Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

New Truck for Hawk: F-150 or Tundra?


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#1 yovik

yovik

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts
  • LocationBaja Arizona

Posted 20 December 2018 - 05:46 AM

Howdy Wanderers,

I'm looking for folks who have real world experience (good and bad) with an F-150 or a Tundra (or both!)

I'm looking for a used truck, in the 2014-2018 range, and have narrowed it down to one of these two vehicles. ( I think)

Our Hawk is currently on a 2008 F150, with the 5.4, and it has almost 190k miles (pictured). The allowable cargo on the current truck is~1700 pounds. I have only added Firestone airbags to the rear end, and they've been great so far. Our current F150 gets 10-12 mpg.

Summed up simply: I'd like a well-priced newer truck that gets better mileage and has a touch more cargo allowance than the current 150.

What do folks think? Any constructive criticism of either of these trucks? Should I consider a GM or....a Dodge or...a...Nissan? 20181006_131112.jpeg
  • 0

2008 F150 2018 F150 XLT SuperCab 5.0 V8, 2006 Hawk<p> 2016 Trek Remedey 9.8, 1x, Ibis 938 Wheels


#2 Foy

Foy

    Resident Geologist

  • Members
  • 964 posts
  • LocationRaleigh, NC

Posted 20 December 2018 - 12:04 PM

At the beginning of June 2018 I purchased a 2015 F150 SuperCrew shortbed 4WD in XLT trim with the 2.7 liter engine which I somewhat derisively referred to as the sewing machine motor.  It's the aluminum body model (first year?). Thinking I was just replacing my thoroughly worn out '01 Mazda daily driver with a 4-door truck in which I could safely transport both of my grandchildren and take over lighter-duty gear hauling to and from some family vacation homes, I kept the venerable F350 diesel 4WD. 

 

So fast forward nearly 7 months and the old diesel stands forlorn in the driveway, having had < 1,000 miles of use since June.  The 150 has served all of my daily driver needs, scoring 17-19 mpg city driving.  On a goodly number of flat Coastal Plain trips to the beach, she's scoring 20-22 mpg with a bed full of tools, power equipment, and odds and ends, running 75-78 mph with the A/C cranked up. I've towed our 2,400 lb popup camper to the Blue Ridge and to Piedmont reservoirs and our 6 x 12' utility trailer fully loaded at 3,000 lbs to both the beach and the Blue Ridge, notching 14.5 to 16 mpg towing.  

 

I am consistently amazed by the acceleration and torque produced by the 2.7 twin turbo sewing machine motor.  The 6-speed transmission likely has a lot to do with how well it moves out from a standing start to cruising speed in that it's electronic shift programming keeps the revs in a good range along the torque curve. It holds 6th gear easily when towing on flat ground and toggles effortlessly between 5th and 6th when towing.  When you need to nail the throttle on an onramp or to pass on a two-lane, it's a rocket ship.  

 

I don't know the payload specs on mine as I had no inkling of using it as a substitute for the diesel when I bought it.  With the tiny lightweight engine and all aluminum body (including the tiny 5.5' short bed), the payload is probably not far off of the payload for the diesel. While shopping I decided on the aluminum body model and the 2.7 so I never drove or looked closely at any 3.5 twin turbo V6s or any 5.0 V8s, nor did I consider the 6.5' bed models (and I don't know if they come with the 2.7).  

 

From what I've browsed through on the F150 Forum, there are some 2016 models built in 2016 which have some sort of internal lubrication problems caused by assembly flaws which have developed quickly and at fairly low miles elapsed, like down in the teens to 20-30,000 miles. The engines start consuming motor oil at such a rate they they seize up before (inattentive, in my opinion) owners notice low pressure idiot light gauge readings or, gasp, check the dang dipstick. But the build date range on those engines is pretty well bracketed and one should be able to avoid ending up with one.

 

So, here's one testimonial to the virtues of a 2015 F150 powered by the high-tech sewing machine motor.  I'm very happy with mine.

 

Foy


Edited by Foy, 20 December 2018 - 12:05 PM.

  • 3

#3 Stray Dog

Stray Dog

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 44 posts

Posted 20 December 2018 - 12:57 PM

I replaced a 2001 f-250 diesel with a 2017 f-150 lariat a year ago.  the f-150 is a naturally aspirated v8, 6 1/2 foot bed, crew cab.   I added air bags to it and torklift mounts.

 

the payload is 1900 pounds.  the old diesel was 2000.  The aluminum makes a huge difference.  Ford sez something like 600 pounds lighter than conventional.

 

My camper is 1300 pounds.  Truck carries it very well loaded as it typically is with 2 people and gear.

mileage is 17 to 19 mpg at high elevation.  The diesel typically got 13 with the camper.   I've done substantially better than that with it unloaded.  Power is excellent even in the mountains of Colorado.  A previous f-150 I had with a 5.4 v8 didn't do nearly as well at elevation.

 

I intentionally avoided the two available eco-boosts.  I drove them both and the power is really impressive.  Reports on them are good and people really like them.  I chose not to go that route because I have known several turbo owners forced into major turbo maintenance/repair costs.  I understand modern high revving engines but I'm old enough that I'll stick with older technology.

 

We love the new f-150 and are very happy with the replacement.

 

I don't have any Tundra experience to compare to...  good luck with your decision.


  • 1

#4 iowahiker

iowahiker

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 465 posts
  • LocationNE Iowa

Posted 20 December 2018 - 01:07 PM

We have 111,000 miles on our 2013 Ford F-150 5.0 liter V-8 all with the camper on full time.  We average 15.6 mpg by the tank fills with the camper, lower 15 mpg's at low altitude and humid, over 16 mpg at high altitude and dry air.  We would buy another F-150.  The years you are interested in purchasing would be available with the same engine and transmission as ours.  

 

Still on the original brakes, dealer checks them every oil change.

 

Toyota Tundra will get 1 mpg less because the engine is larger for the same driver and driving conditions.


Edited by iowahiker, 20 December 2018 - 08:02 PM.

  • 1

2013 Ford F-150 Reg Cab, Long Bed, 5.0 V-8, 4x4, payload package + 2012 FWC Granby

Over 900 camper nights in six seasons.

"The frog does not drink up the pond in which he lives"  (Proverb)


#5 yovik

yovik

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts
  • LocationBaja Arizona

Posted 21 December 2018 - 01:27 AM

At the beginning of June 2018 I purchased a 2015 F150 SuperCrew shortbed 4WD in XLT trim with the 2.7 liter engine which I somewhat derisively referred to as the sewing machine motor. It's the aluminum body model (first year?). Thinking I was just replacing my thoroughly worn out '01 Mazda daily driver with a 4-door truck in which I could safely transport both of my grandchildren and take over lighter-duty gear hauling to and from some family vacation homes, I kept the venerable F350 diesel 4WD.

So fast forward nearly 7 months and the old diesel stands forlorn in the driveway, having had < 1,000 miles of use since June. The 150 has served all of my daily driver needs, scoring 17-19 mpg city driving. On a goodly number of flat Coastal Plain trips to the beach, she's scoring 20-22 mpg with a bed full of tools, power equipment, and odds and ends, running 75-78 mph with the A/C cranked up. I've towed our 2,400 lb popup camper to the Blue Ridge and to Piedmont reservoirs and our 6 x 12' utility trailer fully loaded at 3,000 lbs to both the beach and the Blue Ridge, notching 14.5 to 16 mpg towing.

I am consistently amazed by the acceleration and torque produced by the 2.7 twin turbo sewing machine motor. The 6-speed transmission likely has a lot to do with how well it moves out from a standing start to cruising speed in that it's electronic shift programming keeps the revs in a good range along the torque curve. It holds 6th gear easily when towing on flat ground and toggles effortlessly between 5th and 6th when towing. When you need to nail the throttle on an onramp or to pass on a two-lane, it's a rocket ship.

I don't know the payload specs on mine as I had no inkling of using it as a substitute for the diesel when I bought it. With the tiny lightweight engine and all aluminum body (including the tiny 5.5' short bed), the payload is probably not far off of the payload for the diesel. While shopping I decided on the aluminum body model and the 2.7 so I never drove or looked closely at any 3.5 twin turbo V6s or any 5.0 V8s, nor did I consider the 6.5' bed models (and I don't know if they come with the 2.7).

From what I've browsed through on the F150 Forum, there are some 2016 models built in 2016 which have some sort of internal lubrication problems caused by assembly flaws which have developed quickly and at fairly low miles elapsed, like down in the teens to 20-30,000 miles. The engines start consuming motor oil at such a rate they they seize up before (inattentive, in my opinion) owners notice low pressure idiot light gauge readings or, gasp, check the dang dipstick. But the build date range on those engines is pretty well bracketed and one should be able to avoid ending up with one.

So, here's one testimonial to the virtues of a 2015 F150 powered by the high-tech sewing machine motor. I'm very happy with mine.

Foy

Thanks a ton!
  • 0

2008 F150 2018 F150 XLT SuperCab 5.0 V8, 2006 Hawk<p> 2016 Trek Remedey 9.8, 1x, Ibis 938 Wheels


#6 yovik

yovik

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts
  • LocationBaja Arizona

Posted 21 December 2018 - 01:31 AM

I replaced a 2001 f-250 diesel with a 2017 f-150 lariat a year ago. the f-150 is a naturally aspirated v8, 6 1/2 foot bed, crew cab. I added air bags to it and torklift mounts.

the payload is 1900 pounds. the old diesel was 2000. The aluminum makes a huge difference. Ford sez something like 600 pounds lighter than conventional.

My camper is 1300 pounds. Truck carries it very well loaded as it typically is with 2 people and gear.
mileage is 17 to 19 mpg at high elevation. The diesel typically got 13 with the camper. I've done substantially better than that with it unloaded. Power is excellent even in the mountains of Colorado. A previous f-150 I had with a 5.4 v8 didn't do nearly as well at elevation.

I intentionally avoided the two available eco-boosts. I drove them both and the power is really impressive. Reports on them are good and people really like them. I chose not to go that route because I have known several turbo owners forced into major turbo maintenance/repair costs. I understand modern high revving engines but I'm old enough that I'll stick with older technology.

We love the new f-150 and are very happy with the replacement.

I don't have any Tundra experience to compare to... good luck with your decision.

Thanks for your thoughts! I too wonder about the maintenance of a twin turbo system. Your v8 mileage is impressive, and maybe the v8 should be in the running.
  • 0

2008 F150 2018 F150 XLT SuperCab 5.0 V8, 2006 Hawk<p> 2016 Trek Remedey 9.8, 1x, Ibis 938 Wheels


#7 yovik

yovik

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 51 posts
  • LocationBaja Arizona

Posted 21 December 2018 - 01:32 AM

We have 111,000 miles on our 2013 Ford F-150 5.0 liter V-8 all with the camper on full time. We average 15.6 mpg by the tank fills with the camper, lower 15 mpg's at low altitude and humid, over 16 mpg at high altitude and dry air. We would buy another F-150. The years you are interested in purchasing would be available with the same engine and transmission as ours.

Still on the original brakes, dealer checks them every oil change.

Toyota Tundra will get 1 mpg less because the engine is larger for the same driver and driving conditions.

Thanks for the input! V8, here we go!
  • 0

2008 F150 2018 F150 XLT SuperCab 5.0 V8, 2006 Hawk<p> 2016 Trek Remedey 9.8, 1x, Ibis 938 Wheels


#8 fireball

fireball

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 222 posts
  • Locationcentral PA

Posted 21 December 2018 - 01:59 AM

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.


  • 1

#9 jrwdlw

jrwdlw

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 48 posts

Posted 21 December 2018 - 02:01 AM

Thanks for the input! V8, here we go!

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.


  • 0

#10 jrwdlw

jrwdlw

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 48 posts

Posted 21 December 2018 - 02:03 AM

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.

I would agree with Fireball.  I have no personal experience, but a couple of friends and relatives all said the mileage is pretty poor with a Tundra.


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users