Toyota Tundra Discussion Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Tundra vs competition, need to know!

67K views 442 replies 62 participants last post by  2010 
#1 ·
Today, as a salesman for Toyota, I was instructed to go to this training on 2014 Tundra. It is a regional meeting with representatives of Toyota are there to give you information on the 2014 Tundra, this is not a sales seminar! Ok, there is 3 parts, all have information that just shocked me and had to pass along.

First, we go over the changes on PowerPoint and just get basic knowledge and papers to have. This stuff is basic info most of you know with packages and standard back-up camera, Entune, and Bluetooth, etc.

Now, we are there to compare the Tundra to the big 3 trucks.
2013 Ram Big Horn edition (Hemi 5.7) Quad Cab
2013 F-150 XLT (EcoBoost 3.5 V6 twin-turbo) Crew Cab
2014 Silverado LT (EcoTec 5.3 V8) Crew Cab
and our: 2014 Tundra SR5& 1794 (both 5.7 V8) Crew Max

Road course:

We had a 20+ mile course of back road, highway, and little city driving. After about 3-4 miles, we would stop and rotate trucks so everyone had a chance to drive and look inside.
My thoughts:
F-150---I owned a 2005 F-150 years ago. The interior of the 2013 did not look much different, very plain. Seats were cheap looking and 'itchy'. People in back seat complained of stiff and non-comfortable seating. Performance was ok, braking was not great (I believe it did not have Electronic Braking Distribution).
Silverado---I was actually researching into purchasing a 2014 Silverado before my Tundra, glad I got Tundra. Silverado audio display is nice, interior is comfortable to me. It transitioned very easily from V4-V8 & vice-versa (cylinder shutdown). I did not feel much torque, or power for that fact. I felt like I was working the truck too hard to just keep up with the pack.
Ram---Did not get a chance to test drive it, since I wanted to test drive SR5, Limited, and 1794 Tundra to see interiors and comfort behind wheel and backseat. But I did take a peak inside plus ride in one on tow course, but back seat is flimsy and not comfortable.
Tundra---1794 I believe I have a crush on. The look is awesome, leather feels of Lexus/genuine quality (and found out later it is from Lexus lol). Rear leg room is amazing, 24 degree tilt in rear seat is largest in class, to give best feel. Drives like a dream. One big thing I noticed. I remember that all the brands (including my old F-150) has the same dash on all trims. Thus you would have some spots for buttons that were not there, or did not function. Tundra, the dash is for that truck, so if you see a spot for a button, there is a button and a function. I personally love that and makes the truck not look so cheap.

Engineering station:
Next, we meet with a rep who explains how and why the Tundra is built like it is. Hino (Toyota branch that makes heavy-duty trucks worldwide) came up with making a truck that will last a very long time and be dependable, since they obviously knew how to make this happen with trucks that pull 30,000 + lbs in some of the roughest places in the world. But Lexus also came in with the Tundra, Tundra all have a Lexus transmission (stated the one that is in the IS430). That was sweet!
Now let's get into specific parts:

10.5" ring gear. Why? Because the size will allow it to be very durable for a long time and have plenty of tow power of course. We all know the 10.5" is the largest in class. But, did you know that the F-250 Power Stroke Turbo Diesel also uses a 10.5" ring gear? So in a 1/2 ton truck, we have the same diameter of that of the 'big' trucks. Even more, the 10.5" ring gear in the F-250 is less in weight, thus less durable and long lasting that the 10.5" ring gear in the Tundra? This is why the Tundra can will 300,000 lbs Challenger Space Shuttle.

Triple Tech Frame. Why? Because the competition all have a solid box frame (even though F-150 will have something very similar to Triple Tech Frame in 2015 F-150 finally), Tundra wants their trucks to last and drive like the day it left the lot. So please do research about the Triple Tech Frame because it is a ton to go over and let's just say, a solid box frame is absolute ancient technology if you plan to pull any heavy loads and do not want your frame to literally stay bent after your load is removed.

4-Piston brake calipers. Why? Well first off, you want to be able to stop your truck (common sense), but let's think about stopping your truck PLUS your load. Tundra has stainless steel brake pistons, nice right! This was probably the most shocking! F-150 brake pistons ARE PLASTIC! LITERALLY PLASTIC! Umm, Ford, the brakes are what save or kill you and multiple others, and your going to allow plastic to stop my truck plus a possible 10k+ in tow! LMAO!

Fixed brake calipers. Why? The competition all use floating brake calipers, which are cheap and serve their purpose, to an extent. Fixed brake calipers allow for a firm braking power and thus they are used in all sport/racing cars (including formula 1).

DOHC, Aluminum block & heads. Why? DOHC-Dual Over Head Cams, obviously to get the most power out of your motor and make it run as efficiently as possible. Aluminum block and heads, because aluminum vents 3 times as fast a steel, thus helping control the components from overheating. VVT-Variable Valve Timing, goes hand in hand with DOHC and being very efficient. How about this, Silverado does NOT have any of these! They have a SOHC motor & cast iron block!

Front wheel bearing. Why? Because, umm, that's self explanatory. Now compared to F-150, its probably 4 times in size, they look like 2 different parts, thus you need the quality.

Heavy duty tow package. Why? Tundra is built to not just last a long time, but last a long time towing constant heavy loads. I have installed tow packages on my Silverado & F-150 I owned, Silverado had 6 bolts and my F-150 had 4. That is nice if you plan to pull minor loads (I only pulled a 15" aluminum bottom boat). The Tundra has 12 bolts that is twice as think that F-150, its really sad in comparison.
Tow course:
All trucks have a trailer attached with 7,500 lbs of water for simulation reasons (was originally 9,000 lbs but the Ram literally was dragging the ground and working the brakes so hard, the brake fluid boiled!)

First let me say, Ram! Really, what geniuses decided to put coilovers on a full-size truck! COILOVERS, THOSE ARE ON MY GIRLFRIEND CAMRY! That is great for a smooth ride, but if you ever wanted to pull anything, that is sad!



I drove the F-150 EcoBoost. Now, the lag for the turbo(s) to kick in, makes pickup very slow and it took until 10+mph to feel some power. When I firmly applied the brakes, they jumped and literally were pushing my foot of the brake. It sucked. We did our 2nd pass with trailer brakes, pickup was still sad. Brakes did the same, since I do not know if it has ABS, but it felt like crap trying to stop.

Silverado I rode in the back. There was no torque in getting off the line. It did not brake too bad compared the Ram & F-150. With trailer brakes, it did the best in distance compared to Ram & F-150.

Ram. First, we could not see 10 feet in front of the truck because the front was raised so high from the tongue weight. I feel sorry for anyone in the other lane if you had to drive it like that. Now, the Hemi had a little torque, but the brakes were garbage. Now with trailer brakes, was much better, but only compared to without.

Tundra. Guys! Torque was great, we did not feel the trailer behind us. We picked up quickly and stopped 10+ feet shorter than the Silverado, WITHOUT OUR TRAILER BRAKES ENGAGED! We did our 2nd pass without trailer brakes again to just be sure. We stopped 13+ feet shorter than the Silverado! WOW, THAT IS IMPRESSIVE!.

Ending:

So if you did not know, there is multiple lawsuits again Ford for the EcoBoost NOT getting the EPA mpg they stated. BTW, EcoBoost is over $2000 additional cost, for.... OH! Obviously not great mpg, so why?!

When it comes to towing, Tundra is rated less than F-150. Now, let's just say that I know that NONE of those trucks there could have pulled the Challenger (300,000 lbs) at all! Not even get the thing moving, since they obviously had problems with 7,500 lbs. But the reason for this is Tundra is rated for the 10,100 lbs towing because that is a number they KNOW the Tundra can handle pulling and stopping for the life of the truck. Remember, the Tundra has 100,000 maintenance free transmission (literally never do anything to the transmission but bring in for fluids to be changed at 100k then keep on trucking for another 100k miles) so that is why Tundra is rated for that. F-150 can pull 13,000+ lbs for a few miles, but if you plan to do that for 100k miles, a major 2 or or more component WILL break. Remember, your plastic brake pistons have to stop that truck!


TEASER ALERT! BY 2015 OR 2016 TUNDRA, WE WILL SEE THEM WITH A 8-SPEED TRANSMISSION!

I know I will remember some other keys points but I just had to vent some of this great information to people who would appreciate it. I feel sorry for the first customer I approached today, I pretty much just vomited all this info onto him, I think his mind almost exploded. He owned a 2013 Tundra already, but he was so impressed, he had to drive one. lol
 
See less See more
#5 ·
In an emergency situation when I have to slam on the brake, it's amazing how quickly 6k lb truck comes to a stop.

Perhaps with 8 speed tranny, there might be 'other' upgrades as well.
 
#7 ·
Funny write up
Not biased or anything hahaha
Any of the other trucks could move the space shuttle like the tundra.
Couldn't feel the trailer with the tundra but the Ram was nearly dragging? Yeah ok, its your story. A 2k trailer can be felt with any half ton.
No need to respond any more but glad you liked the tundra. I like mine too but the others make a comparable truck and in some places are better than the tundra. JMO
 
#10 ·
My brother has the 2011 f150 ecoboost. He just took it to ford, with 40k miles. A speaker doesn't work, rear defrost doesn't work, and the front rotors have hot spots and need to be replaced.

He does mostly city driving. I bring this up because he bought the top of the line warranty and Ford wants 800.00 to fix the rear defrost. Really?? My truck has 100k and ai do twice the towing, and don't have any issues.

The reason I buy Toyota is because I have been let down too many times by the Big 3. If you drive 10k a year, and tow rarely, the others may be good. The guy is spot on with the transmission. It's a beast. I will never go back. It isn't worth the risk!!
 
#16 ·
This mirrors my own experience with Ford. Every little $hit (and big things) in the vehicle breaks, it seems. Sold it for $500 with 70 k on the odometer.

Personally, if Toyota and all other import car makers were to go out of business, I personally would go with GM over Ford. Just my own preference based on my own experience.
 
#11 ·
Thanks for the write up!

It's a little bias which is fine. I just like the durability and reliability.

Buddy of mine worked for Ford and parts on their vehicles are engineered to fail at specific mileage to create parts and labor revenue. Granted this was in the late eighties and early nineties, but I'm sure it holds true still.
 
#12 ·
Lots of bias, lots of not true statements. I've owned both a Tundra and currently f150... and the brakes are better on the f150 with a load and without a load. As always compare apples to apples, XLT is a pretty basic model. 1794 vs King Ranch would be ideal comparison.

The shuttle rig was a simple engineering rig, the total weight actually being towed was around the max tow for the Tundra, so say 9000-10000lbs.

IMO both the f150 and Tundra have reliable powertrains, and the tranny in the f150 is actually the same tranny thats in the SD trucks.

When the Tundra can push 420 torque @ 2500 rpms.... then we'll be talking about some serious towing. Towing with the EB is night and day difference than with the high revving Tundra I had previously.

I like Tundras, I like f150s.... I try and stay level headed and just put the facts out there. Currently the Tundra is behind and needs to play catch up.
 
#14 ·
What was not true in my statements? If you want to call someone a liar, say what the remarks were and what to correct.

You need to prove the Challenger was rigged so that it was only pulling 9k-10,000 lbs, if that was the case, F-150 or someone else could do the same thing, but just will not, hmmm? Now, the Tundra did need help in slowing down the Challenger after the run, but that is understandable. Tundra can pull more than the F-150 sir. Read what SAE J-2807 is, and that is where Tundra gets its number from.

Not only in my opinion did the Ford brakes hop and crappy at braking, but the rotors were over 290 degrees after the tow course, compared to Tundra at 190 degrees. I own a Tundra myself, have had a F-150, F-150 truck felt very heavy & the brakes did not do much in stopping on a dime, that's just one of my complains on that truck.

Lastly, I know the XLT is the almost bottom trim in F-150, which would compare to SR5. I still believe the SR5 interior is much more detailed than the XLT. That is my opinion, but I am pretty sure most would agree it they were put side-to-side.
 
#13 · (Edited)
Just to add a little, I can say the chevy 5.3 is not a great truck motor. If your pulling a small light whatever, works great. The review on the Chevy is probably spot on. Now if you had a Denali with the 6.2L or later on this year chevy is offering it in all the truck line up, watch out. Those motors pull hard. That I do know for a fact.

As far as the tundra, a SC tundra has no factory competition IMO. So for a moderate investment you can have it all and maintain your warranty. Next year, if I feel my CM doesn't tow well enough in the Colorado mountains with my notsolight TJ Jeep and trailer, that will be my next step. Honestly, I don't think it will happen. If I can maintain the speed limit +/- 5 mph, I'm good.

In reality, if we really wanted a tow monster, we would have gone with a diesel and been laughing at all these kinds of threads. However, we wanted a great truck, good value, drive everyday and keeps on ticking with scheduled maintenance. It is just that simple. I just laugh at the TQ numbers some scrap about...420 @ 2500 rpm or 550 at 4k rpm..lol try 800 lbs tq at 1600 rpm from the factory.
I drove my brothers Cummins Dodge last night and forgot already the power and torque those trucks put out. Kinda missed it to be honest. Then I slapped myself and remembered that I was on a test drive after a repair @ 9pm so he can drive back to Montana in a few days. Oh, and he had problems on the way down to Colorado too. I then remembered really quick why I got out of the diesels.
 
#17 · (Edited)
Toyota was given the ENDEAVOUR project purely because they donated the most money to the Museum in Los Angeles. Its because none of the big 3, donated yet alone.. Had the forsight like Toyota to make this for the advantage and film the event...
As for the towing.. Its simple physics.. Yes it weighed 300k.. But you also have to look at the trailer rig. It has alot to do with really good bearings and alot of rock hard tires underneath it to reduce rolling friction.
But I can assure you just because it was 300k lbs... DOES NOT MEAN it was actually pulling it persay.. The amount of force to get the rig rolling was substantually less. I do believe any 1/2 ton truck could do this feat. Goes with the laws of physics, " An object in motion tends to stay in motion."
As for Ford and there 6 speed transmission.. There are quite a few people having problems with there transmissions. And yeah they may put them in there HEAVY DUTY line.. But if there already having problems in there 1/2 ton line...
As for ECOBOOST google it.. Far more complaints than compliments.. But then again it goes with complaints are heard louder than compliments..
Dont get me wrong, I love my tundra... Drove a model year of exact same Ford F150 with 5.4 L.. There was absolutely no comparison. For power and torque.

Brakes were a step behind the tundra.. They werent bad.. If you want bad brakes go to a chevy..
 
#20 ·
You are right, Endeavour space shuttle, my apologies.

I agree about it just being physics, but I do not agree that all the competition could pull/get the momentum going on the shuttle. Ram would bottom out in the rear end, no question. The rest, I am not so sure about, just because they are all 1/2 ton trucks does not mean they can all can handle under the same conditions the same, or people would not shop them.
 
#18 ·
The shuttle tow was cute but only sales people hump that leg. I love my Tundra but it was no amazing feat. For a simple exercise, lock your brakes and try to tow your Tundra by yourself, by hand. Not happening eh. Put it in neutral and let off the brakes, all you have to do is overcome it's inertia and keep a steady speed, piece of cake to move something more than 35 times your weight. Have you never seen those tv shows where ol dude pulls a 200K lb 747 airplane? Meh.
 
#21 ·
I suspect a slight amount of Kool-Aide was consumed BUT it's good to hear that someone who works for Toyota raves about the product they sell. Too many people out there will rave about a P.O.S. vehicle just to make a dime!

I just wish they would make a work harder at improving MPG and WHY IN THE HELL DID THEY REMOVE THE REAR RECLINING SEATS IN THE CREWMAX!! :mad:
 
#22 ·
I can answer that questions. Toyota sent a survey to customers about what they enjoyed the most and what they wanted changed in the design of the 2014 Tundra. 88% (7 out of 8 pretty much) stated they did not like the rear reclining seats. Customers stated they would rather the seat fold up so they could have my room for storage. So now you can put taller boxes/containers in back cab, instead of on top of the back of the seats. Good thing is the rear seat has a 24 degree incline for comfort, compared to competition from 19 to 21 degrees. And this increased the leg & knee space over 1 foot, which I noticed is just insane amount of room
 
#24 ·
OP- Props for having interest in your product. Most sales people just push tin with some basic product knowledge. You joined admitting you knew nothing about the Tundra so you are already growing. Great report but as said there are some inaccuracies that you may want to get straight.

Take the corrections to your account to heart. Pretty educated people on here that eat, sleep, live and breath pickup trucks. Every sales lot needs a cheerleader or 2 for their product. But an educated cheerleader is even more dangerous.

Unless Ram changed something in 14 they never had coil overs in the rear. Coil springs with a shock. They have added airbags as an option. All the half tons you drove have coil overs in the front.

Like I said, take this info to heart. If you spout it on the lot and get called out by a customer who knows more than you, you will probably lose the sale if you can't correct it.
 
#58 ·
great advice!!
 
#27 ·
Thats the point I was trying to pass.. The rig was basically setup as a wagon.. Except the tundra would not be turning this rig. The tundra I believe had 1700lbs of added weight in the bed to aid in traction. Essential a sales ploy.. Cool? Hell yes.. Besides I always rag on relatives anyways saying what the biggest thing theyve hooked on too... Lmao
 
#28 · (Edited)
I love my Tundra and I used to sell cars for a living. All of these "comparison" tests are designed to make the other guy look bad. It could be something as small as tire pressure or it could be the way the other vehicle is optioned out. They are not going to bring a better vehicle then theirs to the fight!

Popular Mech newest issue tests all the new trucks (they didnt have the 2014 Tundra to test at press). Toyota came in 5th just in front of the even more aged Titan. Of course the new Titan has the Cummins V8 option coming so that could get interesting. The top was the new Chevy, then Ford, GMC and Ram. The GMC was outfitted different I think. They did 0-60, 1/4 unloaded and towing with braking and MPG. The Tundra was mid-pack for most of it, surprisingly they had a very long brake result and I have always loved the big brakes on our trucks.

Was their test biased? Could be. There are a lot more Domestic ads vs. Toyota. Just a point of reference. I love my Tundra and would not give it up unless something were to happen to make it no longer usable for us. We even skipped out on a perfect camper for us to our current one to not push the weights too much. I didnt want to buy a Domestic 3/4 or 1T.

Lastly - yes the Ram squats. The used the coil springs for comfort and you can get airbags to help with that. The new Ram has the lowest payload of all the 1/2T trucks now by far. No idea what the tongue weight was on your test trailer but I bet it was close to or over the max rating before needing a WD hitch setup which would eliminate the squat. I see more pickups that are driven as daily commuters and just basic transport than I do for actual work use or towing. I am sure Ram did the coil springs to please those people.

To echo all the others, yes the Shuttle was a pure marketing stunt. Very cool, but I bet the Tacoma could have pulled it or even a car that had decent horsepower. Its just a matter of getting that rig moving and then its easy.

I do like the possible news of the Tundra getting the 8spd. Would love a bigger gas tank too. Towing our camper I am lucky to get 200 miles before my light comes on!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ditchhooker
#29 · (Edited)
The brakes are nearly the same size, within .3 inches of each other. The temperature readings could be true, but it could also be something as simple as trailer brake configuration. I personally tow a 9300lb fifth wheel behind my f150, and it stops pretty damn well. I also tow a boat with surge brakes, and both the Tundra and F150 stop the boat very well. I think the F150 brakes are more sensitive, and that's my personal experience after owning both vehicles.

As for the lag till the turbos kick in, that couldn't be further from the truth. It also depends on the rear end that each truck has. The Tundra has either a 4.10 or 4.30 rear end, where as the f150 and chevy can have anywhere from a 3.09 to a 4.10 depending on how you have it built. Just because you go down to the Ford lot and see an ecoboost doesn't mean it's going to have max tow etc. 420 torque @ 2500 rpms, that's what gets a load moving and the Tundra doesn't make that power that quickly. Again compare apples to apples, a 3.73 or 4.10 f150 will be just as quick as a Tundra if not faster.

The Ecoboost is not an extra $2000 option, it's around the $1000 mark which is similar to the Hemi, or 5.7l Tundra upgrades. The lawsuit is not about the EPA ratings, it's about the misfiring and loss of power from some of the earlier 2011-2012 EB motors, which was resolved for the Model year 2013 and TSBs were released to update the previous year motors.

The Heavy duty payload package is what gives the f150 the edge on the market, which upgrades to 7 lug wheels, load range E tires, heavier duty leaf springs, heavier duty shocks and effectively allows for 1900 - 2300lbs of payload depending on configuration. That's on a supercrew 4x4, 6.5ft bed truck. The new standards that Toyota is using are based on 3 areas while towing and those three areas I have to say the f150 is stronger in. 9600lbs Tundra towing versus 11,300lbs f150 towing. I don't think I'll ever approach that number, because quite frankly that's a hell of a trailer. My 9300lb fifth wheel is probably the heaviest I'll ever tow, outside of my father's Jayco 322FKS which is a good 1400lbs lighter than my fifth wheel. He pulls his with his 2008 Tundra, and I've pulled the same trailer with my F150. His comment after pulling his trailer with my f150 was, wow this is more stable going down the road and the power is outstanding. The low end torque of the EB makes for a very pleasant and high rev free towing experience. Both the 5.7l and EB are great engines, but the EB has the edge ... and it should the Tundra is due for an update.

Here are the two trucks in comparison:




 
#31 ·
I think it has to do alot with how you drive and brake. My wife's highlander went through 3 sets of rotors and pads within 55k. This was her first car out of high school, on the flip side my first car a Volvo 850 had the original pads/rotors at 160k when i got rid of it. Same goes for the previous trucks I have had, maybe I'm just not hard on my brakes, or I'm smoother.
 
#33 ·
Why doesn't Toyota setup some kind of website so you can login with your VIN and find out what real customers like and dislike. Stupid Surveys are a waste. Can't believe they still have such a small gas tank - that has got to be one of the biggest things Toyota missed. I also like the Tundra Frame but the rear flex is excessive. So much that a handful have had the bed contact the cab. I personally wish the rear was more rigid and boxed more but I understand why they designed it that way. There are some weak spots on the Tundra and Toyota did not address it with the 2014. Interior is probably the only thing they addressed but still didn't make it perfect. I will keep my 2010 till they decided to ask "real" consumers what they want and fix the issues. Toyota just had less issues than the others and that is why I bought a Tundra and not the Ford F150.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SamuraiCO
#36 ·
I didn't want to reply to this thread, but I just can't keep my stupid mouth shut on this one.

You sound like an over enthusiastic, kool aid drinking, green pea. going on his 2nd week selling cars. I sold for a few years, and saw hundreds of you guys.

Let me give you some advice. If you want us, and your customers to take you seriously, LEARN about not only what you sell, but what the competition is selling. Not to bash them, but what to focus on with your product.

Today's educated customer most likely knows more about the vehicle they are looking at than you do anyway.

Saying coilovers are for camry's!?! Do you even know what kind of suspension the tundra has???

I sold lots of cars, and I did it because I didn't lie or make shit up. I read about what I sold, and I told people what I knew. Or told them I had no idea if I didn't.

Be honest, be educated, but for gods sakes, don't be a desk jockey's parrot on the shoulder.
 
#59 · (Edited)
more great advice!!

if I went in to this guy when I was shopping the tundra and the Ram I bought, I would have probably left saying, geez typical sales guy.
 
This post has been deleted
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top