Toyota Tundra Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

2007 Model Year half-ton pickup structural comparison. SHOCKING!

18K views 136 replies 41 participants last post by  TS Support  
#1 ·
#3 ·
Nice. Frames are made to flex by the way. I seem to recall seeing a semi truck Much larger and stronger then both the F150 and the Tundra flex a whole lot more then both shown on that video. Also the 2 frames are built completly different. Working for a body shop for years I have seen that fully boxed is not always better Hence a semi and super duty being chanel (Plus every ford made previous to this newest) and Chanel is not best. I think if in Toyotas research they found that the Boxed frame was superior in all ways they would have stuck with it. The early toyota trucks and suvs all had boxed frames. T100 as well. So I am sure they did research on it.

Bed bounce is a nice one. I drive on roads like that all the time. I was following a Titan this morning and noticed alot of that going on in his bed. Luckily I drive a 1st gen Tundra and my bed was good.

Thanks for the links but we have already seen them

and thanks for "Bringing the Truth" which is by posting Ford propaganda. I think a 3rd party would be the way to go when bringing the truth.

But the F150 is a nice looking truck. I saw a really nice Roush one just the other day.
 
Save
#6 ·
Frames flex, the Tundra frame really flexes.

I've got a '95 T100 Xtracab with the 5VZ-FE sitting in the driveway right now, fully boxed frame front to rear and it has tons of chassis flex/deflection.

No, this isn't a matter of boxed vs. C-channel, this is a matter of basic frame construction. Toyota went cheap on the new Tundra in many ways, the frame was one of them. Notice the 4-star crash test results from NHTSA.

Ford built a much better full-size truck frame than Toyota, that much is obvious. If Toyota skimped out on the frame, what else did they go cheap with?

Even look how the rear shocks mount to the frame on the half-tons, Ford does it in a far superior way to Toyota.
 
#7 ·
Then we have this. If it's been on before sorry. These could go back and forth all day.

YouTube - Tundra vs F150
Pretty funny, pulling a non-LS F-150 against a Tundra. It's only a matter of traction, it has nothing to do with long term durability or build quality unlike the videos I posted above.

Besides, the Tundra powertrain (which has nothing to do with the results of this video FYI) is one area Toyota definitely didn't skimp out. With the exception of the 5.7L cam mishaps, the 5.7 is best half-ton V8 currently in production. Without question.

That doesn't change the fact the Tundra has a gelatin-like chassis.
 
#8 ·
I wonder why they didn't do the same test loaded with 1000 lbs or so of weight in the bed? What does a test with an empty bed prove for a truck?? They probably tried, but couldn't get the Ford going 28 mph with 1000 lbs in its bed, AHAHAHAHAHAHA :clown:

For real though, I bet with a loaded bed the Ford was all over the road due to the fact that the frame won't give any. Also, the Tundra has laterally mounted rear leaf springs to help out with lateral stability while the rear axle is loaded.

One other thing. I drive an '07 F-150 Ext. Cab everyday as my company vehicle. The bed shakes worse on the highway than my Tundra. Its simply too stiff. One thing they don't mention in the video is how bad the B pillar-less doors shake while driving over rough terrain...
 
Save
#9 ·
For real though, I bet with a loaded bed the Ford was all over the road due to the fact that the frame won't give any. Also, the Tundra has laterally mounted rear leaf springs to help out with lateral stability while the rear axle is loaded.
Laterally mounted rear leaf springs? WHO DOESN'T? Also, loaded the F-150 outstops the Tundra by dramatic margins, the advantage of having larger rear brakes than front brakes with a load proportioning valve. Yes, I know the Tundra has a LPV, so does my 1995 T100, but neither one has the rear brake of the F-150.

Also, loaded the Chevrolet's and Ford's superior chassis control would be maintained. A stiffer structure allows for better suspension control, period.
 
#11 ·
Frames flex, the Tundra frame really flexes.

I've got a '95 T100 Xtracab with the 5VZ-FE sitting in the driveway right now, fully boxed frame front to rear and it has tons of chassis flex/deflection.

No, this isn't a matter of boxed vs. C-channel, this is a metter of basic frame design. Toyota went cheap on the new Tundra in many ways, the frame was one of them. Notice the 4-star crash test results from NHTSA.

Ford built a much better full-size truck frame than Toyota, that much is obvious. If Toyota skimped out on the frame, what else did they go cheap with?

Even look how the rear shocks mount to the frame on the half-tons, Ford does it in a far superior way to Toyota.
This guy's got to be kidding right? Oh, maybe '07 envy............
 
#17 ·
If you owned an '07 and made quality complaints it may carry more weight. Hard to sell your "consumer awareness" to the people who actually drive them everyday.

Drive one for a month then let us know..............
 
#19 ·
To me these tests only look at one component, the reality is the frame, body, and drive train are designed to react as a unit. Bottom line is actual use over time and seat of the pants feel, I would still take my DC over a F150 or a GM product.
 
Save
#21 ·
I've driven a 2007 Tundra CrewMax 2WD with the 5.7. The powertrain and interior volume are beyond impressive. The ride, handling and structure not so much. The new truck doesn't have the same feeling of old school Toyota quality that my Land Cruiser does. Those videos seem to bear that out.
 
#23 ·
#24 ·
I'm just promoting consumer awareness, and I am a long time Toyota owner.
I pretty sure if you look thats a 2006 double cab frame Like the truck i just traded in. I wouldn't have taken 3 new fords for my 2006 trd double cab!
 
Save
#25 ·
That's a frame from a 2007 Double Cab with the 6.5' bed. 145" wheelbase vs. 151" wheelbase for the F-150.
 
#26 ·
If I am a troll, so be it. But I still seek to promote consumer awareness.

Fvcking Trolls. See if you want your posts to be more believeable, you should have commented on some other posts first and then come and posted this crap. Not too bright this one. You are promoting consumer awareness? So you love the Tundra community so much (even though you do not own one) that you went through all the trouble to register on this forum so you can post a video? Bullsh1t. Next your gonna tell us that Osama and company were not involved in 911 either right? "It's the CIA I tell ya, with explosives, I'm just promoting da truth.":rolleyes: Someone ban this d1ckless wonder.
 
Save
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.