, up until very recently, Toyota made better vehicles? The Tundra hasn't been around very long in the big picture, but statistically it has less problems than Ford in the short and long term, and the further back you go, the better it looks. Take a trip over to JD Power, or any of the others, and check the numbers.

If you want to get into comparing the current generation Tundra and F150.... let's do it.

[Fireman78]

HEy guys.. at least most if not all on this forum have the ability to buy/build pretty much want we want, go where we want to, ect.. Ain't life great? (for some people anyways)....... lots of "less" in this world.. :26_7_2:

[baca327]

Whats sad to me is how so many people have zero sence of humor.
Quoted for truth... :victory:

HEy guys.. at least most if not all on this forum have the ability to buy/build pretty much want we want, go where we want to, ect.. Ain't life great? (for some people anyways)....... lots of "less" in this world..
Very true having a job frequenting third world countries really makes you appreciate everything we have here. I will admit I do take things for granted sometimes but hey were all human.:bigbossHL:

[bjowett]

HEy guys.. at least most if not all on this forum have the ability to buy/build pretty much want we want, go where we want to, ect.. Ain't life great? (for some people anyways)....... lots of "less" in this world.. :26_7_2:

You make a good point, and I agree, we are all VERY lucky. All vehicles are fun, stock or built. I like them all and don't fault anyone for being into into a specific make.

[El Guapo]

Well, I'll quote you "DID have higher quality". Why discuss all the way back to the F series origins, when you have already conceded the point that in your opinion, up until very recently, Toyota made better vehicles? The Tundra hasn't been around very long in the big picture, but statistically it has less problems than Ford in the short and long term, and the further back you go, the better it looks. Take a trip over to JD Power, or any of the others, and check the numbers.

If you want to get into comparing the current generation Tundra and F150.... let's do it.
DID have better quality - as in vs today's quality of the same product. and JDpower- well let's see what do they say? and for which model year(s) and how many months in service at what R/1000? all these dimensions i assume you have data showing the tundra is better than the F-series. let's discuss them. share your data.:coffeedrink:

[I Leak Oil]

I wouldn't buy either truck as the cooler of beer in the back wouldn't be enjoyed for hours after you arrive at the camp site! To you guys that are new to the brand feud theme, it's Ford vs. Chevy, not Ford vs. Toyota, especially since we all know Toyota doesn't make real trucks.....
:peepwall:

[ignorant]

vehicle brand feud debates are akin to the good old 2nd grade, "My dad can beat up your dad." I'd like to think it's all in good fun and if we met a stranded vehicle on the trail, no matter the brand, we'd all pitch in and help......

btw.. Haven't you heard, Mahindra will rule everyone soon. :truck::elkgrin:

[bjowett]

Here's a smattering of your requested JD Power.

2010
http://www.jdpower.com/autos/ratings/dependability-ratings-by-category/large-pickup

2009 long term
http://www.jdpower.com/autos/car-photos/VDS/Trucks/2009

2007 long term
http://www.jdpower.com/autos/articles/2007-VDS:-Pickups-and-Vans

2005
http://usedcars.about.com/od/research/ig/Most-Reliable-2005-Models/Toyota-Tundra-2005.htm

2006 long term
http://money.cnn.com/2006/08/08/autos/jd_power_dependable_cars/index.htm

I'll get to the other posts shortly...

[El Guapo]

smattering? hardly. you post a bunch of websites that are flanked by Toyota ads. your "2010" numbers are the closest thing to being vague.

show me your so called statistical proof. compare a to b the R/1000 of whichever amount of months or years in service ACROSS the complete lineup and complement it with the production volumes. then we can discuss the validity of the mickey mouse websites you replied with...

[bjowett]

Smattering - Superficial or piecemeal knowledge. Which is what I provided by posting those links.

Nice distraction by mentioning the Toyota ads, but they have nothing to do with the info posted. Next month they'll be Ford, or Chevy... or?

The only statistical proof is supplied by places like JD Power, Consumer Reports, etc. You know that, and I know that. Don't side step by trying to make it look like I came into this claiming I personally went out and counted up all the problems, then crunched the data myself, or have plans to. They do it, then they publish it. If you want to drop back there, we can bring up your DID make better comment. How do you know Toyota DID make better vehicles?.... They (JD) add up problems per 100 vehicles to figure reliability. When that is done, the most reliable large pick up is the 1st generation Tundra. Please don't ask me again for the numbers, I don't have them, never did, never will. Places like JD Power do, so if you are quite serious about this discussion, go spend some time actually reading at those links. You might even turn up a nice little rebuttle.... like the 2007 Tundra that was horrible for initial quality.

[ignorant]

repairs per thousand are generally closey guarded industry numbers. Depending on the company posting actual numbers can get you fired. Come on man... Thats industry propretary informantion.

[El Guapo]

"The only statistical proof is supplied by places like JD Power, Consumer Reports, etc. You know that, and I know that. Don't side step by trying to make it look like I came into this claiming I personally went out and counted up all the problems, then crunched the data myself, or have plans to. They do it, then they publish it." Then all your claims are based on hearsay, or not?- my friend, where i come from that and $0.25 gets you a cup of coffee....

"If you want to drop back there, we can bring up your DID make better comment. How do you know Toyota DID make better vehicles?.... "
I would if i could but as you state - I don't have the numbers- so i guess that makes us even in posting opinions and trying to make them pass as fact?..

"They (JD) add up problems per 100 vehicles to figure reliability. When that is done, the most reliable large pick up is the 1st generation Tundra. Please don't ask me again for the numbers, I don't have them, never did, never will. "
what happened to your statistically better claim then? 100 vehicles?

"Places like JD Power do, so if you are quite serious about this discussion, go spend some time actually reading at those links. " I actually did, and not surprisingly enough- the definition of the top achiever award recipient is he who collects more of the :"Among the best" marks. NOTE:It does NOT read THE BEST of them all. I wonder why that would be...gee- maybe perhaps due to, non statistical correlation? And for the record: i don't believe everything i read, especially on the internet....
"You might even turn up a nice little rebuttle.... like the 2007 Tundra that was horrible for initial quality." not really- as that would be simply an opinion w/o data basis....

[El Guapo]

since we're so keen on posting 3rd party info here: enjoy the vids on this site (http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/f150/?searchid=426441|28121033|205363816) and please pay close attention to the fine print at ~0:01 into the "Durability" vid....

[Larry]

Is it just me or somewhere along the line did we seem to have lost track of the value of this thread???? There are sites devoted to letting people duke out whose vehicle brand of choice is better. I didn’t think this is one of them.

I thought this forum was for discussions specific to the modification and service of Hummers, GM and Ford large and mid-sized vehicles for Expedition Travel….well that is what the tread title says anyway. This thread keeps floating to the top like a stinky dead fish. Every reader is now dumber for reading at least the last 5 pages of this crap. Go to pickup.com or pirate4x4 to duke this out.

Show us your projects, your dreams, your get away rigs…regardless WHAT brand they are! We are all idea hungry here.

Someone please stop it and lock it, as the value and entertainment value is gone….long gone.

[bjowett]

... floating to the top like a stinky dead fish. Every reader is now dumber for reading at least the last 5 pages of this crap. Go to pickup.com or pirate4x4 to duke this out.

Show us your projects, your dreams, your get away rigs…regardless WHAT brand they are! We are all idea hungry here.

Someone please stop it and lock it, as the value and entertainment value is gone….long gone.

I agree, and apologize for getting into this. I'm out of this discussion.

Here's my current project. http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29091

El Guapo, let's see your's.

[El Guapo]

I agree- no more beating of the chest on this post. Nice truck by the way. Are the wheels that color oem or did you powdercoat them? i have always been partial to blackened wheels!

as for my project - well it was more of a learn as i go over the past 6+ years. i resto-modified a 1974 Early Bronco for mild off road /camping with the kids.

pics of how it looks now :

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_oDDPhJsFED4/SrbfY-J1hJI/AAAAAAAAA08/GBVdPi3Fr64/s800/045.JPG

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_oDDPhJsFED4/SrbfOqUhyUI/AAAAAAAAA0o/GqqfNloZlMo/s800/040.JPG

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_oDDPhJsFED4/SrbfbFXy-nI/AAAAAAAAA1A/xr1hq935lAg/s800/046.JPG

[Bella PSD]

I want that Bronco!!:drool: How about a shot "before"?

Louie

[805gregg]

The Dodge wasn't a whole lot better either. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmSVIXgiuvM

There are no more Dodge trucks, the management co. that took over Benz Chrysler, sold the truck line and the Ram name to Tata of India. No more Dodge Bros. Trucks. I have a good feeling about Tata though, they at least reintroduced the 12' and 14' 3500 and 4500 Cummins work trucks. Always been the best.

[Larry]

There are no more Dodge trucks, the management co. that took over Benz Chrysler, sold the truck line and the Ram name to Tata of India. No more Dodge Bros. Trucks. I have a good feeling about Tata though, they at least reintroduced the 12' and 14' 3500 and 4500 Cummins work trucks. Always been the best.

Como say what?? Where do you get your info?

[Larry]

Bjowett and El Guapo,

You guys have great looking rigs! That Tundra is the best build I have seen yet on a late model Tundra. Love the transfercase rework. Somehow I missed that thread when you started it back in July. I wouldn’t mind building a late Tacoma but ditch the electric shift transfercase for a FJ manual shift.

El Gaupo,

Nice Bronco! That is a very rare rig in Detroit. I have a college buddy that works for Ford that has a well built red ‘75. He lived in Dearborn up until a couple years ago. He lived near Greenfield and Ford Rd. Maybe you saw it around at Woodward or Autoramma.

I served my automotive industry career bootcamp duty in Detroit as well but with GM. Lived in Rochester Hills from 1997-2001.

[bjowett]

Those are rattle canned factory wheels... temporary until some form of beadlock finds it's way on there. Zynolyte produces great spray paint, you can get some nice results with it.

LOVE the early Bronco! They are probably one of my favorite Ford vehicles. Nice build.

Larry, diggin' the K series. Very nice.