I thought I've read something like this before...

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/trucks/2015_ram_1500_rebel_4x4_hemi_vs_toyota_tundra_trd_pro_comparison/

Hmmm- Nice match-up. Loks like the Tundra has non-stock tires. The Ram definitely has some awesome features- like in-floor beer coolers.

Both equally nice trucks. Both have their pros and cons.

I'd buy both trucks just for the hell of it.

Happy truckin.

Tundra has won this match-up in other tests. I don't think the Tundra Pro is available in Canada. I'm already seeing Ram Rebel's on the road. Our local dealer has several of them.

That Tundra with BFgoodrich is completely stock. The Tundra has beaten the Rebel in 4x4 magazine as well.

How come Toyota hasn't upgraded to the KO2 tires?

Ram rebel for the win!

I hope they don't put too much focus on how smooth the ride is while testing off-road. Unless the ride is beating you to death and hindering the ability to drive I'd hope the focus would be capability.

@Albert74 and GeargeC- I'm fairly sure the Tundra TRD Pro Comes with a Michelin AT. BFG ATs come on the Tacoma.

OPtional- I stand corrected

No Raptor? No care!

Posted by: David | Oct 16, 2015 2:23:57 PM

I am fairly certain that the Raptor is quite a bit ahead of these two so it would be a fairly obvious conclusion.

@Mark Williams
TWO online magazines here did overall tests on the new "Utes " roughly 6-8 vehicles ,that had similar off road performance too your up coming test
http://www.caradvice.com.au/388419/ute-comparison-ford-ranger-v-holden-colorado-v-isuzu-d-max-v-mazda-bt-50-v-mitsubishi-triton-v-nissan-navara-v-toyota-hilux-v-volkswagen-amarok-2/

@Mark Williams
The other test, by the other online magazine
http://www.carsales.com.au/editorial/reviews/2015/ford/ranger/4wd-dual-cab-ute-2015-comparison-54395

Unfortunately this looks like a play date at some off-road park. How about running these things for 8 hours per day on gravel roads for a few weeks straight.

This test is old and has been done twice before. The Toyota is a better off roader, the Ram is a better overall truck.

Maybe Big Al needs to look at those 2 undercarriage pictures and point out where the frame will get bent by a direct hit on a rock or perhaps he thinks that is just a Ford problem brought on by the change over to aluminum.

@Lou_BC
The rock climbing, plus the other shots are what all tests are like now online or published here No nicely graded dirt road passing as " Off Road"

I'm surprised that despite being down on power to weight and having 2 less gears, the tundra was a tick quicker in the motor trend test. Fuel economy was he same, too, despite a big gap from the epa.
The tundra is a relative bargain. The tow ratings for the ram are suspect, since it isn't rated for 10% tongue weight.

Lou,
I don't think the refined dirt tracks you have in BC are really off road.

If you have ever been off road you will know driving over logs, dropping into holes, etc do have their toll on the underneath of a 4x4.

As for 4x4 parks, next weekend we are going to a place called Landcruiser Mtn, near where I live now in Brisbane. Should be a great weekend. 4x4ing, drinking beers and BBQ's.

It seems the new Ranger is better than the new aluminium F-150 and far better than the Colorado if you read the links Robert Ryan gave us.

Ford needs the Ranger in the US.

Robert Ryan,
It's a pity they only pick the bigger selling utes for testing.

I would like to see how vehicles like the Foton Tunland, Mahindra, Tata, Great Wall, Ssyanyon Actyon, etc would fare. I don't expect these to do as well, but I think some surprising results would come out.

It's great to have a free car market. Look at the choice!

@Big Al from OZ,
I think they would be OK, but would not trust them on a long hike. Chinese and Indian stuff is getting better, but still leaves a lot to be desired

What comes out of the Car Advice test and despite the VW troubles
"There are some brands that don’t even offer petrol engines in their utes any more, such is the popularity of diesel. You get better low-end pulling power, better economy and, generally, a more robust, long-lasting engine.

As such, all of our utes were powered by turbo-diesel engines, and every ute on test had an automatic transmission, because that’s what the majority of buyers who choose a ute as a dual-purpose vehicle tend towards these days."

I read rob's links and they didn't test the f150 to make the assumption they were better then the f150. The restrictive market of Australia doesn't allow full size trucks in such as the raptors, power wagons and the Trd pro or rebel's.

Dodge has been bought out twice. Must be nice every 20 25 yrs
You drop your debt Dodge the welfare company

Oh Scotty.

Are you being a naughty boy again.

I still hate the grill on that Rebel, but the tailgate is actually growing on me. The toyota looks good in the front but the red in the seats looks like poop.

@Scott,
The F150 would fail everywhere. Yes we do get the F150, but it is a poser mobile here. It needs to be used by Terrorist groups to get any sort of. Cred. Not very likely

@Scott,
You can get Powerwagons,Raptors(yes, they have been imported), even up to F650's Outside of the novelty value, no interest

http://www.carsales.com.au/car/ford/f150/svt-raptor-badge/

I read the MT article and I have to say, that was a lame article. My friend just bought a new '16 Tundra, and what a pile of garbage, it's lightest build truck I've ever seen. It's like they took the Tucoma body and made it fullsize and used the same power train components on it. I'd take the Rebel any day of the week over the Tundra.

Facts are straight bailed dodge out twice but we let a great company like Westinghouse fail. Trust me dodge low end of quality know numerous mechanics worst vehicles to work on
Are dodge

First bailout of dodge was 1980

At rob
Ya there a novelty there as they are 50k more there then they were new in US dollars. You guys can't get cheap fullsize trucks so they are a novelty hacked together conversions. Of course they are going to be a novelty at those prices.

Also reading your links it said the ranger was the best but dragged its butt over every bump do to the trailer hitch. F150 wouldn't as it has better departure angles. Also our half tons are immensely more powerful. The fastest of those midsize in your test 0-100 kmh was the ranger with a 11.1 second dash. A 1972 ford pinto 0-60 is 10.8 seconds. Ecoboost and 6.2 gm's are 0-60 around 6 seconds. I know you and your and your counterpart will say trucks aren't for racing which is a correct statement but Americans still have fun driving and want performance. Not a dull under performing and underwhelming small diesel. Hence the reason the ecodiesel from ram isn't a big seller. There third place engine in sales in the ram 1500 lineup.

Don't think your midsize will perform any better then our fullsize. That is just your opinion is all.

Also we have midsize such as toyota tacomas, Nissan Frontier, and recently gm twins. They don't sell that well or are desired by the masses in great quantities compared to full size trucks.
Can you go buy a factory non converted cheap full size. We can buy factory produced, cheap and not hacked up midsize

You're talking about 2 different situations dummy. Why should I trust you? I've owned many Mopars and brand x's and worked on all of em and none are easier or more difficult to service than another. Until you hold a wrench or get over the demise of Westinghouse you have no valuable input

There's a reason why the Tundra won the Baja 1000 in the stock class. No competition here.

Scott,
You'd better look at the BT50 hitch vs the Ranger hitch. The Ford hitch is quite a poor design for off roading. Same vehicles two different hitches.

The Ranger and BT50 have identical rear step bumpers.

Ranger factory tow bar;

http://www.everestautoparts.com.au/store/image/cache/data/Hard%20Lids/RangerPX_SpaceCabRollbar_.FlatLip1-500x500.png

BT50 factory tow bar;

http://s3.caradvice.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Mazda-BT-5003.jpg

In USD the Raptor would be between $75k to $90k. But we are on a different level of income. The average wage here is around $75k per year or $55k USD.

The change over from left hand to right hand drive costs $20k plus. So we can bring them in at a cost effective price, but add on that $20k and all of a sudden your $50k Raptor is now around $70k USD. Then add your markup to make a profit and there you have it.

@Scott,
They used to be made in Australia in the past. The Raptor has a minute following(9) vehicles. F150's are slugs Off Road. Yes the F150 would be worse than any of the vehicles on test.No the interest is declining here even for the 3/4 and 1 tons. Times are changing

@Scott,
The Bronco, F250/F350 were made here in 2003-2006 the Brazilian F250/F350 were imported. All failed

Ranger t6 has way worse break over angle, and departure angles as well as articulation index then the f150.

So you have to modify the ranger to make it offroad worthy. Kind of like al had to modify his bt50 to be able to go offroad. Got it. Your article stated all the trucks in the test we dragging there under carriages over everything! Lucky they didn't go on real offroad terrain with those Australian trucks.

F150 can easily hang with a ranger and best it in many things offroad. That's my opinion just like your opinion

Scott, difference is they have 3rd world trucks, we don't have or want them. Why do they offer cheap low quality imports if their income is so high? Especially since it killed off their domestic auto manufacturing. Something fishy here.

I'll take the Ram Rebel given a choice between these two.

Tom,
Quite an uneducated and interesting take on the big bad world.

Ever thought that our incomes are to high to manufacture cars?

So, we import them from less fortunate countries?

We import many cars from the US.

Tom,
Here an interesting link regarding the Australian auto manufacturing sector.

Here's an interesting cut and paste from the article;

"According to former manufacturing minister Kim Carr, Australian taxpayers pay $17.80 per person in automotive manufacturing subsidies to keep those jobs and that industrial capability. The same subsidy figure for the United States industry is $264 per taxpayer."

Tom, it seems the US is prepared to use taxpayers money more than us as well. Is this good or bad, time will tell. Also, add the more protective conditions of the US market and you can see why it is more viable to manufacture vehicles in the US.

So, with the added tax and protection are you paying more for you vehicles than is needed? Is the consumer getting the best possible options in relation to vehicles?

If you are happy, then so be it, but I'd bet there are many in the US who would like to be able to buy what is available globally. If you just think the market is full size pickups, then you will be happy as the US is the only country with a market large enough to support that segment.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/australias-car-industry-one-year-from-closing-its-doors-20151012-gk7ip0.html#ixzz3orPQNWJY
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook

Tom,
The most significant reason for the demise of our auto industry wasn't touched on.

That is the size of our market. Our market is only 1.2 million vehicles per year. With high wages making export unviable there is no room for the industry.

It must go.

So with such a small market all these third world truck makers see the huge opportunity. Right. You guys couldn't afford your own trucks, so import chinese and indian junk. There's a good idea. We have what is called brand identity. All your trucks have the same car front end. You talk about all your choices, jokes on you. You have dozens of choices of the same mid size over rated third world vehicles. Happy for you. Wont work here though.

@Tom,
Yes, your Pickups do not rate outside NA. No we do not drive Chinese or Indian Pickups. " Third World" makers have better reliability , fit and finish than NA Pickups. US needs to produce really good Pickups, to break into the bigger global market and get great market share

@Big Al, you almost get it right sometimes! You are right that better-educated and better-paid workers prefer not to stoop to picking fruit, or in this case, working on assembly lines--check!

However, the reason that your car companies stopped making cars in Australia is a currency story. As I have harped for a long time, the world's currencies need to be pegged to some solid measurement--just like a ruler needs to be measuring the same inches. Today's global banking system is very disruptive, and not in a positive way. Its constant monkeying with interest rates keeps the rest of us in a constant state of flux.

As a result, back when the big thinkers were deciding to pull the plug on Australia's auto plants, the US dollar was very soft compared to Australia's. Fast forward several years and today the US dollar is much stronger, but it's too late to help the Aussies get their auto plants back online. That would probably take a world war or two.

Maybe the big bankers can cook up a reason to start building tanks and bombers again.

Obviously Ryan you know nothing about NA trucks. About what I would expect from someone living where you do. To be fair, I know nothing about third world trucks, about what you would expect. However, I don't frequent australian truck sites(if there are any) as I don't see any reason to.

papa jim,
It still isn't competitive to manufacture in Australia.

It is just the value of the AUD vs USD. It's also the value against all global currencies.

People seem to think that the USD is what everyone earns and pays. In Australia we in fact pay similar amounts for many items as the US. ie, loaf of bread here is 85cAUD, 1 litre of milk is 95cAUD. But other things we pay more, ie, Apple products.

Where the difference lies is in our incomes. We are eaning around 50% in AUD. This doesn't include the added cost of superannuation of 10% for each and every worker, whether full time, casual, etc.

So to employ a person is costing $75k AUD or around $55k USD average, just for salary/wages, not insurance, super, etc. We will not be able to manufacture until our wages are comparable to the US, which is even expensive by global standards.

The fluctuation in our dollar is great. The freer market we have allows for fluctuations to occur to the benefit of our country. This is a quick way to respond to market forces.

It isn't bad to have a fluctuating currency, it is the easiest and best possible way to maintain an economy.

Artificially propping up currencies or in the case of the US artificially driving down the value of a currency shows that the US economy is overly regulated. This is not good.

Let freer market forces determine the value of assets, not a central bank and government throwing trillions away.

Why do you think we have a small external debt?

@papa Jim,
Currency , you are correct ,is what killed car production in this country and decreasing demand for large sedans.
If Ford and Holden had some good SUV's to sell and locally made Pickup Trucks as well as the Utes, they would be a lot larger