48 replies to this topic

[yovik]

I had a 2013 F-150 super crew with the 5.0 V8. I could get 18-19 unloaded, going easy on the pedal. Pulling a 2700 lb tent trailer it was about 15.5 mpg. Loved the truck, but the payload is inadequate for a FWC of any size.

Do you know the allowable cargo for your 2013? I'm seeing newer number near or over 2000 pounds, which seems adequate.

[yovik]

I have a 2012 Tundra, 5.7L V8. I've only ever had the camper mounted to it for a limited time, but was seeing ~12mpg in mixed driving.

The F150 will get you much better mileage. I am a huge Toyota fanboy and love the Tundra, however from your original post stating that mileage was a big concern I think the clear nod goes to the Ford.

Thanks for the perspective. Most of my buddies drive Tundras or Tacomas (each model with popup campers), and I used to be a Nissan (Datsun!) loyalist. The shift to F150 makes me a black sheep in some circles, that's for sure.

[JHanson]

As the owner of a 2012 Tacoma, a 1973 Land Cruiser FJ40, and a 1993 Land Cruiser Troopy, I say buy the Ford. All my Toyotas (many besides these) have been superbly reliable, but I think the F150 is a superior design to the Tundra, starting with the Ford's fully boxed chassis compared with the inferior open-channel rear frame on the Tundra.

Edited by JHanson, 21 December 2018 - 03:59 AM.

[yovik]

As the owner of a 2012 Tacoma, a 1973 Land Cruiser FJ40, and a 1993 Land Cruiser Troopy, I say buy the Ford. All my Toyotas (many besides these) have been superbly reliable, but I think the F150 is a superior design to the Tundra, starting with the Ford's fully boxed chassis compared with the inferior open-channel rear frame on the Tundra.

Thanks for the input!

[Danneskjold]

To echo what everyone else said...get the F150.

I just sold my 2017 Tacoma with 52,000 miles and bought a new 2018 Ford XL Regular Cab 8 Foot Bed and 4x4 with the 3.3 motor for $26k.

On the drive down to pick up my Grandby I was getting 23-24mpg, and I’m getting 17-18 now with the camper on it (better than an unloaded Tundra!) and I couldn’t be happier.

I would have loved to get another Toyota but the Tundra is such a turd it doesn’t make any sense. More expensive than an F150, less payload, older, substantially worse MPG, less customization from factory, etc.

[yovik]

To echo what everyone else said...get the F150.

I just sold my 2017 Tacoma with 52,000 miles and bought a new 2018 Ford XL Regular Cab 8 Foot Bed and 4x4 with the 3.3 motor for $26k.

On the drive down to pick up my Grandby I was getting 23-24mpg, and I’m getting 17-18 now with the camper on it (better than an unloaded Tundra!) and I couldn’t be happier.

I would have loved to get another Toyota but the Tundra is such a turd it doesn’t make any sense. More expensive than an F150, less payload, older, substantially worse MPG, less customization from factory, etc.

Thanks for sharing your perspective!

[windy]

FWIW I recently purchased a mint, low miles 06 Tundra after test driving a new one. My son just purchased a new f150 ccsb with 5.0.
And he is very happy with it.

I really like the size of the older Tundra and felt that it drove much better than a new one. My son’s f150 gets better mileage than my 06 4.7 V8 but in end I didn’t want to spend $30K+ and reliability were my priorities.

[jrwdlw]

Do you know the allowable cargo for your 2013? I'm seeing newer number near or over 2000 pounds, which seems adequate.

That would make sense, because mine was a steel body. 

 

The total capacity according to the Body Builders guide is1700 lbs.  The footnotes for that number say, "Load rating represents maximum allowable weight of people, cargo and body equipment and is reduced by optional equipment weight."  Add two people and you're down to 1400.  My truck had optional equipment, so subtract another 100 to 150, and you're at 1350.  Do you want to tow something behind?  Subtract the tongue weight.  The 1700 can't all be on the rear axle either.  The manual says rear GAWR is 3850, and base rear axle weight is 2409.  Only 1441 can be carried on the rear, assuming no options.  Also, as far as overloading the rear, you need to be aware that the rims are rated for only 2025 pounds each.  So, if you put 1641 pounds on the rear, the axle and rims are maxed out.  Basically, I decided it was totally inadequate for what I need, although a very nice truck.

[yovik]

That would make sense, because mine was a steel body.

The total capacity according to the Body Builders guide is1700 lbs. The footnotes for that number say, "Load rating represents maximum allowable weight of people, cargo and body equipment and is reduced by optional equipment weight." Add two people and you're down to 1400. My truck had optional equipment, so subtract another 100 to 150, and you're at 1350. Do you want to tow something behind? Subtract the tongue weight. The 1700 can't all be on the rear axle either. The manual says rear GAWR is 3850, and base rear axle weight is 2409. Only 1441 can be carried on the rear, assuming no options. Also, as far as overloading the rear, you need to be aware that the rims are rated for only 2025 pounds each. So, if you put 1641 pounds on the rear, the axle and rims are maxed out. Basically, I decided it was totally inadequate for what I need, although a very nice truck.

Thanks for this detail.

[Beach]

I would try to find an F150 with the payload package option.