We Hold Panel Discussion on 2014 Tundra

Chicago-Auto-Show II

As part of the world debut of the 2014 Tundra at the Chicago Auto Show next week, Toyota will conduct a panel discussion following the press conference from 11:00 to 11:30 AM (CST).

The panel discussion will be moderated by editor of PickupTrucks.com, Mark Williams, and will include Toyota Division Group Vice President and General Manager Bill Fay, Tundra chief engineer Mike Sweers, and Calty Research and Design president Kevin Hunter. Both the Tundra press conference and panel discussion will be broadcast live via Livestream.

We're hoping to have both the live webcast of the press conference (9:00 AM CST) and panel discussion (11:00 AM CST) here at PickupTrucks.com, but if you are having any problems with the links, it can also be seen at http://new.livestream.com/toyota.

Feel free to send along suggestions on what we should ask the panelists, then watch to see if you use your questions during the webcast. 

ToyotaTundra2.KGP.ed-2341724380 II

 

 

Comments

2014 Tundra
Stronger than ever
Back to wreck
All respect to those Toyota engineers who break their neck to keep their hoes from GM, Ram and Ford in check
Cause oh they sweat the Tundra majorly
Lou, I don't know why, your girl keeps paging me
She tell me that she needs me, cries when she leaves me
And every time she sees me, she loves the Tacoma, lady take it easy!
Hate to sound sleazy, but I don't want it if it's that easy
You ask why I drive a Tacoma, don't matter, my pockets got fatter
Saving max money
Now everybody's looking for 2014 Tundra
Toyota Tundra gets around.
What you mean you don't know?
Yeah, ayo oxi, let them hoes know

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnDR8OngS1U

Posted by: Jay | Jan 31, 2013 8:25:47 PM

That was not me!

@Lou and @JJS Jerseys
CAT has no plans for a on Highway Truck in the US or suppliying of diesels to another OEM. Hino does their diesels for them.
They do sell a CAT branded Truck in Australia with a MAN designed Navistar produced engine. The Emissions compliance in the US by Navistar of the enginehas been a bit of a disaster.
I believe the locally assembled Trucks were Euro IV compliance, imported ones from the US are Euro V compliant . The current Navistar over the highway trucks use Cummins as the CAT /Navistar developed engine was a total flop. Very confusing picture about what is going on.
Here are photos of the current Australian Trucks.
http://www.deviantart.com/download/208023649/cat_truck_on_display_by_redtailfox-d3fuo2p.jpg

http://www.truckworld.com.au/absolutenm/articlefiles/2636-Cat-Trucks.gif

@Ken and Lou,

Toyota Tundra creek crossing with trailer on!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6H5meIbJtdk

Lou, I don't know why, your girl keeps paging me
She tell me that she needs me, cries when she leaves me
And every time she sees me, she loves the Tacoma, lady take it easy!
Hate to sound sleazy, but I don't want it if it's that easy

LOL!!!

@Bob, LMAO. Did you write that? Good one!

Serious question to ask:

How do you expect the old 5.7to compete against GM's expected segment-leading numbers from its class of new engines on the 2014 Silverado and the next-gen 2015 F-150?

@Bob -what makes you think GMC will have segment leading numbers?
How many people actually buy a truck with the 6.2 whether it be in a Ford or Chevy?
Ram guys tend to go with the 5.7 since the 4.6 isn't better on fuel and is down on power compared to the 5.7.
The 5.3 is GM's bread and butter engine and it has to go against the Ford 5.0 and 3.5 EB, it also has to go against the 5.7 IForce and Hemi.
The Chevy 4.3 will most likely beat the V6's from Ram and Ford in power but I'll be surprised if it wins any mpg contests.

Marchionne released their new plan and the Ram is due for another refresh in 2015. Ford will have a new truck in 2015. Tundra will be new 2015?
If GM comes out on top, it will not be for long.

GM the company said it expected segment-leading numbers from its class of new engines.

http://bizbeatblog.dallasnews.com/2013/01/toyota-will-unveil-2014-tundra-pickup-at-chicago-auto-show.html/

The Ram refresh is planned for 2015 calendar year so 2016 MY.

GM also plans a new HD for 2015 MY. The GM half tons will also receive another refresh when GM and Ford get done with the 10 speed in 2015. GM may not be class leading forever and every year but they will be fine!

Toyota usually waits a long time between refreshes so that is why I said to ask how do you expect to compete against the others who are starting to do faster refreshes: GM, Ram and Ford.

Will the V6 be beefed up to somewhere in the mid 300 horses to retain its current size, or will it drop maybe, half a liter, and rise to 300-305 horses?
Will an eight speed be available behind all of the engine lineups?

It could be possible the front end of the Tundra will be similar to this vehicle.

It would be nice to see a diesel in a Tundra, but the 4.5 V8 diesel is getting long in the tooth and Toyota don't have suitable diesel.

I suppose they can use it like Ford is using the 3.2 Duratorque.

http://www.caradvice.com.au/188618/toyota-landcruiser-altitude-special-edition-released/

@Bob - The news story did not stipulate model year or just year. As you have astutely pointed out, the odds are Ram 2015 means 2016MY, but a 2015 Ram refresh could be MY2015 or MY2016. If one looks at the 2014 Chevy, it is being released summer of 2013. There is no longer a clear connection between callendar year and model year.
Chevy "will be fine" as you have pointed out but the caveat being the speed at which they respond to the competitor's upgrades and new models.
Toyota is and always has been very conservative. They are slow to change and do not usually take risks. They've been accused of being the oriental version of GMC when it comes to decision making. what has saved Toyota from the same fate of GMC is the quality of their products and the fact that they are a true global company.

Ask them please, if they are going to get 8 speed transmission, small diesel engine or HEMI as an option . Rear coil springs ,air ride, heating steering wheel and leather interior would be nice as well.

Another question I would ask is what is on sales!

In 2007 you expected to sell double as many Tundras as you did in the previous year where you sold 110,000. That would put you at 220,000 Tundras sold for the year. This never materialized and you sold as few as 79,000 in 2009, 87,000 and 110,000 in 2012. Are you disspointed by the sales? What is your sales goal for this redesigned model?

Tailgate question:

There have been reports in the past where the tailgate has split when someone sat on it or loaded an atv. How have you fixed this and what is the tailgate load capacity?

@Lou: The Tundra 5.7 might be more advanced, too bad it doesn't make any bit more power or better economy. It barely makes more torque below 2400 rpm, after that, game over.

For a good laugh, look at K & N's dyno runs of both a 2007 and a 2012 Tundra, vs. a 2009 Ram Hemi. Somebody will be here to say K&N is trying to sell their stuf, yeah, that's why they DYNO them BEFORE and AFTER, not just after their filter was applied.

5.3 lol (name subject to change when ratings come out) will be quick to complain the Tundra is hard to Dyno, whatever. I believe they all get dyno'd in 2nd gear.

Yup, all those valves, all that tech, and bigger slightly then a hemi (fair enough I guess when the Hemi has a bit more compression) Oh, and the Hemi doesn't NEED the 89 octane to get those numbers, as hemi lol will be quick to point out.

It was also the worst gas eater in the 30 K shootout. Go beat out by an old tech 5.7 16 valve pushrod engine, with a less efficient transmission (the Rams 6 speed) It will only get better.

@TRX4 tom
Max hp and torque doesn't translate into a more flexible engine. Yourself being a race car driver should understand this.

This article is a pretty objective piece on the Tundra engines. It states the Tundra engine is more truck like than the other engines. And the difference in hp and torque is marginal.

Being trailer tower you should look into buying one as it is also quite economical at towing. It might be better than your Ram.

Also you comment on the fuel types doesn't quite marry up to the article.


http://www.newcartestdrive.com/review-drive.cfm?Vehicle=2012_Toyota_Tundra&ReviewID=5090

@ TRX 4 Tom

What's your question for Toyota? This post is supposed to be for questions on the 2014 Tundra! Not your defense of Ram!!!!!!!!!

2 Steve If Toyota made the same changes, Ford did to the F150 rear springs. Toyota would haul more, tow more etc... But they did not, they stayed with the standard ase springs. Toyota is the better truck no matter what it is up against! Period. lol u ever seen the size of the tundra rear and and spring, LMAO you made me laugh so hard, a ford ranger can out hout a tundra. the space ship commercial was fake

If Valvematic does not show up, ask why use the more expensive & less versatile D4-S?

Where is the center differential in their transfer case?

was i the only one to ask a civil question, lol?! and i am not even a toyota fan really, i just like to see competition.

@lou
the hemis are reportedly to get a power boost soon (somewhere in the "plan"), presumably to stay competitive with the next nissan, toyota, chevrolet, and be ready for ford.

I would ask them what Toyota is doing to prevent any future issues with frame rust. Also I would suggest that Toyota puts a few more soft touches on the doors and dash (this would be a suggestion to GM as well on their trucks). Otherwise the truck is a good truck. I do not want to waste their time in bashing their truck just some questions that would lead them in the direction of improving their truck. I am looking forward to reading any articles on this new truck and seeing any pictures from the Chicago auto show. Nine years ago I went to the Chicago auto show and Toyota had a very impressive display along with Hyundai, GM, Ford, Mercedes, and some others. Chicago has a great show very much worth seeing.

@Big Al from Oz--I don't see anything wrong with either using the current front end or the front end of the Landcruiser in your link. Toyota could stand to clean up the sides, the tail lights, and the tailgate but otherwise the looks of the Tundra have grown on me. Toyota is a conservative corporation as Lou stated and is slow to change. They have had a few quality issues recently like the rusting frames, but overall their products are good just a little pricey. I would say address the structural issues first and if those have already been addressed make the public aware of what has been done. Better to clear the air about any problems and address them directly, then move on.

Eventually the Tundra will gain more acceptance, it is just very hard to break into the traditional American full size pickup truck market. Younger generations have been more accepting of Japanese and Korean brands. Yes I realize the Tundra is American made and designed and has a higher content of American parts but to the traditional truck buyer they still see GM, Ford, and Ram as being more American. The longer Toyota sticks it out with the Tundra the more acceptance in the American market.

Why no diesel? A pickup truck is the PERFECT application for a diesel with lots of low end torque, and it would get good fuel economy.

Put a bow tie on the front grill and it can pretend it is a real truck.

Ideally, your conversation will go something like this:

*someone asks a smart, pointed question*

you: "Will there be a diesel?"

*someone asks a smart, pointed question*

you: "Will there be a diesel?"

*someone asks a smart, pointed question*

you: "Will there be a diesel?"

*someone asks a smart, pointed question*

you: "Will there be a diesel?"

*someone asks a smart, pointed question*

you: "Will there be a diesel?"

*someone asks something else*

you: "can I roll coal or what?"

*you get shade*

you: "all that matters is torque. We want it. You can do it. Torque."

I can't wait to see Mark's followup article on this panel discussions. It will be interesting to read the questions and to read Toyota's response. Toyota needs to address the prior frame issues, tailgate issues, and other safety issues. I am sure that Toyota has addressed many of these issues but they need to be forthright and address everything including what they have done. This would help Toyota as well because it would remove any false rumors or misconceptions the public has in general about the safety of their products.

@ TRX 4 Tom

I have hard time believing that you can't understand after all the different threads I have shown you were people had a hard time trying to dyno a Tundra it must be you don't want to believe. So here is another http://www.motoiq.com/magazine_articles/articletype/articleview/articleid/2138/pageid/3647/project-toyota-tundra-installing-and-testing-the-trd-superchargercharger.aspx.

To everybody a Tundra is hard to get an accurate dyno on because of 2 problems:
1. It has an open diff and not a real limited slip so when you dyno one you have to pull the traction control fusehttp://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/tundra/215088-dynoing-tomorrow-what-do-i-need/ which will lead you more susceptible to wheel spin. Also some have found pulling the fuse to be a little difficult http://www.tundratalk.net/forums/tundra-performance-modifications/105178-racing-5.html.
2. Tundra has a 6-speed and it's true 1:1 gear is 4th not 3rd which will yield less power. The problem with trying to dyno in 4th is you will the speed limiterhttp://www.toyotatundraforum.com/general-tundra-discussion/11726-dyno.html . If you can dyno in 4th you might see closer to the Edmunds HP# http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/tundra/93015-5-7-sr5-tundra-dyno-test/ than the K&N http://www.knfilters.com/dynocharts/77-9031_dyno.pdf.

Now Tom you said the Tundra makes more power before 2400 and the Hemi after so what rpm range do you normally drive in?

So much to say, so many idiots on here.

I'm amazed at how you "big three" fan boys are SO threatened by the Tundra. Not to mention hateful and defensive. Could this be perhaps because all of you knew that in 2007 when the 2nd Gen Tundra came out it was better than anything the big three had at the time? Power, Torque, 6-Speed Tranny, huge brakes, all the things that took the "big three" 3-4 years to catch up with. Could it be that you're all scared that's going to happen all over again???

God forbid the world's #1 auto maker make another great truck for people to tow their boat, atv's, camper with. Why is that so offensive to you people?

I think Ford's have been historically $hitty trucks, however I will admit the new F-150 is a nice truck. Chrysler constantly is rated in the basement for reliability, but I can admit the Ram is a good looking truck. I'd just never buy one. Keep it real people.

And how could I forget, just a reminder the most American made half-ton, is none other than the Toyota Tundra :)

" Could this be perhaps because all of you knew that in 2007 when the 2nd Gen Tundra came out it was better than anything the big three had at the time? Power, Torque, 6-Speed Tranny, huge brakes, all the things that took the "big three" 3-4 years to catch up with. Could it be that you're all scared that's going to happen all over again???"

DG: if the 2007 Tundra was so much better than the trucks from Ford, Dodge, and GM at the time it was introducted, why did Toyota have to offer $5000 rebates and cut-rate financing on it to move it, an ALL-NEW vehicle, just a few months after it was rolled out? $5000 rebates and cut-rate financing on an all-new vehicle just a few months after going on sale is virtually unheard-of in the car business.

I agree that the current Tundra was, on paper, equal to the domestics when it came out as a 2007, but when it came to selling, the marketplace resoundingly said otherwise. Sales have tanked hard since the 2007 rollout.

I don't believe that anyone, least of all the domestic brands, is outright "threatened" by the Tundra. Simply put, Toyota does not have the production capacity to make a serious sales run at Ford, GM, or RAM. The Tundra is built in one plant that splits its production capacity with the Tacoma, and it should be pointed out that the plant came in way over budget and was substantially underutilized until Tacoma production was shifted to San Antonio from the NUMMI plant in Fremont. Ford alone has two plants building the F-150 and a third plant cranking out the Super Duty. That being said, you can be sure that the domestics are not ignoring the Tundra; they take it as seriously as any other competitive truck.

Facts are facts: Just like the Titan, Tundra is not a true, hard-core threat to anyone unless Toyota decides to commit the billions(!) of dollars needed to make a real run at the domestic trucks ... and I don't see Toyota committing that kind of coin to the US market for a vehicle line that will only be sold in North America.

@TRXTom - please note that I said the 5.7 IForce is more modern than the 5.7 "Hemi". I didn't say anything about power, torque, or reliability. One can argue that there is nothing wrong with pushrods, and Ram's 2 plug head.
@Josh - There is probably more room for Toyota to develop the IForce 5.7 than Ram/Dodge with their 5.7. I suspect that the 5.7 will be replaced by the 6.4. There seems to be more room to grow with the 6.4 or the 5.7 will stay as the mid engine.
@DG - we expect men to be rational and logical but all evidence indicates that we men are just as driven by emotions and gut feelings as women. There is nothing wrong with that as long as we realize that and try to keep an open mind. Toyota owners tend to be from a higher socio-economic demographic which would indicate that those buyers have grown beyond many of the emotional and societal constraints that affect our decisions.

The "haters" to "hack cough gag" quote Oxi for the most part are bringing up old issues. Frame rust, yes that was a problem. I see frame rust on many trucks of the same era. The pics that were posted are bad but I've seen those SAME pictures multiple times. The first time they surfaced, I made the comment about "personal responsibility". Rust doesn't just happen. I was flamed for those remarks.
No one seems to go ape feces over guys mentioning frame rust on "low slung Chevy" frames?

Toyota gets universally panned for many reasons, and the majority are emotionally based. How dare Toyota, a foreign company, who has set up shop in the USA and then try to sell us (as in me or USA) a pickup which is an American Institution. How dare they cross that line? They should know their place and that is to crank out econoboxes and little, not really for real men, compact trucks. We all know that a compact is what women use to apply make up, and heaven forbid, we do not sound like or appear to be less manly or patriotic or conservative or .......... well, some of you get the point. Others, well, those pesky emotions will block out what I've just said!

@KMS,

I am with you man! It seems like most the comments made on this site are nothing but disgraceful, ignorant, 4th grade education level flatulence!!! These guys and their immature attacks are an embarrassment to truck manufactures and truck owners everywhere! I say if you can't be civil and respectful like pickuptrucks.com asks, then stay the heck off the site! After all, you know what the truth about opinions is anyway. 'Everybody has one and they all stink!'

@ Jay,

You are a perfect example of what I just explained in my last post. Those of us who actually get educations, jobs, and buy new pickups don't spend all of our time attacking others just to make up for our own incompetence!

Could someone tell me what a real truck is? Does it need to include frequent trips to dealer service? Does it need ball joints replaced every 10k miles? Does it need most of the emissions controls replaced before it reaches 5 years and 50k miles? Does it blow its spark plugs out and require thousands of US dollars for helicoil repairs? Does it need to ride on the back of a flatbed when the first wave of single digit temps hit the northeast? Does it need a rear diff rebuild after its vent tube plugs and it blows all the fluid out the seals?

Oh...I see. My bad. The Tundra isn't a real truck. Got it.

@Lou--I would agree with many men are not as rational and logical as they think they are. There is a lot of emotion that is involved in not just the purchase of a car or truck but in many other things including brand of beer. You can have rust on any truck frame based on what climate and how much salt your truck is exposed to. The Toyota frame issue came from Dana supplied frames to Toyota that lacked corrossion protection. Toyota I know has extended the warranty on these frames and is either replacing frames or treating frames with corrosion protection. My neighbor has a 2002 4x4 Extend Cab Tacoma who had his warranty extended and his frame treated. You could not detect any rust on his frame but the dealership took care of him. I do think that Toyota should still address this issue and let the public know what they have done and if it is no longer an issue on the newer trucks to state this fact to give consumers the peace of mind.

As I have stated before Lou, that Toyota is a major business in the State of Kentucky where I live with a Camry assembly plant in Georgetown, NA parts distribution warehouse in Hebron, and NA offices in Erlanger KY. It is much better to have Toyota making their cars and trucks they sell in America than importing them from Japan or China. People are going to buy Toyotas anyway so lets have jobs here in America. Let's be honest in our global economy that having any manufacturing jobs in the US and Canada is a plus.

As for Oxi his bashing of GM is getting old. Government loans have already happened and now all we can hope for is that GM moves on and continues to do well and pay the rest of the Government loans back. To me the whole thing boils down to keeping good paying jobs and having a more prosperous economy.

I am old enough now not to have my identity wrapped up in a product name. I am past the point of being impressed with any label, even the Polo or Alligator labels on clothing. Go to Hong Kong and they will sew those labels on for a couple of bucks when you purchase something. You can also buy fake Rolex watches. Pick what you like and enjoy it.

@FW --The definition of a real truck has changed so much from what it was originally. My granddad would say that it serves a utilitarian function and that it should not have anything extra that detracts from that function. Today a crewcab 4x4 is a family hauler or maybe a single cab or extend cab could be a muscle vehicle with a high performance V8. If the truck is loaded it can be a personal luxury vehicle. Maybe a truck is an off road recreational vehicle. A truck could be a weekend warrior for trips to Home Depot to do those fixup or remodeling jobs. A farmer or a contractor would have yet a different definition of what a real truck is. The definition of a truck is really up to its user.

You must take a look outside the US where not the roads are paved.
I live in Chile South America and here you see Toyota┬┤s all around, recognized for it dependability.
Take a look at the Toyota trucks market share outside US and you will be impressed how it outsell Ford and every other brand.
I would like to know about a HD Diesel Tundra powered by Hino.

@ Big Al, broader range of torque, the Hemi has it, sorry Toyota guys. Never did I say that peak numbers where the only thing that matters, you misinterpret most of what I say anyway.

@5.3 LOL Same old story with you; If dynoing the Tundra in fourth wold be better for it, would it not be better for the Ram as well? Why not?

I don't want to read your installing a supercharger threads, I am not talking about supercharged engines, that's great they make more power. But that's not what I am comparing.

@Jeff S
Pickups are not what they started out to be in the US. Don't get me wrong many are still used for work.

But if you have to option a twin cab to be able tow, and carry 5 people with their lunches then they are losing their utility at being a "truck".

A modified Landcruiser front end could fit under the camoflauge. I think it would look nice on a pickup and offer another look other than the Korean Ram look or the I wanna be a big truck, big grills.

Most beers are drinkable when chilled considerably:)

@TRX$ Tom
I"m sorry mate, your post had nothing to do with the article. It was another attempt at talking up Fiat.

The link I sent was objective and pointed out the good and the bad. From what I read the V8 for the Tundra actaully looks like a better truck engine, especially at towing like you talk alot about.

@ Big Al from Oz

You are right.

It just doesn't look like the iForce is a better truck engine than the hemi--it flat out is. As has been noted on this board, there is a reason why Ford didn't include a Tundra in their Davis Dam Eco-boost test--but did include a hemi... .

Why not you said well I don't know maybe because have a 5-speed w/3.92 rear end and a mechanical limited slip (keeps traction) and I have 6-speed auto with 4.30 rear end and I have to disable the Auto LSD to dyno it (traction problem). It would appear one of us is geared more for top end power than the other with better traction. So if you have trucks with inaccurate dyno's what are you celebrating? You seem to have a problem with facts when multiple reports show people have problems getting a dyno this truck Supercharged and NA 5.7L iforce. Just for the record I believe you when you say the 5.7L Hemi does make more top end power but it is not the huge gap you make it out to be. Also you never answered my question what rpm range do you drive in?

As for the supercharging thread it was posted to show another person can't dyno in fourth without hitting the speed limiter as well.

P.S. The supercharger does make your point moot as Toyota cleary offers the most power in a current 1/2 ton.

@ Big Al from Oz

Also, to comment on "the utility at being a truck," it depends on usage.

When I worked construction, our pickups needed to haul a full crew (yes with their lunches), all of our gear in the bed, and tow a trailer with either more gear/equipment or a tractor to the job site. One larger vehicle that can do all of this is better than numerous more specialized vehicles.

@Dav
I was talking about the twin cab requiring a "HD" option because with 5 guys, tools and a trailer it would be overloaded.

For a 1/2 ton twin cab to work you would want at least a 2 500lb payload to carry 1 200lbs of passengers, some tools and tow a half decent load.

I forget who I had this debate with someone the other day regarding the utility of base model 1/2 ton twin cabs.

I have to agree that current 1/2 ton crewcab pickups are suitable either for cargo or passengers, not both. Mine at 1500 lb capacity will be near capacity with 5 men on board unless they are all steriotypically of Asian descent.
I don't worry about it becuase if I have my family on board I'm not carrying anything super heavy in the box. I have "overloaded" it once to help a friend out. Squat was minimal and the truck was stable with over 2,000 lb in to box. Mine you, all I had to travel was 10 km at a max speed of 60kph. I do suspect that part of the reason our pickups are rated low is because of people's desire to travel at 85 mph down the freeway.
It was funny to read a Ford blog about 2 guys complaining about the Ecoboost. The one guys complaint that it would cut out as he pulled to pass someone at highway speeds. This had happened multiple times 9according to him)Another guy sited the same issue but said the problem went away when he disabled the stability control.
That raised all sorts of WTF flags in my brain. How wild and unstable is one's passing maneuver if it activates the stability control system and kills engine power?
You can't fix stupid with duct tape (but you can muffle their cries).

I disagree with the the hysteria that if I fill a half ton with 5 men line it will be at or near full capacity. To be at capacity with 5 men on board I'd say you have to go on a diet. You guys are obese.

How much do you people weigh?

If you're sticker is 1500, the actual payload for passengers is 1650.

1500 lb + 150 lb extra capacity for a driver = 1650 lb payload / 5 men = 330 lb each man. I don't think you'd comfortably fit 5 300+ lb men in a truck no matter what the payload is.

Average weight of a man in US and Canada is 182 to 192 lbs.

182 average canadian man weight x 5 = 910

1650 - 910 = 740 lbs payload left over with 5 average full size males.

Add in max tow and you'll have over 1000 lbs payload left over.

Add in max tow + hd payload and you'll have much more.

Typically there will be only 1 or 2 adults on board.

There is plenty of payload for passengers and cargo properly equipped.

@Lou
You would think a base model pickup will become a work truck, so why not have the axle loading rated for work? Even a 2 500lb capacity would be comfortable to drive.

I can understand most pickups are SUVs/cars and they have SUV/car suspensions. But I would imagine these trucks are optioned like cars, power everthing, carpet etc.

Here in Australia the VW Amarok is the only pickup we have with differing loads. Even the "lightest" axle load is rated at 800 odd kgs or 1 800- 1 900lbs. I even think this is a more expensive pickup or SUV/car replacement.

The stability control issue could be because of the road surface, load and driving habits of the operator. It could mean the driver was driving beyond the capability of the vehicle safely or what Ford engineers decided would be the largest loads placed on the vehicle so it doesn't break.

Coming back from fishing the other day I noticed my stability control light flickering like when fording creeks, but that was when I was climbing out and up the opposite bank, my speed was quite low no more than 70kph.

@Paul
So you have 1 000lbs of passengers, plus extra 50 lbs or so of crap/lunches/jackets/glovebox/laptop etc in the cab.

That leaves less than 500lbs. A couple of toolboxes and stuff will take up to 500lbs easily.

What's left to tow with? A small trailer at most, and that's empty.

If a global Ranger or comparable truck outside of US & Canada can have 2500 - 3000lbs payload why can't the almighty American half ton?

@Paul - I don't personally know many guys that weigh under 200 lb unless they happen to be 5'6". My truck can seat 6 but even if you go with a crew of 4+1 at 200 lb each you still are 800 lb + 50lb extra for 150 lb driver allowance. That is still poor for a pickup. Max load/tow gives you roughly an extra 200 lb pound which still sucks. I don't see many max capacity crew cab 1/2 tons either. If you go with a 6.5 box F150 superCrew that reduces max load as well. What is the weight of safety equipment and associated gear even before one starts talking about jobsite tools?
The point is that a 1/2 ton crew should be able to carry a full passenger load and decent cargo if it is to be viewed as a serious work truck. I don't consider 800 - 1000 lb much of a load for a work truck.
The fact that a 1500 - 1800 lb capacity exists in a crewcab 4x4 proves that their primary purpose in life is that of an SUV with a box.
I still stand by my comment that you can either carry people or cargo and hysteria? no just discussing a fact.
BTW - if I needed to carry a crew and a load, I wouldn't of purchased a 1/2 ton. 1/2 tons as work trucks are rare in my part of the world because they can't carry a crew/load and don't hold up very well in a rough environment.



The comments to this entry are closed.