F150 5.0 vs Tundra

[blackgrizz550]

Good Morning!

I have a Springdale 260TBL that checks in a 4890 Dry. We have been towing it with a crew cab GMC 1500 with the 5.3. The truck handles it fine but it is very under powered. The truck has 210,000 miles and its time to replace it.

We have 3 kids so I am totally digging the size of the cabs on both the F-150 and the Crew Max Tundra. We keeps vehicles for a long time. Honestly, I like the look of the F-150 and I know it has more features. I would only be interested in the 5.0 Motor with 3.73 rear end. I'm sure its much better on fuel as well.

I am attracted to the Tundra for its durability. I still see a ton of 2007 models on the road that aren't even rusty.

Is the reliability and resale worth more than the features and high tech design of the new F-150?

[Txsurfer]

mudfuel07 wrote:

Txsurfer wrote:

blackgrizz550 wrote:

camp-n-family wrote:
You won't get many responses on here for the Tundra as there aren't nearly as many owners as the big 3. That being said, you also won't find many actual owners with bad things to say about their Tundra either.

You are correct that the Tundra is lacking a lot of the gadgets and gizmos the others offer but you won't find the reliability, resale value and customer satisfaction with them either. Which is worth more to you? And how many of those overpriced gadgets will you really use?

I traded my '07 Tundra crewmax limited for a '14 Ram 2500 Laramie with all the bells and whistles. I've been shopping for another Tundra ever since. The Tundra went into the shop twice in 5 years for unscheduled maintenance. Common AIP pump failure covered under warranty (newer models have been changed) and once for a belt failure (my own fault). I'm never comfortable driving the Ram as it's left me stranded so many times. Spends weeks at a time in the shop, including 4 transmission rebuilds. Most of the gadgets have failed at least once, brakes seized, countless electrical problems, chrome rusting, mirrors failed, seats fell apart (twice)........

Why do I still have the Ram? It's still under warranty and the trade in value is horrendous, last offer was $28k CDN (for a $79k 2 year old truck!) and I can't find a Tundra for a reasonable price. People just don't sell them and if they do they command big $$.

What kind of MPG can be expected with the Tundra? Some say it is horrible, some say not.

My GMC gets 15 city, 17 hwy and 9-10 towing the camper.

2015 CM 4X4 with 295 AT's and leveled. 13 overall / 16 HWY and about 8.5 towing an 8K# toyhauler at 65 over mixed terrian

I got the '16 version and get about the same with my setup except I have 295 MT's. While the drivetrain remains largely unchanged, you can't argue that there are very few problems with them.

You got the bigger tank - count yourself lucky.. this is really my only complaint with whole truck not not a huge deal

[Tyler0215]

Buy for comfortable seats and ride. Both are excellent pickups.

[mudfuel07]

Txsurfer wrote:

blackgrizz550 wrote:

camp-n-family wrote:
You won't get many responses on here for the Tundra as there aren't nearly as many owners as the big 3. That being said, you also won't find many actual owners with bad things to say about their Tundra either.

You are correct that the Tundra is lacking a lot of the gadgets and gizmos the others offer but you won't find the reliability, resale value and customer satisfaction with them either. Which is worth more to you? And how many of those overpriced gadgets will you really use?

I traded my '07 Tundra crewmax limited for a '14 Ram 2500 Laramie with all the bells and whistles. I've been shopping for another Tundra ever since. The Tundra went into the shop twice in 5 years for unscheduled maintenance. Common AIP pump failure covered under warranty (newer models have been changed) and once for a belt failure (my own fault). I'm never comfortable driving the Ram as it's left me stranded so many times. Spends weeks at a time in the shop, including 4 transmission rebuilds. Most of the gadgets have failed at least once, brakes seized, countless electrical problems, chrome rusting, mirrors failed, seats fell apart (twice)........

Why do I still have the Ram? It's still under warranty and the trade in value is horrendous, last offer was $28k CDN (for a $79k 2 year old truck!) and I can't find a Tundra for a reasonable price. People just don't sell them and if they do they command big $$.

What kind of MPG can be expected with the Tundra? Some say it is horrible, some say not.

My GMC gets 15 city, 17 hwy and 9-10 towing the camper.

2015 CM 4X4 with 295 AT's and leveled. 13 overall / 16 HWY and about 8.5 towing an 8K# toyhauler at 65 over mixed terrian

I got the '16 version and get about the same with my setup except I have 295 MT's. While the drivetrain remains largely unchanged, you can't argue that there are very few problems with them.

[otrfun]

camp-n-family wrote:

blackgrizz550 wrote:
What kind of MPG can be expected with the Tundra? Some say it is horrible, some say not.

My GMC gets 15 city, 17 hwy and 9-10 towing the camper.

My Tundra was lifted with 305/55r20 AT tires and mileage wasn't any worse than others. I would get 17mpg hwy, 14mpg city and averaged 9.8mpg towing our 34' 7600lbs trailer. I could probably get better but tend to have a heavy foot on the highway. All hand calculated, even though the computer was pretty accurate. The 5.7l with 4.30 was a bulletproof tow beast. Pulled way better than my current truck.

The 2016 and newer Tundras have a 38gal tank.

Tundra hasn't changed the 5.7 or the tranny since 2007. The EPA ratings have consistently stayed around 13/17 to 14/18 depending on the year, and whether it was a 4x2 or 4x4.

We used to own a 2012 Tundra 5.7. Got 8-10 MPG towing a 7,000 lb. trailer. Under ideal conditions we got: true stop & go city 12-13 MPG; suburbs 14-15 MPG; interstate 17 MPG at 75-80 MPH.

A friend of mine has a 2015 F150 5.0 V8 with an EPA of 15/21. It consistently gets 2-3 better MPG's than our 5.7 Tundra under the same conditions. HP and torque numbers are very similar even though it's a smaller engine.

I've driven a number of F150 3.5 Ecoboosts. They each got the same MPG's our 5.7 Tundra did. Very interesting in light of the fact the Ecoboost's EPA ratings are 3-4 MPG's higher than the Tundra 5.7.

[Txsurfer]

blackgrizz550 wrote:

camp-n-family wrote:
You won't get many responses on here for the Tundra as there aren't nearly as many owners as the big 3. That being said, you also won't find many actual owners with bad things to say about their Tundra either.

You are correct that the Tundra is lacking a lot of the gadgets and gizmos the others offer but you won't find the reliability, resale value and customer satisfaction with them either. Which is worth more to you? And how many of those overpriced gadgets will you really use?

I traded my '07 Tundra crewmax limited for a '14 Ram 2500 Laramie with all the bells and whistles. I've been shopping for another Tundra ever since. The Tundra went into the shop twice in 5 years for unscheduled maintenance. Common AIP pump failure covered under warranty (newer models have been changed) and once for a belt failure (my own fault). I'm never comfortable driving the Ram as it's left me stranded so many times. Spends weeks at a time in the shop, including 4 transmission rebuilds. Most of the gadgets have failed at least once, brakes seized, countless electrical problems, chrome rusting, mirrors failed, seats fell apart (twice)........

Why do I still have the Ram? It's still under warranty and the trade in value is horrendous, last offer was $28k CDN (for a $79k 2 year old truck!) and I can't find a Tundra for a reasonable price. People just don't sell them and if they do they command big $$.

What kind of MPG can be expected with the Tundra? Some say it is horrible, some say not.

My GMC gets 15 city, 17 hwy and 9-10 towing the camper.

2015 CM 4X4 with 295 AT's and leveled. 13 overall / 16 HWY and about 8.5 towing an 8K# toyhauler at 65 over mixed terrian

[dshelley]

blackgrizz550; you ask opinions on this forum and you will receive them. You wish to compare the F150 5.0 and the Tundra 5.7, both very capable and reliable vehicles. Mileage empty will average mid to upper teens and pulling will be around 9 for both trucks. Any difference measured over a year will buy you a 16 ounce coke. Reliability over 200 thousand miles will be about the same. Ford along with GM and Ram have been building working trucks for a long time and they make them very well.
Any measurable differences between the trucks are going to be subjective, ride, ease of entry and exit, beauty, dealer convenience and of course, price. Pick the one you and your family like the best and enjoy it. You won't go wrong with either choice.

[blackgrizz550]

IdaD wrote:
Given that half tons cost as much as heavy duty trucks these days, I'd advise OP to start shopping the heavy duty options. You get a lot more truck for the same money and the only penalty is a little stiffer ride and marginally poorer fuel economy (assuming you get gas). To me a SRW HD is the best balance between daily user friendliness versus capability.

We were floating the idea of a 3/4 ton gas TBH. I picked one up last Saturday and brought it home. My wife took it out for a 15 minute test drive and didn't care for the size of it. She is the one who drives the truck each day and I think the thought of parking it intimidated her. I drive 70 miles a day in a Toyota Sienna. She drives 10 miles a day. If I were the one driving 10 miles each day, it would hands down be a 3/4 ton.

[transferred]

Owned an 08 Tundra TRD 4x4 5.7 w/4.30s. The truck got sold a and a guy around town owns it. It's at 217,000 and it's been fantastically reliable. It was my son's truck and we sold it for two reasons- low payload and the bed bounce on concrete freeways.

Other than those two things they are fantastic trucks and more reliable than what the big 3 can do. Thing is, the big 3 make pickups that can haul big and tow big so they are who get my money.

I just wish my Dodge at 144,000 was as trouble free as the Toyota. Electrical and leaking issues do put a frown on the joy of owning the venerable Cummins.

[IdaD]

Given that half tons cost as much as heavy duty trucks these days, I'd advise OP to start shopping the heavy duty options. You get a lot more truck for the same money and the only penalty is a little stiffer ride and marginally poorer fuel economy (assuming you get gas). To me a SRW HD is the best balance between daily user friendliness versus capability.

[TurnThePage]

I don't understand what you Tundra guys are talking about when you mention reliability and still being on the road after 200,000 miles. Virtually EVERY VEHICLE manufactured today is up to that standard, and then some. Every manufacturer has some lemon years, including Toyota, but over all, they are all darned good vehicles now. I don't see Toyota as being that much better in any way. In fact, I seem to remember some pretty severe rust issues with them. Of the available half tons, it would be #5 on my list, which I wouldn't consider an insult.

[RPreeb]

2012Coleman wrote:

blackgrizz550 wrote:
NOT interested in an ecoboost. My current Chevy has 208,000 miles on it. Looking to put the same amount of years and miles on our next truck. I'm not willing to roll the dice on a turbo charged gas engine for 10 years and 200,000 miles, even if it pulls better than a v8.

My thoughts exactly. The Tundra comes with the 5.7. I have a 2003 4.7 with 260K + miles. Followed the maintenance schedule. Runs like a top. I'm not being hateful towards the Ford people! I'm a former F150 owner myself. The Tundra is built in San Antonio, Texas.

Although, you really need to check the payload especially with the crewmax. Don't rely on tow capacity numbers. It's more about what the truck can carry - payload will be exceeded before reaching tow capacity.

My F-150 was built in Dearborn, MI, so that's a wash. Only other thing I can say is that mine gets ~18 mpg for general purpose driving. That's calculated, not by the readout on the dash. It varies 1-2 mpg by temperature and winds - colder seems to lose mileage, and headwinds here in northeastern CO can seriously affect mileage.

I love the power of the 3.5 EB. The other day I was headed to town and got behind a two car and one semi parade chugging along at 55 (2 lane highway - speed limit 65, and most drive around 70 there). Nobody else was looking to pass, so when I got to a straight open stretch I signaled and tromped it. By the time I passed the lead car (a white-haired seasoned citizen of the female persuasion) I was hitting 110 mph.

Although I've only towed my TT once, and that was only 150 miles from Denver out here to the house in the NE corner of the state, it pulled without even thinking about it. Pulling out of the RV lot I accidentally squeaked the tires, earning a dirty look from my DW. The 3.5 EB engine is not new tech any more so I have no concerns about its durability. Certainly not like the Ram owner who posted above.

[camp-n-family]

blackgrizz550 wrote:

camp-n-family wrote:
You won't get many responses on here for the Tundra as there aren't nearly as many owners as the big 3. That being said, you also won't find many actual owners with bad things to say about their Tundra either.

You are correct that the Tundra is lacking a lot of the gadgets and gizmos the others offer but you won't find the reliability, resale value and customer satisfaction with them either. Which is worth more to you? And how many of those overpriced gadgets will you really use?

I traded my '07 Tundra crewmax limited for a '14 Ram 2500 Laramie with all the bells and whistles. I've been shopping for another Tundra ever since. The Tundra went into the shop twice in 5 years for unscheduled maintenance. Common AIP pump failure covered under warranty (newer models have been changed) and once for a belt failure (my own fault). I'm never comfortable driving the Ram as it's left me stranded so many times. Spends weeks at a time in the shop, including 4 transmission rebuilds. Most of the gadgets have failed at least once, brakes seized, countless electrical problems, chrome rusting, mirrors failed, seats fell apart (twice)........

Why do I still have the Ram? It's still under warranty and the trade in value is horrendous, last offer was $28k CDN (for a $79k 2 year old truck!) and I can't find a Tundra for a reasonable price. People just don't sell them and if they do they command big $$.

What kind of MPG can be expected with the Tundra? Some say it is horrible, some say not.

My GMC gets 15 city, 17 hwy and 9-10 towing the camper.

My Tundra was lifted with 305/55r20 AT tires and mileage wasn't any worse than others. I would get 17mpg hwy, 14mpg city and averaged 9.8mpg towing our 34' 7600lbs trailer. I could probably get better but tend to have a heavy foot on the highway. All hand calculated, even though the computer was pretty accurate. The 5.7l with 4.30 was a bulletproof tow beast. Pulled way better than my current truck.

The 2016 and newer Tundras have a 38gal tank.

[Terryallan]

blackgrizz550 wrote:

camp-n-family wrote:
You won't get many responses on here for the Tundra as there aren't nearly as many owners as the big 3. That being said, you also won't find many actual owners with bad things to say about their Tundra either.

You are correct that the Tundra is lacking a lot of the gadgets and gizmos the others offer but you won't find the reliability, resale value and customer satisfaction with them either. Which is worth more to you? And how many of those overpriced gadgets will you really use?

I traded my '07 Tundra crewmax limited for a '14 Ram 2500 Laramie with all the bells and whistles. I've been shopping for another Tundra ever since. The Tundra went into the shop twice in 5 years for unscheduled maintenance. Common AIP pump failure covered under warranty (newer models have been changed) and once for a belt failure (my own fault). I'm never comfortable driving the Ram as it's left me stranded so many times. Spends weeks at a time in the shop, including 4 transmission rebuilds. Most of the gadgets have failed at least once, brakes seized, countless electrical problems, chrome rusting, mirrors failed, seats fell apart (twice)........

Why do I still have the Ram? It's still under warranty and the trade in value is horrendous, last offer was $28k CDN (for a $79k 2 year old truck!) and I can't find a Tundra for a reasonable price. People just don't sell them and if they do they command big $$.

What kind of MPG can be expected with the Tundra? Some say it is horrible, some say not.

My GMC gets 15 city, 17 hwy and 9-10 towing the camper.

BTW. My 3.73, 5.0, 150, gets 14.5 city, and 20 MPG highway not towing. 10 towing on level ground, no head wind.

[blackgrizz550]

RedRocket204 wrote:
BlackGrizz,

One item you may have left out is will you be bed loading your 2016 Grizzly 700 and pulling your trailer? If so, that weighs heavily on what a 1/2 ton is capable of. Count on the Grizz weighing 800 lbs wet/loaded. Then add your ramps, WDH, family and all other items into the truck and you payload has been diminished by A LOT.

Not sure if your trailer is a toy hauler.

No, the grizzly stays home when we go camping. We were floating the idea of a 3/4 ton gas TBH. I picked one up last Saturday and brought it home. My wife took it out for a 15 minute test drive and didn't care for the size of it. She is the one who drives the truck each day and I think the thought of parking it intimidated her. I drive 70 miles a day in a Toyota Sienna. She drives 10 miles a day. If I were the one driving 10 miles each day, it would hands down be a 3/4 ton.

[RedRocket204]

BlackGrizz,

One item you may have left out is will you be bed loading your 2016 Grizzly 700 and pulling your trailer? If so, that weighs heavily on what a 1/2 ton is capable of. Count on the Grizz weighing 800 lbs wet/loaded. Then add your ramps, WDH, family and all other items into the truck and you payload has been diminished by A LOT.

Not sure if your trailer is a toy hauler.