Ford’s EcoBoost Tear-Down Stunt Is Gimmicky

0 Flares 0 Flares ×

At next week’s Detroit Auto Show, Ford will be tearing-down an EcoBoost engine live in front of the public as an attempt to prove how tough and reliable their new twin-turbo V6 truck motor is. While this sounds like a great way to demonstrate the toughness of this particular motor, it’s really just a gimmick.

EcoBoost engine tear-down gimmick

Ford's "live" EcoBoost tear down is more of a gimmick than a predictor of engine reliability

To be sure, Ford’s plan sounds impressive:

Ford powertrain engineers will tear down an engine that…has the equivalent of 160,000 miles and 10 years of rugged use. Engineers punished it in temperature and load extremes simulating nearly 10 years of use – a regimen tougher than any consumer could ever subject a truck to….It hauled 55 tons of lumber…It ran at full throttle for 24 straight hours towing 11,300 pounds [and] completed the world’s toughest desert endurance race, the SCORE Tecate Baja 1000 in Mexico

The thing is, there’s a difference between simulated wear and tear and the real world.

First, let’s state the obvious: The internal components of your typical engine are incredibly reliable these days. Provided that things are well lubricated, adequately cooled, and properly managed by the engine computer, there’s very little reason that they should ever fail.

The thing is, most engine failures start with either a cooling problem, a lubrication problem, or an engine management problem.

  • Older trucks blow head gaskets because of poorly maintained and/or less efficient cooling systems.
  • Trucks of all years and models have major engine problems because of improper lubrication, which is almost always owner error. As crazy as it sounds, people forget to change their oil.
  • Lots trucks have problems due to engine management issues. Sensors go bad and/or degrade, become ineffective, and then these sensor errors lead to other problems.

While it’s great that Ford pushed this engine as hard as anyone could ever hope to, no one should be surprised that it’s still running strong. The cooling system is still relatively new, the engine maintenance schedule has been carefully followed, and the electronics are practically brand new – remember, electronic failures are more often caused by vibration and temperature extremes than they are by anything else.

You can run a truck all day long every day for a year and the electronics will be fine. But if you drive that truck down some rough trails over the years and put it through a few cold winters and hot summers, electronics start to lose integrity, degrade, and eventually fail. Even if the sensors degrade gradually, they can cause the engine to run improperly and ultimately cause damage.

Think of it this way: If it were easy to simulate years of wear and tear, manufacturers would make even more reliable products, right?

While Ford’s tear-down does have some value – it’s a testament to the fact that Ford’s design isn’t inherently flawed – it shouldn’t be construed as a testament to the ultimate reliability of an EcoBoost engine or a Ford truck in general.

If you want to know about reliability, look at JD Power study results, Consumer Reports,, etc. Lately, Ford has done very well in these areas – that’s why you should consider the EcoBoost – not because of some auto-show tear down gimmick.

Filed Under: Auto News


RSSComments (115)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. Anonymous says:

    Talk about engine sensors, like the ones in my father’s 2001 and 2004 Tundra which both had check engine lights come on about a month after leaving the dealership. Also, with it’s fully boxed and welded frame, the F150 will shrug off offloading abuse easier than Tundra’s open C channel. Furthermore, without expensive rust protection every year, the Tundra’s metal will oxidize rather quickly. Like my dad’s ’04, which was showing rust in the bed and on the bumper only a year after purchased new. Oh, and sitting in the interior of anything other than the Limited trimmed Tundra will make you wonder where your money went. The truth is, Ford’s F150 line is the envy of Toyota’s truck division.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Furthermore, go stick it in a F150 tailpipe. Your father, too.

  3. Cater says:

    Ford and reliability does not belong in the same sentence. Perhaps you could flirt with the idea of putting the 5.0 ford in that sentence, but for trucks, They are crap and harder to work on.

  4. Eric says:

    anonymous……come on man everyboby knows the truth. You can build a pretty truck but it will never outlast a TUNDRA….NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Make all the excuses u want but Toyota is just better and thats that.

  5. Toby says:

    160,000 miles is 10 years of driving? Seriously? Most people who buy trucks do so for a reason – hauling or towing stuff. I have a 2004 Tundra DC and I have just over 198,000 miles on it. I bought it used with 103,000 miles on the odometer 2 years ago. Incidentally the truck runs better than my buddy’s brand new Chevy 2500 with less than 10,000 miles on it.

    Time and elements take their toll on mechanicals. The freeze/thaw cycle really does a number in the wear and tear department. The real test is time. In 2021 if Ford does a tear down on a 2011 Ford truck (assuming one is even still running after real world use) then I would pay attention.

  6. Sethro says:

    and what truck is the best selling 34 years running???
    the tundra? the silverado? the ram?

    NO! The F150, so all you haters can eat it, because numbers dont lie.

    • Richard says:

      Thats great, best selling because they come in cheapest in fleet tenders… add GMC and Silverado togather, and they are more than ford. Quit listening to ford commercials, and try a tundra for 6 years, you’ll see.

  7. mk says:

    The main reason why the Ford F150 is the number 1 seller so long is because of fleet sales. Yah, they sell more to the general public, but they also offer the biggest rebate of all the 1/2 ton trucks as well. toyota offers the least in rebates on their tundras and the higher resell/trade in reflects that as well. I beg anyone to say the tundra’s tranny and engine are not #1 on the market by far. Time will only tell if the V6 ecoboost is a hit or a flop. Looks impressive, but I won’t be the first one to buy into a V6 with a huge truck.

    • 2010Tundra says:

      F150 keeps breaking or doesn’t survive in a crash so they have to sell more F150 to another idiot, thus the numbers does lie. Tundra just last’s forever, Toyota don’t have to sell as many. Ford looks good and drives good for 5yrs and after that, the paint will start peeling and the dealership will tell you it’s too bad. That’s why I’m driving my 2nd Tundra, nothing was wrong with my 2000 tundra, I just wanted the new model. My Phone # happens to be in my owners manual and the new owner of my 2000 Tundra called me and thanked me for taking good care of the truck. I added cold air, JBA headers and the 2000 tundra got 22mpg.

  8. Eric says:

    All i can say now to all the HATERS ….is make all the excuses u want but even though ford chevy and dodge sale multiple vehicals to the fleet hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
    Toyota will nver change and will always be the best, make all the changes to the the vehical, but all that matters is the engine ……………..period ask around ull findout. im n the oilfield industry and and more and more i see THE TUNDRA …..laugh now thats where the supply is period..Everyone can keep talking but let the proof speak for it self hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

  9. Alex says:

    People on a Tundra website don’t like the F-150? Well there’s the surprise of the century! To anyone without bias, they have to admit it’s looking like a pretty sweet engine!

  10. rich says:

    I agree, the ecoboost is intriguing. With fuel prices rising, manufacturers will have to find ways to keep the playing field level. Power plants will change at an alarming rate and as Jason stated, where will we be when gas is over 5 bucks at the pump. Ford’s approach is more logical compared to sticking batteries into a truck that can’t pull more than 1k. The gimmicks are just part of the business, nevertheless I still watch them for the entertainment value!

  11. Jason (Admin) says:

    Anon – The SuperDuty has used open C-Channel in the past – will those truck frames collapse too?

    Toby – Agreed – thanks for commenting dude.

    Sethro – McDonald’s has the world’s best selling hamburger, but that doesn’t mean they *make* the world’s best selling hamburger, does it?

    mk – Great point. Bigger discounts and selling trucks to fleet buyers for cost doesn’t mean much.

    eric – Love the enthusiasm bro.

    Alex – Never said I didn’t like the F150. In fact, the article closes with a note about Ford’s improving quality.

    rich – EcoBoost is cool for sure, and a great idea. Gimmicks – like tearing down a nearly new engine or driving a Tundra up a steel spiral staircase – are just theater…but I agree they’re entertaining.

    My goal was to get people talking – mission accomplished. Thank you all!!

  12. Toby says:

    @ Sethro:

    “and what truck is the best selling 34 years running???
    the tundra? the silverado? the ram?

    NO! The F150, so all you haters can eat it, because numbers dont lie.”

    Fact of the matter is Tundra came out in 2000 so the whole 34 year running comment is meaningless.

    I stand by my original statement. If ford has a 2011 truck running in 2021, after having run in real world use for a decade, and wants to do a tear down I would be interested in seeing it.

  13. Mark says:

    In reading that article, you could just feel the envy of Toyota. Tundra isn’t half the truck what the F150 is and just because you put a 390 hp motor into a visually huge looking truck with a wimpy C channel frame and tiny suspension components doesn’t make it a truck.
    Ford doesn’t even invite Toyota to its tests because Toyota isn’t even on the radar for sales compared to the F150.
    All is I can say is, “it’s right in their name TOY.

  14. Jason (Admin) says:

    Toby – That makes two of us. I’d like to see a 10 year tear-down too.

    Mark – Thanks for commenting.

  15. Toby says:

    @ Mark – I absolutely agree that the Tundra wimpy C-channel frame makes the reliability of the new ford engine a cut above everything else on the market.

    Insofar as sales are concerned keep on buying that UAW trash as it is clear you already bought their indoctrination. By your line of reasoning you are a justin beiber fan since he is selling a lot of albums. I can just see you rockin’ out to his album in that big gay ford truck of yours. Don’t be mad – gay people, by definition, are happy.

    Seriously here guys – the fanatical ford emotion here really makes ford drivers look just like excited jihadists – screaming louder becuase what they say does not matter. The protocol ford claims to follow is questionable at best. The same scrutiny would be applied to any manufacturer who stated that the test would be performed on an engine with “the equivalent of 160,000 miles and 10 years of rugged use”. Really? Wow. The real meaning of that statement is “ford will make up some test conditions to simulate a padded test environment in order to achieve favorable (slanted) test results.”

    Whoa. I just read what I wrote and thought what a waste.

    To you ford guys – why are you on a Tundra website in the first place? Reminds me of this guy who was so jealous that the girl he used to date is with someone else now so he followed her around – just burns the eyes of the puny little jealous mind.

    But keep keep opening your mouths and removing all doubt . . . .

  16. Tomdra says:

    “Mark – Thanks for commenting.” = “Mark, you are a gigantic tool.”

    • Jason (Admin) says:

      LOL – What else could I say but thanks? Mark’s mind is made up, so pointing out that the Super Duty also uses a c-channel frame, for instance, would be a waste of time.

  17. Toby says:

    @ hexmate

    Yes – I agree. I have 198,783 miles on my truck as of last night. 198,783 real miles, real weather, real wear and tear, real towing for half of those miles – real “history.” Truck runs perfect. How many fords make it that far in daily use/abuse? What ford is proposing is to “make-up” a “test” and equate that to real world conditions.

    It is quite revealing that not a single self-acknowledged ford guy who has posted here has addressed that. Rather, much like a someone attempting to direct attention away from their glaring character defects you talk about C-channels, sales, and anything else you can think of to criticize a Tundra while ignoring the legitimate issue that has been raised regarding testing.

    That is fine with me if that is what makes your fantasy world tolerable. In the real world I laugh when you give me the finger as I drive past you stranded on the road in your truck.

    To all the ford guys who come here – what happened? Did you get kicked out of the ford forums? That is pretty bad when even your own kind cannot tolerate you.

    I stand by my original statement. IF ford wants to do a tear down on this new engine after 10 years of real world driving I would be glad to see it. Why is that something not a single ford guy can talk about?

    Oh never mind – just keep trying to find something wrong with the Tundra line-up while ignoring the actual issue raised regarding the testing protocol ford said they would use.

  18. Jason (Admin) says:

    Toby – We don’t talk to Hexmate around here – he’s been banned for being a jackass and he knows it. His comments are deleted as soon as I see them.

  19. Mickey says:

    Well sorry for all you wannabe’s out there. Ford been pulling your string for a long time. Just like a dog you keep going back to them not realizing what is actually out there. Now why would I believe a test of a motor which wasn’t in a truck most of the time? You Ford people are very gullable. Not to mention shallow. I just went over 102k miles on a 07 CM Limited. Those are total weathered miles. From mountains to the beaches. What Toyota has that you big3 don’t have is piece of mind. Been there in your Ford truck and two Ford cars. They were the most expensive vehicles I owned. Simply when all 3 vehicles visited the dealership over 20x each makes one wonder where is quality. It sure wasn’t next door at the GM dealership. Didn’t bother looking at Dodge because I didn’t have the heart to look at another big3 with their hands out crying save me.

    • Anonymous says:

      Previous versions do not reflect new engineering. Oranges to apples! All vehicle compnaies change/modify over time to improve!

  20. Mickey says:

    Just goes to show you. Hexmate who likes his big3 keeps coming back like a fool just to see his statement was “Recalled” because it needed attention/fixed.

  21. Mickey says:

    What really gets me is that you guys that hate Toyota are stuck on the “C” channels. What do the bigger trucks/semi’s use? Need I say more?

  22. Toyotatundra2010 says:

    @Toby….totally agree…..why do all these “haters” of toyota keep coming on toyota fans websites to post negative remarks? I go on honda websites too and all the honda “haters” do the same thing. I guess when you’re on top….they always try to knock you down. 🙂

  23. Toby says:

    @ Toyotatundra2010

    I am not sure what drives supposedly grown men to act like that but I think it is not so much of trying to bring someone down as it is trying to draw attention away from how worthless their own vehicles are in comparison.

    Even so, the point remains that the testing protocol issued by ford in this case is questionable at best. If Toyota proposed such a ridiculous set of contrived conditions I would be just critical – probably more so. On paper the eco boost stats look impressive but one has to wonder how the engine will hold up in the real world.

    My truck lives outside and works outside. After nearly seven years and 200,000 miles it is still as good as it was the day it rolled off the assembly line. I have towed some seriously heavy trailers with it, run it out hard on the highway for a hard thousand plus miles non-stop several times each year, it starts up at zero degrees and tows in 100 degree heat. My truck does everything I ask of it and more with no problems. In three years my truck will be ten years old. I would not hesitate to have the motor torn down for inspection at that time or anytime thereafter. I challenge ford to do the same thing with an eco boost in 2021 with at least as many miles as I have in the real world.

    Is it so much to ask that ford step into the real world with the rest of us?

    • Anonymous says:

      Enough with the 2021 teardown! Ecoboost has a couple of years of real use behind it. Many pickups will have issues over the next bunch of years. Owned Chev/GMC, Dodge, and Ford’s. They all require repair here and there over time.

  24. Justin says:

    Dang, some blind fools posting on this thread. You guys are as laughable as some of the blind faithful that frequent the Chevy, Ford, and Dodge forums. Fact is, each truck, ford, Chevy, Dodge, Toyota, Nissan, has their goods and bads. Some are better than others at certain aspects, and vice versa. To me, it’s not about solely the motor, or style, or interior, it’s about the entire truck, I want the best “overall truck”. And I’m sure Jason (and most likely Mickey) that this is what I’ve said for years. And in my opinion, and from personal experience, the F150 is the best “overall” ½ ton on the market.

    MK: You may actually want to check your facts on rebates. From what I’ve seen the last 2yrs or so, the Tundra is receiving very similar rebates, and sometimes more, than the F150. 4-5yrs ago, I’d agree with your point that Ford had more cash on the hood. Today, your statement doesn’t carry any validity.

    If you are talking purely about 0-60 times, then yes, the Tundra 5.7L & 6-spd is best. But if you’re talking about durability and longevity, there is no proof to backup this statement. And with Fords new power trains (5.0L, 6.2L EB 3.5L w/6spd), the Tundra just may not hold the 0-60 title anymore.

    Eric: Sorry to tell you, but the motor is only one component of what makes a good truck. You can have the best motor, but if the rest of the truck is crap, it won’t sale. And sorry, most construction and oilfield workers drive 3/4 & 1 ton trucks. Was a nice attempt though.

    Jason: On your multiple comments regarding the C-Channel frame of the SD and Tundra. Simply look at the gauge of steel used and strength of these two frames. The Tundra’s frame is minuscule compared to the SD’s. So sure they both use C-channel, but that’s about where the comparison ends. The SD C-channel is superior in practically every way. And you being a former Ford worker should know this and be willing to admit so.

    You like to use the McDonalds most sold cheeseburger line, I’ve heard it plenty of times. But you also have to factor in, if the Tundra was really such a good truck, it would have moved up in 1/2 ton truck sales compared to the competition, and wouldn’t sell less than the Tacoma does. And clearly when purchasing a vehicle, which is typically a person’s 2nd largest purchase in their life, they aren’t simply going to blow that money on an inferior product. Just look at how the F-Series has gained market share in the last year to 1.5yrs. The Tundra didn’t even top 100K units this year.

    Did you even watch any of the videos of the torture tests this truck and motor went through? It had plenty of vibrations (see running baja races), had plenty of heat/cold cycles and so on. These were plenty more real world tests than ever displayed by the Tundra. And this was proving the ability of the motor, and by all accounts from websites not tundra based, most truck owners/buyers and magazines were impressed with the results.

    Toby: You must be the new internet tough guy on this site. Haven’t seen you around before, then again, I haven’t posted much here recently. Either way though, you are amusing to me. Funny you want to call others names (i.e. supposedly grown men), but you’ve been the one whose acted more childish in your responses. Couple responses for you though:

    So what if the Tundra just came out in 2000, it has never come close to the sales figures of the F150. And there are still more F150s on the road than Tundra, so by 2021, I’d assume the same could be said. I’m a Ford owner and fan, and have been posting to this site much longer than you, providing at least a little credible information, instead of immature jihadist type comments.

    Also, I’ve owned a 1981 F150 Rcab Shortbed 4×4 4.9L/I6 and when I finally sold it, it had over 300K miles. Still ran as good as any truck its age and wear/tear. Had a 1985 Ranger Rcab Longbed 4×4 2.8L/V6, and had 175K miles on it when it was totaled. Ran like new too. So the Tundra is not unique in the ability to put over 100K miles. There are F150’s and Econoline vans with over a million miles on them. Just because you have a swayed opinion that the Tundra can always last longer, doesn’t mean it’s the truth. You are just as much a fanboy of the Tundra/Toyota, as I’ve seen on other sites for their makes/models.

    My F150 5.4L is 4yrs old. In another 6yrs, I’d be more than willing to put it up for a tear down against a Tundra motor of same year/miles. Problem is there would be no reason for me to tear down a perfectly good motor in the first place. Plus, I don’t know you, and could care less too know you. So I have no reason to prove anything to you.

    Mickey: Always love to hear your biased and sob stories about your dealings with the domestics. Come on over to some of the forums I frequent and you’ll find many unhappy former import owners, they’re a dime a dozen. And again, look at how puny your C-channel frame is compared to the SD’s and larger trucks. That there is your difference.

    Toyotatundra2010: When exactly was the Tundra on top, 2007? Since then though, it’s got back in line and playing 2dn, 3rd or even 4th fiddle to the F150 again.

    Thanks everyone, I appreciate the good laugh!

  25. Deanh says:

    unbelievable bunch of clap trap here…and one of the worst offenders happens to be “Admin”….this takes the cake….If you want to know about reliability, look at JD Power study results, Consumer Reports,, etc…..why didnt you add “because they put the engines through the same types of abuse……” I agree on the surface this seems gimmicky…but its pretty ballsy…waht if when opened up it looked like the inside of one of a certain manufacturers “sludge” mobile??????

  26. Mickey says:

    Justin as usual nothing changed over time. The arguement about C channel was over boxed frames. My statement is that C Channel does more for towing than box frames. Also like I said you fit the ordinary role thinking just because you sell more it’s the best. Give it a break. Sorry Justin I don’t waste my time on domestic things/forums. They don’t particularly care for a Toyota owner to be on there. Also quit trying to humor people and belittle them. You call them sob stories and bias, but the truth hurts don’t it. Nothing bias when your Ford reps tell you they can’t fix the truck. They have no idea what the problem is. Like I mentioned before it’s piece of mind Justin. Just like you mention about your incredible Ford truck. I’m at 102201 miles and which I know that Ford ecoboost wasn’t on it’s original brake pads like I am still. Yes Justin in 3.5 years of having this truck I racked the miles also. There’s no way they can use a simulation for 10 years much less the mileage without the motor being in a closed enviroment for most of the miles. Sorry that does give us the real laugh.

  27. Mickey says:

    BTW Justin good to see you back. How’s the snow out there? Just cold here and some rain.

  28. Ben says:

    Cater says, “Ford and reliability does not belong in the same sentence. Perhaps you could flirt with the idea of putting the 5.0 ford in that sentence, but for trucks, They are crap and harder to work on.”

    Ford is building more reliable cars than Toyota is now, and has pretty consistently since around 2006. The quality surveys are finally catching on to this fact. Ford trucks are blatantly superior the the full-size failures Toyota has cranked out. The 5.0 Ford is crap? Apparently you haven’t been following this engine at all, it has already achieved things the Toyota 5.7 never will and is proving to be better suited to truck duty despite being a smaller displacement engine. Toyota 5.7 owners who have swapped to the ’11 5.0 F150 are already reporting of a truck that is just as “fast” empty but the mid-range torque that allows it to hold overdrive with a load that the Tundra 5.7 lacks. The Tundra lacks a real chassis and its previous sole advantage, the engine, has now been surpassed by 3 offerings from Ford and one from GM.

  29. Jason (Admin) says:

    Justin – First of all, good to see you commenting. Always enjoy and appreciate your perspective.

    Next, if you want to be technical about frames, the Tundra’s frame has both c-channels and a fully boxed frame. It’s not as beefy as the super duty frame, but most half-ton frames aren’t.

    I’ve always said that I’m uncomfortable with the frame design that Toyota used for the Tundra, but I’ve never seen anything conclusive that shows the Tundra’s frame is somehow inferior…and I’ve heard more than smart person talk about the Tundra’s frame and say that it’s really not a talking point.

    I guess what I’m saying about the frame is that I don’t know enough to know if it’s good or not – but I do know that using a C-channel instead of a fully-boxed frame by and of itself is proof of nothing.

    Next, sales figures: Tundra sales increased more than GM or Dodge sales, and unlike GM or Dodge, Tundra sales figures don’t include fleet. This means the number of individual consumers choosing the Tundra is increasing…and that means Tundra is grabbing retail share. That’s a good thing.

    Finally, torture testing staged for an auto show isn’t very convincing…it’s cool to be sure, but it’s a bit gimmicky, don’t you think? Do you think the Tundra De-constructed videos are cool too? Same concept…

    P.S. Go easy on Toby – he’s contributing some writing here and I think you would find his attention to detail very impressive.

    Deanh – I don’t get it – I compliment Ford’s ratings in Consumer Reports and JD Power, and yet somehow I’m a jerk? Go figure. We both agree it’s a gimmick, so why the guff?

    Ben – I don’t know if Ford is building more reliable vehicles than Toyota, but I’m 100% in agreement that Ford’s products are universally great.

    The Tundra’s advantages over the F150 were significant in 2007, but since that time Ford has closed all of the gaps. When we re-do our comparison, it’s going to be tough for the Tundra to beat out the F150…at least so long as we ignore the financial impact of buying a Ford.

  30. TXTee says:

    I’ve been missing out on the forum by not checking the comments. Great info keeps coming out of these “battles.” I do love that people think just because something sells well, it must be great. Wrong! Just up front costs look cheaper and I know many Ford enthusiasts that will not even look at a Chevy, GM, Toyota, or anything else because they were brainwashed to believe in supporting Ford (paid their bills) and their family just doesn’t know any better. It’s quite sad. My stepdad drives an F-150 and it’s had so many different issues I just dont bother saying anything to him anymore when it’s all jacked up. Tundra – running strong 3 years/50K now with nothing but oil changes, tire rotations, and me beating the heck out of it from cross country treks, offroad conditions, towing, hauling, and STILL going! Keep your Ford…I’ll be a Toyota Tundra fangirl all day long. Financially, Tundra is a great choice…..dollars add up quickly and time spent in a shop is money going out the door.

    • Allie says:

      Take a breath.
      I have worked in the Alberta Logging and Oil patch for 28 years. There is no clear winner overall. I’ve driven, worked on, and wathched others, drive their pickups for years (some of my contractors do over 100,000 kms per year) through basically offraod conditions on logging roads and oilfield roads in all four seasons of the year. These roads are very vehicaly demanding. They drive one make/model for a couple of years then switch to another because of supposed weakness. Time after time these guys switch make and model. All makes fail at a weakness over time. In the true tough driving, they all indicate certain weaknesses. One maker will improve on one failure while another is working on solving another. Early Duramaxes had lots of injector failures, Ford had a disc wheel brake buildup problem (as did GMC), the Dodge Cummins was a workhorse, but replacing front end parts cost you to a new reality. On and on it goes!

  31. Mickey says:

    Dean you can give Consumer Reports all the credit you want. I won’t. To give a truck a nomination as the best without even testing it states bias all the way period. You test trucks on actual roads not factory roads. You never have the traffic to sit in much less all the trash or debris you have on out highways. Stiil trying to believe the 10 year part of this. Eco has been out how long?

  32. Zack says:

    The Ford has better Quality in and out. look at all the recalls Toyota has.

  33. Jason (Admin) says:

    TXTee – Agreed. Just because something is popular doesn’t make it good. Ford builds a fine automobile – with better quality now than at any point in the future – but only a fool would buy one because “everyone else is doing it.”

    If a person wants to buy an F150, they should do so after looking at quality ratings, resale, safety, capability, and cost. If all of these calculations = F150, great. But buying one because “my family has always owned them” or because “they’re the best selling truck” is just silly.

    Mickey – Consumer Reports is funny – they gave Toyota automatic positive ratings without testing, then announced they weren’t going to do that anymore, then did it again. I think Consumer Reports data is interesting, but as you and I have both said it’s inherently flawed. It’s best to combine Consumer Reports with other data sources – like JD Power, Strategic Vision, etc.

    Zack – A lack of recalls isn’t proof of better quality. If they were, Ford would be in trouble:

    What is it with F-150’s and fire, anyways, LOL! (Just a joke folks).

  34. Mickey says:

    I agree Jason with combining them with other sources. I won’t rely on them themselves. Consumer Reports still to this day is trying to get me to subscribe. Reminds me of so much of Hexmate/H/Anonymous.

  35. Justin says:

    Mickey: What’s going on? I’ve reviewed some of the threads, just haven’t had a great deal of time to post recently. Of course this thread pulled at my heart strings. We haven’t had much snow here in Denver this year, but the Mtns have been getting hit much harder. Some chilly days/nights here, but not much else.

    I hear you on the c-channel vs. boxed frame. I can’t truly agree that c-channel does more for towing, it’s just typically lighter than that of a box, so you may get a higher payload/towing capacity due to the weight savings. My point is more about people want to compare a ½ ton c-channel to that of a ¾ or 1 ton c-channel. Yes they are made with a similar design, but that doesn’t mean the ½ ton c-channel is comparable. Would be like comparing a 1 ton c-channel to that of a Petersbilt. Sure both are c-channel, but there is a considerable difference in size, weight and capacities.

    I’m not saying the F-Series is a better lineup simply because they sell the most trucks, that’s only one small aspect. But you do have to admit, there must be something right about the F-Series if they’ve done it 34yrs straight. Not 1, 2 or 5yrs in a row, which could be an anomaly, but 34yrs? Also, the F-Series has been the #1 selling vehicle in the US for what, 24yrs in a row. Meaning people choose the F150 over any other vehicle (car, truck, SUV, CUV, etc). Don’t mean they are the best every year, but it shows consistency and that they offer a good overall product that consumers love.

    And never said you needed to waste your time on domestic forums. Was just stating you get the same rants from members about their negative import experiences. Some of the sites I frequent, don’t care if you own a Toyota, heck some of the members I know own Toyota, Kia, Honda, etc. cars. But like here, if you don’t come with an open and objective mind, you are seen as a Troll. Not sure if that is the way I’m viewed here, but just try to give the other perspective. I agree with and believe the Tundra is superior in select aspects, but will not defend it if I see it is not superior.

    Like I’ve stated before, I had a ’99 Explorer that was nickel and diming me to death, and I consider it a huge POS. Still irks me to this day, but every other Ford I’ve owned (5 others – 3 F150s & 2 Rangers) have all been great vehicles. I totally understand why many people moved away from the domestics in the 80’s/90’s, but more of that was due to their cars than it was due to their trucks. Not saying my Ford truck or anyone else’s are incredible, and not saying the Tundra isn’t. Just saying my personal experience as well as many millions of others, think they are great long lasting trucks.

    This Ecoboost test was for durability and to prove it can be put through similar rigorous tests, just like the V8’s, and still come out looking good. And I wouldn’t think this motor would be on its original brakes, since motors don’t have brakes. The motor itself was thoroughly tested within Ford facilities, then dropped into an F150 for various other tests, and in the end, was dropped into a Raptor for baja racing/testing. Ford wasn’t trying to prove the durability of the F150, it’s been proven over time. They were set out to prove the naysayers wrong that this EB 3.5L could stand up and play with the big boy V8s. I’m sure it’ll have its hiccups, just like the Tundra/5.7L did, but that’s how every new powertrain goes. If people consider this battery of tests a gimmick, then every commercial and test that has ever been shown for the Tundra and the 5.7L are simply laughable. Never did I nor Ford say the EB 3.5L was better than the 5.7L. This simply shows that it should be able to compete with the likes of the Toyota 5.7L, Dodge 5.7L, Nissan 5.6L and Chevy 6.2L.

    Oh, and the EB 3.5L has been out for over a year now. Sure it’s been in cars, not trucks, but Ford has learned and tweaked this motor based on its experience so far. So they are slightly ahead of the game, instead of not having any R&D or road time on this powerplant.

  36. Justin says:

    Ben: Totally agree with the 2006+, Ford quality has been shooting up at a rapid pace. And over the past decade, decade and a half, Toyota’s has slowly slipped, closing the gap. Can’t say the 5.0L, EB 3.5L or 6.2L are superior to the 5.37L just yet, since they are fairly new. But they sure do have the capability to do so. The 5.0L has been in the Mustang for a while, and the EB 3.5L in the SHO and Flex for a littler while, so they have a little time to prove themselves prior to being dropped into the F150. We’ll just have to see how it plays out.

    Jason: True. The Tundras has 3 frames merged together from my understanding. You’ve got the full box under the hood, c-channel under the bed, but I’m not sure the frame type they install for the cab section. And yes you are correct, no 1/2 ton has a frame like a 3/4 or 1 ton. I’m not sold on the Tundra frame being superior, nor inferior, but I only question whether or not its design is partly to blame for the bed bounce issue.

    And props to the Tundra for increasing sales (think 17% 2010 over 2009). I’m not sold on the GM twins redesign in 2007 (still very dated and needing many updates) and can see why their sales increase isn’t nearly as impressive. While the RAM, I kind of sort of like the new design, and love how they’ve improved the interior over previous models. But I still hear the only positive being the HEMI. They run a 5spd (when most have 6spd now), and that coil rear end doesn’t seem to give as good of a ride as most people, or RAM expected. Plus, the fact they took bailout money, many aren’t looking their way. I contribute part of the sales increase of the F-150 from people who refused to purchase the RAM or GM because of that.

    Gimmicky, maybe sort of. But I believe the 5.7L in the Tundra could go through similar testing and come out looking just like the EB 3.5L did. The thing Ford was attempting to prove here is, this twin turbo V6 is just as capable, reliable and durable as those big v8s. It wasn’t trying to prove it could out do the v8s. Just trying to prove those naysayers who think just because its a twin turbo V6 it won’t last. The jury is still out, but the simply furthers that Ford spent tons of $$$ and R&D time making this a rock solid motor to compete with the big boys.

    No problems here with Toby, and glad to see you’ve got members contributing still. I understand his faith and belief in the Tundra, as I have it for the F-150. Just think a few comments were taken a little overboard and without objectivity. Which I’ll agree, I’ve done at times, think we all do.

    And the best part about all this bickering and debate. Is the manufacturers are hearing us, and continue to one up each other. Competition breeds competition. And the winner is the consumer!

  37. Justin says:

    TXTee: Yes, you do have your blind faithful to Ford, or those that jumped to Ford because of the GM/Dodge bailouts. You also have Toyota owners who left a domestic because of some experience 20yrs ago. Ford is a different company today. You also have your brainwashed Toyota loyalists, who believe Toyota today is the same as back in the 80’s and 90’s, which it clearly is not. There have been many changes over the last two decades, but too many people are stuck in the past. Some are comfortable with a domestic, some with imports.
    We have members on a few F150/F-Series forums I frequent that owned both or either generation of Tundras. And like you and your father (but reversed), they had many problems with their import but not their domestic. You can find stories like yours and mine on the internet all day. But I’d bet you’d hear of more F-150 issues than Tundra. Not because the F-150 has more problems per vehicle, but because there are so many millions more F-150s on the road compared to the Tundra. If you break down the number of trucks with problems, by the number of trucks sold in a particular year, you’d see the percentage of difference in miniscule.
    I’ve owned my F150 for just over 4yrs now, and it has not been any more financially expensive than a Tundra would be. It’s been through similar conditions as yours with towing, off-roading, road trips, etc. I have not paid a cent in repair costs, just your normal maintenance of fluid changes, tire rotations, etc. So glad to see you’ve got a good reliable truck, but it doesn’t prove anything since mine has been through the same and cost me just as much, if not less.

    Mickey: I’ve never liked C.R. Like you, I could tell they were biased in many of their reviews. I’m not about to claim something like “well, CR said…” just because Fords rating with them is improving. I still think their test results are BS the majority of time. Sure they are an option to read when looking for a new vehicle, but like most ragz, take what they say with a grain of salt.

    Jason: 100% agree on your C.R comment.

    Not trying to defend Ford, but this was a very small recall (14K units), and after speaking with a few Dearborn workers, the majority of those trucks hadn’t even been shipped to dealers. Better to catch this at the plant, then when most are in customer hands.

  38. Paul says:

    I don’t see how it was anymore gimmicky than this.


  39. Justin says:

    Jason: Speaking of recalls. You say 14K vehicles recalled and Ford is in trouble? How about this one recently announced, 1.7M vehicles recalled (255K in NA) by Toyota. If you want to talk about being in trouble because of recalls, then Toyota has the most to worry about based on their recall figures the last 2-3yrs. 8-10 years ago, yes Ford had issues, mostly with the CC switch that we’ve beat like a dead horse. Looks like Toyota wants the recall crown now.

  40. TXTee says:

    Justin – good point on the possibility of more complaints on the Ford being that more are on the road. I haven’t done any studies on the ratios. If you have that available or can show the ratios are in fact negligible, that’s awesome. I do, however, think that resale value should be factored in and it’s not there for Ford as much as Toyota (on average). BTW – I don’t think you’re a troll! 🙂

  41. TXTee says:

    Justin – one more thing…I’m really curious about this one. I have no interest in visiting a Ford, Chevy, Honda, or BMW forum. What’s your interest on a Toyota forum? I’m not picking on you but genuinely trying to understand your viewpoint and possibly others.

  42. 99_F150_owner_Penna says:

    My last ’87 F150 had 237,000 miles on it when I sold it. I’m currently driving my ’99 F150 4×4 4.6 5-spdmnl, which I ordered and bought new Apr’99. It’s on the road every day to work and back. I haul firewood, dirt, you name it. Currently at 265,000 miles, no internal work done to engine, original clutch, pressure plate and throw out bearing. Origianl exhaust system. I do take care of it. Cahnge oil every 5000 and rotate tires. I do my own brake lining, etc., and common maintenance.
    I looking forward to owning an EcoBoost in the near future.
    Can’t complain about my Fords.

  43. Justin says:

    TxTee: Well, it’s hard to complete the stats, since all we truly know are the # of vehicles sold in a particular year. After that, whether an owner fixes a problem themselves (which I know many that do outside warranty) or they take it to a private shop or even to the dealer, all the details aren’t always spelled out. Just because an owner took their vehicle into Ford, Nissan, Chevy, etc, for one visit, doesn’t mean they didn’t have multiple issues. And just because an owner took their vehicle in 5 times, doesn’t mean they have 5 issues, maybe only one problem and that issue has never been resolved (see Mickey and his domestic experience for example). This is why we have to rely on 3rd party companies like CR and TrueDelta for this information. Therein lies another problem, depending on how brand loyal the owner may be, or how the owner uses/abuses their vehicle could potentially skew the results. Also, the owners surveyed may be skewed because of minimal subscribers. Say there are only 5 Nissan owners and 5 Dodge owners surveyed. None of those 5 Dodge owners had a problem, so in the percentages, this makes Dodge look great. And for the Nissan owners, say 3 of the 5 had minor problems. When you look at the percentages for this very small population, you’ll get drastically different results than the industry average for these two makes shows.

    Resale value can also be misleading. Typically from what I’ve seen is Toyota’s cost more at time of purchase. As an example we’ll say $1K-$2K more than a comparable Ford. If a few years down the road you look at re-sale value for these vehicles, you may find the Toyota is worth more than the Ford by $1K-$2K. It doesn’t mean the Toyota has a better re-sale value, because at the point of initial purchase it cost $1K-$2K more, so you are truly just breaking even. Also, the demand for said vehicle and the number of those vehicles on the road makes a huge difference. There are so many more F150s on the road than Tundras, dealers typically have to sell the F150s at a lower price to compete with every other dealer selling an F150 out there. There are a lot fewer Tundra’s on the road, making them a little rarer. In those cases, the dealers can ask more for the Tundra, since the volume isn’t nearly as high. So as you can see, a lot goes into the re-sale value. It’s not so cut and dry to say Toyota has better re-sale value. Heck look at the new Ford Fusion compared to the Camry. The Fusion is predicted to have a better resale value due to the many aspects I spoke about.

    I started coming here in either late 2006 or early 2007 after hearing all the hype about the 5.7L. I like to review what owners say of every make/model full-size (1/2 to 1 ton trucks), so I get the scoop and understand what aspect of each people like. This also gives me things to look for when a friend, family member or co-worker owns one of those vehicles. I’ve had a lot of behind the wheel time in my mother-in-laws neighbors 2007 CrewMax and can speak to my experience. Also, I like to add a little perception from the other side with no loyalty to the brand. As you see most people here love Toyota and can’t fathom them doing anything wrong. I’m here to help shed light on that misnomer. Just like I accept any truthful criticism of my preferred brand, whether I agree or not. No truck or manufacturer is perfect, but too many believe so. I’m simply a truck fan and love to discuss the goods/bads of each. I have my run ins with Chevy, Dodge and Nissan owners as well, but in the end, we typically agree.

  44. Tomdra says:

    “Always enjoy and appreciate your perspective” = “Justin, your comments are too long and far too frequent. Get a job.”

    • Jason (Admin) says:

      Tomdra – LOL – not true. Justin is a smart guy and a Denver resident, and he’s been commenting on this site since it started. I was very sincere when I wrote that! 🙂

  45. Jason (Admin) says:

    Great comments all – too many to respond to, in fact.

    It’s people like Mickey, TXTee, Justin, mk, Paul, Ben, Toby, Cater, and many others that make this site so enjoyable to manage. My thanks to all of you.

  46. trucker carl says:

    Let’s see the Japs come up with an engine that gets the power and fuel economy of the ecoboost.

    Oh, and maybe a tailgate that doesn’t fall apart, or a gas pedal that goes to full throttle.

    Give me a break. Toyota 20-25 years ago had a good truck with their small ones. Today, face it they are about like a Chevy or Dodge

  47. zach says:

    look I’m not gonna make a comment that could bite me in the butt later on but all I’m gonna say is this. After testing out a 2007 silverado, 2008 tundra and a 2005 ram, the (2004) f150 that I bought came out on top (obviously) for me the interior on most other brands is just plain cheap looking and feeling. Toyota builds a nice mid size truck (I originally wanted a tacoma) but after seeing how cheap the tundra interior was and knowing how my 2005 sequoia turned out after only 4 years and 80k (bad compressor, engine problems, brake problems, and a busted coolant hose that left my family stranded) I decided I probably wouldn’t like the tundra in the long run, oh and I take care of my vehicles.
    Truthfully I love the EB and how much power it delivers, I test drove one last week and it pulled like a dream even from a dead stop. As a new truck a would say none could ever compare, however with ford’s past of bad spark plugs and such, only time will tell which truck model is truly superior for this year.
    as for a gimmick I don’t see why you would think such a thing. All companies have gimmicks, heck there’s a toyota video series ( where they talk about the c frame providing a smoother ride because of its flexing.
    ultimately the truck that’s best for you is the one that you decide is best for you. Leave the bashing for the offroading when you pull your buddy’s ford or toyota out of the mud because it couldn’t handle. You can say history is a good teacher but personal experience is even better.
    right now I couldn’t be happier with my ford and would never “settle” for anything less.
    ya’ll have fun with your crazy talk
    god bless

  48. Jay says:

    We had a fleet of Tundras. They were good for the first 10,000 miles, then they turn to trash. Went back to F150’s. We could never get work done because our Tundras were always in the shop. I could understand one or two, but 10 plus. I will stay american and support american.

  49. Jason (Admin) says:

    Jay – Sure you did man, sure you did.

  50. Anonymous says:

    that engine is a piece of junk. what i wana know is why didnt they in all those test put it up against a tundra? but they did against chevy and dodge. also why would ford go and spend all the money it takes to produce a new engine with no more horsepower or torque than its compeditors and just a few mpg better not making to much sence. and the price of this truck isnt that inviting

  51. TXTee says:

    Justin – thanks for letting me know your perspective. It all makes sense and I think it’s been good to have your point of view. And whoever thinks you talk too much probably just has a problem reading! If the information is worth it, I’ll take the time to read it….and so far, so good. Plus, you have no right to comment til you read all the points and/or facts.

    Jason – no problem. This is the 1st Tundra site I joined shortly after my 07 purchase and has been a useful resource in helping with my build, meeting Tundra owners across the states, and just a place to “hang out.” Considering I knew nothing when I had already driven the truck off the lot to what I know today, it’s been a great journey!

  52. Justin says:

    Anonymous: So since this motor just came out, and the market has really no exposure to it as of yet, exactly how do you know it’s “junk”? Or is that just an “opinion”, with no factual basis? I can’t truly say it’s not junk, but you can’t say it’s junk either. Let’s wait for some miles to be put on these motors before we start making fact-less claims of it being junk.

    From my understanding, they tested against the Ram and Silverado, who are Fords biggest competitors in the full-size truck market. Why would you compare against your 3rd or 4th biggest rival? Just doesn’t make sense. When marketing, it’s better to market towards the larger group of consumers than smaller.

    The EB 3.5L (16/22) brings home 2mpgs city and 4mpgs highway more than the Tundra 5.7L (14/18). That is a considerable difference. Based on a 30 gallon tank, the EB 3.5L F150 could bring home 60 more city and 120 more highway miles per tank. And you could do even better in the mpg dept with the F150, as you can opt for 3.15 gears, whereas the 5.7L is only available with 4.30 gears.

    Comparing power, sure the EB 3.5L (365/420) makes 15 less hp, but its max is hit at 5K rpms, not the 5600rpms where the 5.7L (381/401) is made. Also, the EB 3.5L makes 19 more ft-lbs, at 2500rpms, rather than the 3600 rpms where the Tundra’s max is received. If you tow, those lower max rpm figures are very beneficial in getting your load moving. Have you looked at the dyno charts for the EB 3.5L versus the 5.7L? They are in the below link, and work in favor of the EB motor. Look how smooth and consistent the power is through the range when compared to the other makes/models.

    Also keep in mind, this is Fords upper middle engine, not max. Ford now has the 3.7L V6 (300hp/275ft-lbs), 5.0L (360hp/380ft-lbs), EB 3.5L (365hp/420lb-ft) and 6.2L (411hp/434ft-lbs). So compare Fords 3.7L to the Tundra 4.0L, compare the Fords 5.0L to the Tundra 4.6L and Fords 6.2L to to Tundras 5.7L. This would leave the Ford EB 3.5L as a wildcard motor with power very similar to that of the 5.7L Tundra, but better mpgs.

    And guess you haven’t really been pricing these trucks, or else you’d know the EB 3.5L can be had with any model from XLT through Platinum models. Which even then, the F150 with EB 3.5L can typically be had for less than a similarly equipped Tundra 5.7L. So if you are complaining about the F150 pricing, you might want to double check the pricing of the Tundra.

  53. Justin says:

    TXTee: Thanks and appreciate your response. Not trying to be a troll when I post my comments, just bringing a different perspective and understanding to the thread. We all have experiences with domestic and foreign products.

    Every truck from every make has their goods and bads. Not one truck dominates in every category. There is no clear winner in the full-size category. It’s all based on personal opinion and which truck best suits their likes, needs and wants.

  54. Mickey says:

    Thanks Jay for that comment about staying and buying american. That shows me you have the foggiest idea about your part content.

    Trucker carl you have proof about that pedal? By the way my engine is a 5.7 which I get between 20-22mpg. It will out pull your eco. How about getting an actual vehicle that matches the engine for the complete 10 years instead of simulating. I can simulate also that my CM is better than your eco.. ohh noo I don’t have to simulate that I’m already there. Yes with 103k miles on an 07. Also still on original tailgate. I guess I missed the broken one. You forgot to mention your issues Ford has. I won’t say more about it because it’s over your head. You see Carl I can smile and have the piece of mind which everyone should have. I can’t say that to the 3 ford’s I owned.

  55. BLOWBYU says:

    Guys the BEST truck is the one that fits your needs. All brands have issues. In 2004 I was looking to purchase a new truck. I went to the truck show and looked at all the full size trucks. I was not even considering purchasing the NEW Nissan Titan, but decided to give the truck a try and saved it as my last test drive. But after driving it, I feel in love. Needless to say I have a 2004 Titan that just hit 100,000 miles. Yes, I have had issues(nothing with motor or tranny) but I do not regret my purchase.

  56. TXTee says:

    BLOWBYU has won my respect! The one that fits your needs is what should matter and my mantra. If you’re happy with what you got, you really don’t care about the next one out there….or at least you shouldn’t unless you really have cash flow to throw around as your needs change.

  57. Anonymous says:

    justin if toyota isnt one of fords biggest competiotors then why do they mention constantly in all there commercials and adds that they are finally up to the quality of toyota and show these test on the internet trying to prove that the f150 has a special trailor sway system and the only truck they tested it against was the tundra so dont say that the tundra isnt one of there biggest competitors if not its by far the best, and if this engine is so good then why not just throw the tundra in there and show it what it has. also HP numbers dont mean anything the newest dodge ram claims that it has more hp and torque than the tundra and yet the tundra beat it in a loaded drag race, and then and unloaded drag race, then they did a 10% hill upgrade and guess what the tundra beat it in that, alot more factors come into play in the HP game. and i understand about giving the engine time it could be great but so far in the past years ford hasnt been the one to brag about…

  58. Justin says:

    Anonymous: Don’t think I’ve ever heard an F-Series commercial compare to the Tundra or Toyota in general. A Ford sedan or car, sure Ford uses Toyota for comparison since Toyota holds good footing in this market. But when it comes to full-size trucks, it’s a different game and Ford typically doesn’t use the Tundra as comparison. Big difference.

    Again, no matter how good the motor is in the Tundra, Ford compared the F-150 to the Ram & Silverado, because those are its two biggest competitors. Ford stands to gain more customers by comparing to those models, than by comparing to the Tundra or Titan.

    And sure I know hp/ft-lbs is a numbers game these days. I was simply providing the figures to show where each of the new F-150 motors slots in against the competition.

  59. Leo says:

    I am older and have owned may different vehicles Toyotas a fords alike. The fact that ford has a product that performs and they do have the quality should not upset the tundra owners. My next truck will be a ford ecoboost not because one is better than the other, but because I am an American and Have a retirement coming to me. I do not the dollar to be worth nothing, it might stop the imagration but My children and grandchildren will have not chance at getting a job. If you are waiting on Washington to solve the economy you are wrong. Americans do not realize they are economically surendering this country with every car purchased no matter what country it comes from. As for the other car manafactures are building vehicles here in america is sign of our terrible situation. Our Great grandparents had other countries working for us but now we are happy working for them.

  60. Jason (Admin) says:

    Leo – If you’re interested in helping the American economy, you should consider the Tundra. It has more US parts than the F150 –

  61. Anonymous says:

    The accelerator in my 09 Tundra got stuck the other day….so I burnt it. No more Toyota thank god.

  62. HolyCrap Justin says:


    HOLYCRAP. Crap now has become holy. Whoever did that graph on the link that you posted is obviously completely bias. I’ve never seen a 5.7 tundra graph like that.

    It seems that all this talk bout power and reliability comes down to one thing. We are freaking racist. Lets say Toyota is an american company and not a jap company; I bet all the comments would shift directions immediatly. Try going to Thailand and telling them ford is better on their sites and board, and you will get the same treatment, all they will say is datsun and mecedez and toyotas and hate ford to death even though ford isn’t all that bad, just the fact that it is made by white people.

    If you guys can drop the whole attitude towards who makes what and just focus on what is a better truck that would really kick out the real stuff we need to know. I.E. I/We know that ford makes the best truck body peroid. Strip it down and look at everything, thicker frame, thicker body panel, better paint, more solid built – no questions ask here. I can say that chevy is/almost the same thing. I don’t know bout dodge as I’ve never driven one so I can not comment. I hate people who critize a product and never own it before. Anyway we know toyota have been making some really good solid engines, usually their drivetrain is just plain solid, but holy crap their truck bodies are like cardboard, and yes I do own a 5.7. Paint looks cheap, frame looks okay, overall feel the ford wins for the body structural integrity, but their engine and drive train has fallen a little short. This ecoboost is nothing new. If you really want to talk about force induction say hello to Japan. What do you think all their sports car are? FORCE INDUCTION. 3.5 liter supra producing 1200hp and 900tq. OMFG, I didn’t think it was possible. Toyota has their work done for them already if they wanted to go force induction with v6. I bet GM and dodge will now slap on a turbo and tada ecoboost. Although this is a nice setup, I don’t entirely trust a v6 turbo to do a v8’s job whether it comes from ford, GM, Dodge or Japan(most experience with force induction). It’s like give a Pony drugs to do a horses job. Can we see the fail in that? I hope I’m not the only one not smoking anyting. Where I think the arguement should really be is the 5.0 vs 5.7 tundra. Bump that 5.0 a bit and tune it then it’s ON. but the ecoboost is shady in it’s ways.

  63. HolyCrap Justin says:


    Dream Truck is PowerCUMS Allison. hehe :).

    Superduty body with 5.9 CUMMINS on top of Allison. I like how that came out. See guys I’m sure we can all agreed on a mixture of things which is what makes that country so great.

  64. […] and GM all build vehicles for all purposes. A half ton truck is just that, a light duty truck. Ford’s EcoBoost Tear-Down Stunt Is Gimmicky | Tundra Headquarters Here's another view on Ford's accelerated aging tests and tear down test methods. Some can […]

  65. Leon wheeler says:

    I’m thinking about buying a brand new Ford F 150 ecoboost engine and I read your review plus a few other reviews and I will soon be buying a new Ford F150 ecoboost engine. I would never buy a Toyota pick up truck as I live in Maine and Toyota truck always rust out due to the rock salt.Toyota truck seem to be reliable but if the truck turns into rust bucket in 3,4,or 5 years that is full of holes you might be able to poor water in the back and water your lawn which by the way is dumb idea. You would be better off to by a Ford truck which is built far better than all the other trucks on the market. I bought a 1998 Rav-4 and I put 303,000 miles on it with a few minor problems and now he clutch is gone and the engine takes 2 quarts of oil per 200 miles so it not worth repairing.I bought a 2006 Rav-4 and the brake pads went bad at 50,000 miles and the spark plug coils went bad at 60,000 miles and again at 90,000 miles.I put more money in the 2006 than I did the 1998 which is bad in my book. We have a 2000 Ford Expedition with over 200,000 miles on it that cost far less money to maintain than the 2006 Toyota and the Expedition still runs better than the Toyota. I also have a 1999 Ford F 250 with a V 10 engine that runs great with 140,000 miles on it with no rust. Burns a lot of gas but I don’t water the lawn with it. HA,HA TOYOTA Also don’t buy the Ram AS THAT IS JUNK AS WELL. Buy any crysler product be ready to replace a transmission or motor.I owned a 69 Road Runner that back fired at 60 miles per hour (JUNK) and other crysler product that stalled out at red lights and when ever it rain it stalled out going around corners not to mention bad engines and transmissions made in the nineties and into 2000’s My 69 MUSTANG Boss would blow the doors of any of those crappy cars on the road at that time.

    • leon wheeler says:

      Hi just thought I would let you know my son bought a brand new F150 super crew Ford ecoboost which now has 19000 miles on it and runs great.We can haul 4 large atv 1000 Cam am,650 Can am,850 Polaris and a 500 Polaris on a 2000 pounds traler plus 3600 with the atv’s with plenty of power going up big hills and 75 miles per hour on the turn pike.It would go faster but the speed limit is 65 and the state troopers would give us a ticket so we keep it at 75.My son average 23 miles per gallon in city drivig and higghway driving. I can get better miles per gallon as I don’t have a lead foot.My advice to all of you,Go buy a Ford ecoboost and you will say I should have done this sooner

  66. David Williams says:

    Wasn’t there a big blow-up about the frames of Toyota trucks rotting out? Wasn’t there also a scandal regarding Toyota employees bragging about short-changing their customers for major repairs on their Toyota products that failed. Well, I can’t wait to see what is next regarding Toyota’s next “problem”. One thing for sure, I won’t buy a Toyota. My next first full-size truck will certainly be another Ford, I have been impressed by the quality of care that I have received from Ford. My 2008 Ford has been back to the dealer for one problem, an oil leak, they fixed it really quick and that is the only problem that I have had. Oh, gas mileage, 19.6mpg at 74-79 mph. I like that too!!

  67. Jason (Admin) says:

    Leon and David – This post isn’t a commentary on Ford quality or reliability. In fact, it’s complimentary to Ford in the last paragraph.

    The article merely states that this marketing promotion was a Ford gimmick. There’s no way to accurately “simulate” 10 years worth of use…you just have to use it for 10 years.

    Don’t get your Ford undies in bunch, fellas.

  68. firemanscot says:

    I am looking at buying a truck to pull a 6500lb dry RV trailer, and then just your reg stuff as well. I have no personal bias. Looked/drove all makes. What I heard had me convinced to go diesel, so Toyota was out. My best friend who has a sweet Tundra Limited even said go diesel. He cannot pull his trailer (same as mine) 300km on a tank of fuel!Now i need to justify an extra $10,000 for the diesel… not sure I can. Took the ecoboost out today and i must say i was impressed!I have spent a month researching, testing and driving trucks, and I honestly still dont know what to buy. If I can get away with a half ton, then i will. But I do not want to cheap out and then have to put a new tranny in or bag a truck out. I would love to hear some opinions and thoughts.


  69. Dennis says:

    Jason – I agree that the Ecoboost stuff is for marketing purposes. No doubt. (The worst was dragging the logs up the hill.) If that makes it gimmicky, so be it. I would say 99% of advertising is similar. Some is worse, where they make carefully worded statements that are true but misleading. Reminds a person of politics.

    Anyway, I work in a diesel engine factory, the design center is across the street. I’ve spent my career in machining until recently. We have very good interaction with the design folks so I have an understanding of much of the testing that goes on. Your argument against accelerated testing does not consider the fact that every manufacturer uses it to look for weaknesses. They also field test after the basic tests are successful, but they simply can’t put 10 years of real use on a component in 6 months. Accelerated testing is a must. I promise you Toyota uses accelerated testing. If they don’t show it to you does that make them better?

    To answer your typical question, I am here on this site because I’m curious about the Tundra’s performance. I’m arranging a race of all the trucks I can for the last race of the year. Should be fun, I hope the Tundra guy at work comes. I own the Ecoboost, a buddy has the 5.0, another guy has a Hemi Ram, but we can’t find a Chevy guy to race with us yet.

  70. Anonymous says:

    I fond it humorous that a Toyota Truck forum would post anything “Gimmicky” about the Ford EcoBoost engine. Have you watched a Toyota Truck commercial lately? When it comes down to it both Toyota and Ford have excellent marketing divisions that are helping them to sell trucks. In the end, Tundra vs F150 comes down to personal preferences and what you will be using your truck for.

  71. Jason (Admin) says:

    Dennis – Please don’t think I’m arguing against the value of accelerating testing. If I’ve given that impression, let me take it back right now. Accelerated testing is great.

    All I’m saying is that Ford’s publicity stunt of tearing down an engine in public is proof of nothing. It’s just a gimmick.

    Anon – Good point on gimmicky Tundra ads. I agree that the “truckers know” line of commercials are silly.

  72. Dennis says:

    Jason – the teardown proved nothing to Ford. They had undoubtedly done it dozens of times already. Seeing minimal wear should give those thinking a V-6 won’t live in a truck some proof that Ford has done their homework and the major engine components can handle the load.

    Oh, the drag race. My Ecoboost beat the Ram. I went 14.89 @ 92.58 and the Ram went 15.40’s @ 90 mph. Both were 4-door 4wd trucks and both of us drag race regularly. The Toyota didn’t show up.

  73. Chet says:

    Sorry tundra owners,this junk vehicle just never caught on. The plan for toyota was to build their tundras right in the middle of Texas, an area of the country where trucks are a large part of everyday use. Toyota thought they would be able to sucker Texans into buying their vehicles by producing them in the heart of Texas,as payback for creating a few jobs.Good luck toyota in trying to catch GM and Ford in the pickup market,never going to happen. Ford is lean and mean and have concentrated all of their efforts on cutting edge technology and leaves toyota in the rear view mirror.

  74. Jason (Admin) says:

    Dennis – Under 15? That’s cool. Very respectable.

    But watch out for a Tundra 5.7, especially if it’s wearing a TRD supercharger! 🙂

    Chet – Biased much?

  75. Anonymous says:

    Jason –

    While the performance is great, the sweet thing is on my last tank I got 17.63 mpg averaging 33.7 mph to and from work. Going to my mom’s place last weekend (all divided 4-lane) I got 23.21 mpg averaging 63.3 mph over 145 miles. I intentionally stayed out of the turbos within reason as I can have a heavy foot normally. My normal driving gets me a little under 17 to and from work. I know under better conditions the truck will do better, and worse with a bad headwind, etc. I think at 55 mph on the highway this thing will knock down 24 mpg. I have verified fuel usage and odometer accuracy over the last 2000 miles so these aren’t optimistic dash readings. They are as close as I can calculate. Time will tell if this engine was a good choice but for sure the potential has been demonstrated.

    I have never seen one of the factory supercharged Tundras. Keep in mind that Fastlane offers a downpipe and piggyback tuner that adds 90 rwhp to this engine! It might still lose to a supercharged Tundra but it will certainly cost less and get better mpg to boot.

  76. Dennis says:

    Oops. Looks like I forgot to log on for my previous comments authored by “Anonymous”

  77. Chet says:

    Yes I must be biased, sort of like this forum, but not in denial. Tell me again how many tundras did they sell so far this year.

    The 2012 Ford F-150 is named Truck of Texas, the most prestigious award presented by the Texas Auto Writers Association (TAWA) at its annual Truck Rodeo in the country’s largest truck market. In addition, Ford products and technologies win top honors in seven other categories
    The 2012 Ford Edge is named CUV of Texas
    Ford EcoBoost® technology – available for both F-150 and Edge – is named best vehicle feature. EcoBoost uses gasoline turbocharged direct-injection technology for up to 20 percent better fuel economy, 15 percent fewer CO2 emissions and superior driving performance versus larger displacement engines
    Ford also is named Truck Line of Texas for the 12th consecutive year, in recognition of the best-in-class capability and durability of its truck lineup

  78. Jason (Admin) says:

    Dennis – Didn’t know the after-market was on the spot with EcoBoost downpipes…awesome. I think those trucks are smart, and if you can stay out of the turbo I hear they get good mileage too.

    As to whether they’ll beat a TRD supercharged Tundra in the quarter mile? My money is on the Tundra – at least at the halfway point – there’s no substitute for displacement on the starting line.

    Ford deserves a lot of credit for the EcoBoost – very smart option.

    Chet – So you think sales figures prove that something is better than something else? Does that mean McDonald’s makes the best cheeseburger? They’ve sold more of them than anyone in the world, so they must be the best, right?

    If you want to tell me that the F150 is a good truck, I won’t argue. But if you want to say that the Tundra is “junk,” you’ve left the reservation. The Tundra has won numerous quality awards and done well in numerous comparisons. It might not be your cup of tea, but it’s definitely not junk. Only an idiot would seriously argue that the Tundra is junk – to do so is to ignore a mountain of data to the contrary.

    How about instead of tossing out your bias, you just offer a respectful opinion and then move on.

    Or, just move on. I don’t care.

  79. Chet says:

    Jason (Admin)
    The McDonald analogy is a very poor comparison in representing sales of trucks. A hamburger cost about a buck a new truck can cost between $25,000-$50,000. The truck market is an area where Toyota has failed and will will continue to struggle and may eventually give up on this segment of the market. Ford, GM, and even GMC are the dominate players in this market basically due to experience and customer loyalty which will be almost impossible for Toyota to lure buyers from these markets.Toyota has proven that it can suffer from many of the same problems that the domestic auto makers have and has turned many Americans back to buying domestic vehicles.The real facts are that Ford is a rising star and continues to pick up market share in all segments, yes they have equaled Toyota and Honda in quality and are building vehicles that people want. The F 150 is the gem of Ford and they will continue to keep it that way, always staying on top of the competition. Toyota dominates some of the car market but the Tundra just hasn’t caught on for real truck lovers. As for the McDonald thing they sell more burgers because they taste good and are a great value.

    Buy Ford stock while it’s cheap and undervalued.

    • Jason (Admin) says:

      Chet – First of all, great stock advice. I’m an owner of as many shares as I feel comfortable owning (come on $18!). 🙂

      Secondly, the problem with assuming that sales = quality is that not all buyers are rational. If they were, no one would buy convertibles (there’s no logic in that decision), no one would buy King Ranch or Platinum trucks b/c the XLT or SR5 would be fine (who needs luxury in a truck?), no one would buy sports cars (expensive to insure, not a lot of utility) etc. Yet all of those cars sell because most consumers are NOT rational. Instead, they buy what they like, what they can afford, whatever is close to their home, whatever they’ve always bought, etc.

      So long as Ford and GM have a large dealer presence in rural areas, the lowest cost trucks, and the perception that they’re somehow “American” (even though Ford and GM build more of their trucks in Mexico than anyone else), and a large owner base, they’ll ALWAYS win the sales contest. Always. Frankly, you made this point yourself when you talked about customer loyalty. A lot of people (right or wrong) are loyal to a brand, so loyal in fact that they’re unwilling to consider any alternatives.

      So, I think any argument that says Ford is best because they have the best sales figures is flat-out wrong. Ditto for any argument that the Camry is the best car because it sells the most, or the Tacoma because it sells the most, etc. Sales are proof of nothing more than sales.

      As for improvements in quality at Ford and GM, I absolutely agree. I’d even go so far as to say that the quality difference between Ford or GM or Honda or Toyota is miniscule – barely perceptible. In fact, I wouldn’t be shocked if each manufacturer had one or two vehicles that won the quality award in it’s class.

      Still, it all boils down to this: the Tundra has earned numerous awards for quality and enjoys excellent resale value. That’s not a mistake – that’s because the Tundra is solid. Any honest assessment of the truck must come to that conclusion. Now, is it best for YOU? I don’t know. You’re the only one who can know that.

  80. Chet says:

    Jason (Admin)
    Ah this is tricky. The Tundra is a niche market meaning not that many used trucks are available, because they just don’t sell many which can drive up the price of used vehicles.If a buyer wants a used Tundra he has less to choose from, supply and demand in play here which is great for you. I guess we could go in circles trying to out logic each other, obviously you are a Tundra guy and I am a Ford guy. I believe you see the Tundra as fine wine and the F 150 as boons farm apple wine, that’t fine and I respect that, it’s what makes the world go around.I will read your response to this (if any) and then move on to another subject. Thanks.

    • Jason (Admin) says:

      Chet – Quite the opposite actually – I really, really like the F150. It’s a fine truck, and I think it’s perfectly logical to buy one. Thanks for commenting – I hope to see you comment on other posts too. Ford owners are always welcome! 🙂

  81. Dennis says:

    Jason –

    A few things to consider.

    Rational people can buy sports cars, King Ranch F150’s and other premium vehicles. The rational person identifies the upgrade from a spartan, but fully functional vehicle to something more as a want and not a need.

    The fact that a vehicle sells more is a combination of a number of factors, some of which you have identified. Bias, cost, dealership experience, perceived quality (there are different defintions of quality), availability, aesthetics, and more. The fact that the F150 sells more is testament to it being the more successful truck.

    Resale value … this one is more complicated than it seems. Various brands brag about resale value but you have to be careful to understand what the numbers really say. Resale is calculated off sticker price. I bought my last two F150’s for $8000 or more below sticker, and I could choose any F150 on the lot at that discount. I even negotiated the price over the phone with a salesperson I had never met. Honda and Toyota don’t generally do that. Yes, they have higher reasale value, but some of that is due to the higher real cost of purchase. For sure some of it is due to people’s willingness to pay more (look for a used Accord!). As a datapoint on the F150, I bought my 2004 for $27,500 with no trade in 2004. I bought my 2011 at invoice and kept all the rebates. Sure, I know the dealer still made money, but the trade in value of $13,000 they gave me for my trade with 90k miles was not inflated by a high purchase price of the new truck. Approaching half price 7 years later is pretty good resale value.

    I do agree with your conclusion, just not completely with how you arrived there.

    • Jason (Admin) says:

      Dennis – I realize it’s a bit semantic, but what’s rational about spending $$$ on something you don’t “need?” That’s sort of like saying “I know I don’t need a Rolex to tell time, but I really wanted one, so I decided to tell myself it made sense to buy one.” 🙂

      As for resale, I’m not talking about absolute dollars – I’m talking about percentage of value retained. That’s what Edmunds was talking about earlier this year when they ranked Tundra 1st overall:

      Finally, speaking to sales volume, let me ask you this: The GMC Sierra and Chevy Silverado are identical, and if you combine their sales figures (and many argue that they should be combined), there are many years where they outsold the F150 (combined). Does that mean that the Ford is 2nd to the GM truck?

      Also, if sales volumes represent relative value, how is it that Ford sells more XL’s and XLTs than Lariats and King Ranch’s? Is that because those more expensive packages aren’t a good deal? Toyota, on the other hand, sells almost exclusively SR5’s and Limited’s…does that mean that a Toyota Limited is better than an F150 King Ranch if it outsells the model?

      This is why I say phooey to sales figures…who cares. The typical consumer shouldn’t buy a truck because everyone else is buying it too – they should buy one because it’s the best value for them.

    • Jason (Admin) says:

      Dennis – One more thing: My sincere thanks for the intelligent commentary. Much appreciated – please comment more! 🙂

  82. Dennis says:

    Jason –

    Rational is intentionally making decisions based on reason. This includes recognizing that we are human and have wants. If you don’t accept this, then you must accept that Tundra buyers are the most irrational truck buyers as they favor the high end trucks. Data point: I find that I keep my vehicle longer and appreciate it more if I buy a higher trim level.

    GMC and Chevy combined regularly outsell F150. From a manufacturer’s perspective they are more successful. I give them 75% credit, the other 25% they don’t get because there are people out there who will buy a GMC but not a Chevy and vice-versa (reference the corporate V8 lawsuit of the 70’s). Also, if GMC were killed some people would go to another dealer which might not be a Chevy dealer.

    I would be interested to see the actual numbers when it comes to resale. In your link I only saw the rankings. Given that Ford sells a lot of XL’s to commercial buyers who use and abuse them then sell cheap at auction (GM also) the resale percentage will be pulled down. My own experience as I mentioned already is that I got outstanding resale. Private consumer resale should be compared to Toyota to be fair. I drive past a local plumbing company every day with at least 75 F150 XL’s that I wouldn’t want when they are done with them.

    Regarding models, I would be surprised to find a Tundra Limted outselling the equivalent F150 model(s) regardless of the tag on the fender. I don’t know how many trim levels Toyota offers, but I’ve certainly lost track of Ford’s. My FX4 has heated leather, power folding mirrors, sunroof, rear camera, adjustable pedals, Sync, ect. and the FX4 is a level down from the Lariat! I think breaking down the sales by trim level is valuable in understanding some of the measures we use, but in determining the overall success of the truck it is much less valuable.

    I agree, buy the truck that you deem to be the best but believe sales figures are just another survey method – a survey method that real people are putting their $$ behind. Edumunds, JD Powers, etc can’t make that claim. The only significant argument that can be made against the volume argument is the issue of bias. Sales figures mostly matter when there is a concern of the model disappearing. Try to buy a new Ford minivan for example.

  83. bills driveway garage says:

    thanks for the comments
    I just saw a ecoboost teardown at the Checkout the strength of the main caps. very thick, very big, as big as for instance a chrysler 360, 6 bolts, 2 side bolts, 2 through the engine combo girdle/windage tray. strong bottom end could contribute a lot to stability and reliability, torgue starts at 1400, 90% 1700 to peak, the strong bottom end should compensate for multi directional thrusts under load, so, I would like to have one to test as my race car

  84. Tundra/F250 says:

    Sour Grapes I have a 2000 Tundra 4×4 Limited bought new, and just got rid of a F250 diesel. The diesel had more problems than the Tundra but the tundra has had enough manufact. ignore problems than a person should have to put up with. Several O2sensors. Leaking rear window 6 trips to the dealer, brake vibration (finally fixed it myself by ordering high preformance rotors. and a ridiculous 90 mile service.

  85. Boosted says:

    Ford has the best line of gas engines on the planet right now. What kind of retard thinks pushrods are a good idea.
    And give your heads a shake. Cop cars,cabs all have modular engines and the 4.6 and 5.4 are proving that 500000 miles is just warming up.
    I used to be a chev guy but fords engines are doing laps around every manufacturer out there. Say whatever you want,proof is looking at the fleets of cabs and police vehicles still running and racking up miles.

    • Tim Esterdahl says:

      Umm… what are you trying to say? Ford F-150 is the most American built? Sad, that Ford only has one product in the top ten? Are you frustrated that Toyota has 4? What is your point?

  86. Chet says:

    Hey, are Tundra’s still available, don’t see many on the road. Looks like the 2014 Silverado is almost on par with the Ford 150 but not quite. All new Ford 150 to replace current generation in 2015-2016, Ford way out in front here.
    Dodge Ram really moving too. Hold on to those Tundra’s soon to be a collector item.

    • Tim Esterdahl says:

      Umm… where do you live? Here, every 3 out of 10 pickups is a Toyota.


      • Anonymous says:

        Face it, Tundra just doesn’t cut it, not taking America as the Camry did. Toyota is losing it’s clout as American car companies are progressing with high quality and cutting edge technology. Toyota has proved that any auto maker is subject to recalls especially Toyota’s recent costly pay out for accelerator problems.

        • Tim Esterdahl says:

          Toyota has actually increased market share in the pickup side to equal the car side. And every automaker is subject to recalls, Toyota was doing recalls long before the unproven accelerator issue. You probably need to check your facts.


          • Chet says:

            Not saying they never did recalls, but the accelerator problem was especially damaging to them, not to mention severe depreciation of the affected vehicles.
            Unproven? Or just never admitted to the accelerator problem. Toyota paid out over a Billion dollars in economic loss from incidents of unintended acceleration. Toyota has consistently misled the public about the nature and severity of the Toyota sudden acceleration problem. NASA identified numerous failures in Toyota electronics that could lead to unwanted acceleration.

            The Tundra is struggling to compete especially with the introduction of the next generation 2015 F-150. Toyota will eventually exit the light pickup segment unless sales dramatically increase.

          • Dennis says:

            Tim, I don’t know what kind of fuzzy math you are using regarding market share increase, but in no way is Toyota a player in the full size pickup in the manner that they are cars. Math is funny that way … if you sell 10 trucks a month and then sell 11 you had a 10% increase in sales but the market share is still insignificant. The only full size truck that sells less than Toyota is Nissan.

          • Tim Esterdahl says:


            I got my numbers from Toyota themselves. At a regional press event, Toyota told all the reporters that their market share for cars is the same for trucks. I didn’t do the math, they did.


          • Dennis says:

            Tim –

            Sales will always try to spin things to sound the best. This may be what you are experiencing. In 2013 Ford sold 763,402 F-Series and Toyota sold 112,732 Tundras. Ford did not dominate Toyota in car sales to this ratio … in fact Toyota sells more cars than Ford. Toyota may have had similar car-to-truck sales increases in 2013 on a percentage gain basis but in no way does their market share in pickups match their market share in cars. Again, you have to listen very carefully to the marketing spin to understand what they are saying, and not saying.

          • Tim Esterdahl says:


            The reality of this conversation is that we are missing the big picture. Toyota says they have the same market share and they say they are happy with it. Who cares then what you and I think. If Toyota says they are happy, then they are happy. I’ve yet to speak with anyone at Toyota including Chief Engineer Mike Sweers who laments not having more market share. They don’t even discuss it, they know they are at the bottom of the heap in sales. That isn’t a big deal to them.

            We could go round and round discussing sales, percentages, who is talking out the side of their mouth, etc… and my question would be: to what end? Toyota doesn’t sell as many trucks as the others, that is true. It is also true they don’t have the factories like the others do. And Toyota doesn’t invest as many resources in trucks as the others. Those are the real facts.


          • Dennis says:

            Tim –

            If you read the comment string, the summary of my reason for commenting goes like this:

            1. You suggested that Toyota sells 3 out of 10 pickups. Clearly this is not the case.

            2. Anonymous called you on that, and you responded “Toyota has actually increased market share in the pickup side to equal the car side.” Cleary this is not the case.

            3. I must have a compelling urge to correct every false claim on the internet. (Sorry, no humor font is available here.)

            I don’t for a moment believe that Toyota is happy being the #5 producer of pickups. In today’s competitive market any manufacturer that is content with mediocrity will not survive. I expect Toyota to survive. I am in manufacturing and know that you will never get a sorry face from our marketing guys about our underperformance in a particular market segment. We are working to improve it.

            Regarding the accelerator pedal recall discussion, I do believe this has damaged Toyota but due to their good reputation they have clearly survived it. For me the fact that they had information and did not disclose it for months is as bad as or worse than the actual problem. This speaks to the integrity of the company and is why the NTSB issued the largest fine ever for an automaker in the US.

          • Tim Esterdahl says:


            On points 1 and 2, Toyota themselves are declaring them to be true, you are saying they are not. If you have better qualifications than Toyota to state this, please let me know. Sure that is what the PR guys say and I state again, who cares about this. It is like arguing if the sky is blue, there are no winners.

            If you look at our site posts overall, you will see that we have called out Toyota for many things like their rust issues. And you will see that other manufactures have had pedal acceleration issues. Everyone has an opinion on how Toyota handled it and they are ALL mostly right. That’s the funny thing about opinions, everyone feels they are right and there isn’t a lot of sense in arguing it.

            I will end with this. Toyota has to be pretty happy to be where they are at. Flip it around for a second. They have gained market share in the tough truck market, the plant in San Antonio is at full capacity and they are adding to their truck lineup with the 1794 edition. Toyota’s problem isn’t sales position, it is capacity. I just talked with Mike Sweers last week in Detroit face to face. He told me flat out that he needs more resources for the Tacoma. I imagine the same thing applies for the Tundra (think a new plant and more power train options).

            Like I stated earlier, you and I are discussing our view on Toyota’s stated statistics. It doesn’t really matter how this conversation goes, each of us just has a different point of view. I have spoken with engineers of all makers and sales reps. Everyone pretty much has the same view, Toyota isn’t a big threat in the full-size market – yet, that doesn’t mean they make a terrible truck.


          • Dennis says:

            Tim –

            Possibly some confusion here. Point 1 – toyota sells 3 out of every 10 trucks … I see you make the claim, not Toytota. Ford sold 763,000 F-series in 2013. Toyota sold less than 113,000 Tundras. Figure in that Chevy, GMC, and Dodge sold more full size trucks than Toyota did and the math just doesn’t work out. Even with the Tacoma in the stats it’s more like 1 in 10.

            Point 2, I think there is a misunderstanding about what Toyota’s claim was. Again, do the math. There is no way that 113,000 trucks puts Toyota in the #2 market share spot like they are overall (cars and trucks combined). Clearly the cars are carrying them in their battle for the #1 spot in the world, a position they are in contention for any given year. You claim Toyota is happy with their truck sales, I don’t believe it, but clearly they aren’t putting the resources into the truck battle to put themselves into a better position.

            I never said Toyota makes a bad truck, and I agree they aren’t a big threat at this point. They might be later, might not, we’ll see.

          • Tim Esterdahl says:


            Did you see this story?

            Toyota just basically said they are OK with their market share based and place in the market place.

            On 2, you’re right that we are talking apples and oranges. Toyota is looking at their entire car division market share not standing in say the Corolla. Statistics are funny things and they can be used in many different ways.

            I never accused you of saying that Toyota builds a bad product. All I am saying is that right now, the “signs” I am seeing indicate Toyota is good with their market share and won’t be expanding their truck lineup to increase share. They are sitting tight and watching what happens.


          • Dennis says:

            -Hey Tim –

            Check this one out. It quantifies total sales over the last few years and points out that Toyota is facing some pretty good competition. Neither the article nor I would say Toyota doesn’t make a good vehicle but the world-is-a-changin’


  87. leon wheeler says:

    All trucks have their good points and bad points as well. My Rav4 4 is ok but we also have a Ford Explorer that is older but rides better and handles better than my newer Rav4. My son bought a Super crew eco-boost that has nearly 40,000 miles on it and it can hall 4 new snowmobiles or 2 4-wheelers and a Cam ann commander on a large trailer and still get good gas mileage and has yet to break down. You don’t neeed to be so blind that you think you have the best truck because they all can piss you off at one time or an other.

0 Flares Twitter 0 Facebook 0 Google+ 0 Email -- 0 Flares ×