Is the Tacoma enough truck?

[Dalko43]

Ok I got you. Ford’s quality has improved. But let me call you out and go on record for this: IF, underline bold italics, you get a new truck, it’ll be a Toyota. Ford and others have made strides but Toyota seems to be still at the top. Ronny Dahl, on one of his videos within the last couple of years, said one of his mates sold his 79 saying it was too boring, and went with a Ford. After two years of constant fixing things, he went back to a 79.

Compare apples-to-apples.

Ford, really doesn't make anything that is comparable to the LC 70 series. The only vehicles that come close are the Mercedes G Wagon and Nissan Patrol (referring to the overseas versions of both). I'm not surprised that a LC 79 held up better than a Ford Ranger/Everest (I'm guessing that's what Dahl's friend switched to).

Compared to the Hilux, Isuzu, Navara, and other overseas pickups, the Ranger seems to be viewed quite favorably. I've seen a few Aussie media groups rank it quite high among its competition. I guess we'll find out for ourselves if that praise was warranted.

 

[phsycle]

Compare apples-to-apples.

Ford, really doesn't make anything that is comparable to the LC 70 series. The only vehicles that come close are the Mercedes G Wagon and Nissan Patrol (referring to the overseas versions of both). I'm not surprised that a LC 79 held up better than a Ford Ranger/Everest (I'm guessing that's what Dahl's friend switched to).

Compared to the Hilux, Isuzu, Navara, and other overseas pickups, the Ranger seems to be viewed quite favorably. I've seen a few Aussie media groups rank it quite high among its competition. I guess we'll find out for ourselves if that praise was warranted.

We’re talking AUS market where they use the 79 for agri purposes. Pretty much any full-size truck is a fair comparison.

 

[Bayou Boy]

Ok I got you. Ford’s quality has improved. But let me call you out and go on record for this: IF, underline bold italics, you get a new truck, it’ll be a Toyota. Ford and others have made strides but Toyota seems to be still at the top. Ronny Dahl, on one of his videos within the last couple of years, said one of his mates sold his 79 saying it was too boring, and went with a Ford. After two years of constant fixing things, he went back to a 79.

I'll take a slight possible decrease in reliability in exchange for not having interiors that look and feel 10 years behind and severely lagging features and niceties any day. The interior of a Tundra or Sequoia looks ancient compared to anything made by the big three. And the switch gear and plastic just feels cheap. I just can't get over that. Toyota is relying on heritage to sell cars these days. That won't last.

 

[Dalko43]

Compare apples-to-apples.

Ford, really doesn't make anything that is comparable to the LC 70 series. The only vehicles that come close are the Mercedes G Wagon and Nissan Patrol (referring to the overseas versions of both). I'm not surprised that a LC 79 held up better than a Ford Ranger/Everest (I'm guessing that's what Dahl's friend switched to).

Compared to the Hilux, Isuzu, Navara, and other overseas pickups, the Ranger seems to be viewed quite favorably. I've seen a few Aussie media groups rank it quite high among its competition. I guess we'll find out for ourselves if that praise was warranted.

We’re talking AUS market where they use the 79 for agri purposes. Pretty much any full-size truck is a fair comparison.

I think a 3/4 ton is fair comparison, even though we’re looking at a much bigger vehicle. Like the LC 70, it’s a vehicle that is purpose-built for work.

Most NA 1/2 tons are too focused on on-road handling to compete with a land cruiser.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[phsycle]

I think a 3/4 ton is fair comparison, even though we’re looking at a much bigger vehicle. Like the LC 70, it’s a vehicle that is purpose-built for work.

Most NA 1/2 tons are too focused on on-road handling to compete with a land cruiser.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, I agree with that. 3/4-1 ton. I am thinking that’s what his friend ended up going to rather than a midsize truck.

 

[DaveInDenver]

Toyota is relying on heritage to sell cars these days. That won't last.

It would mean something if they were still selling vehicles that lived up to it. They sell us Sequoias and Tacomas as though they are Land Cruisers and Hiluxes.

 

[DorB]

I'm not surprised that a LC 79 held up better than a Ford Ranger/Everest (I'm guessing that's what Dahl's friend switched to).

Appeals to apples you said..

The LC79 load capacity and size are more comparable to ford 350 shortbed, it carries more then metric ton, and much bigger then medium sized ranger.

The rest of the world outside North America refer to what you guys call “small trucks” as the main work horses, and load them much more, close to a metric ton.

 

[Dalko43]

Appeals to apples you said..

The LC79 load capacity and size are more comparable to ford 350 shortbed, it carries more then metric ton, and much bigger then medium sized ranger.

The rest of the world outside North America refer to what you guys call “small trucks” as the main work horses, and load them much more, close to a metric ton.

Yeah the trucks we refer to as 'midsized' here in North America are usually sold as work-oriented variants overseas. But I still contend that the Ranger, Hilux and other work-oriented 'utes' aren't in the same class of vehicle as something like a LC 70 series. In my earlier post, I argued that Ford doesn't make anything that truly competes with the LC 70; I acknowledge the Super Duty is comparable in function to the LC, but in reality that Ford vehicle isn't prevalent in the markets that the LC is sold in.

Also, I do think the overseas markets have a set of standards for rating a vehicle's payload and towing that is different from what we use here in North America. I've loaded my 4runner (NA version of the LC Prado) nearly all the way up to it's 1.5k lb payload; the vehicle can handle the weight, but I would ultimately prefer a bigger vehicle if I were to carry that amount of weight on a frequent basis.

 

[bkg]

It would mean something if they were still selling vehicles that lived up to it. They sell us Sequoias and Tacomas as though they are Land Cruisers and Hiluxes.

has the sequoia been updated yet? Last I looked - 2015 - it was identical to the 2008 model. Didn't get the interior upgrades the Tundra did in 2014.

 

[DaveInDenver]

There's more to the equation than just lbs or kgs. A 70 series and the Hilux both have large cargo capacities but they are small trucks. The 70 series in particular, when you see one stock they really aren't very big at all. So trying to use them in the U.S. as a substitute for a F350 would I think be inappropriate based on the how unstable it must be at Interstate speeds. That's something we've talked about before I think. I certainly want a Hilux to replace my Tacoma, but I can't see a Hilux carrying 2000 kg on I-80 keeping up with semi traffic as being all that safe.

But that's also aside a typical use here for trucks, which is towing. A 70 series is going to be easily out matched with a large trailer. Not to mention the point of the 70 series in particular is doing work over poor roads, rather than strictly a large number game but about carrying a significant cargo without breaking for decades. But it's not going to be doing it at 80 MPH all the time. This is the root of why I want them. So carrying my relatively meager payload while 'wheeling compared to the vehicle max doesn't wear it out as fast.

 

[DaveInDenver]

has the sequoia been updated yet? Last I looked - 2015 - it was identical to the 2008 model. Didn't get the interior upgrades the Tundra did in 2014.

Not sure. I assumed it would follow the Tundra refresh cycle, but I don't know that either TBH. I believe it's due for something soon, right?

 

[battleaxe]

has the sequoia been updated yet? Last I looked - 2015 - it was identical to the 2008 model. Didn't get the interior upgrades the Tundra did in 2014.

I've always thought the Sequoia was super ugly. I glanced at one while driving past the dealership the other day and thought it looked updated. Did a quick google search, and yeah they're still mostly the same. Still ugly.

2018 brought a slightly updated front end?

 

[Dalko43]

There's more to the equation than just lbs or kgs. A 70 series and the Hilux both have large cargo capacities but they are small trucks. The 70 series in particular, when you see one stock they really aren't very big at all. So trying to use them in the U.S. as a substitute for a F350 would I think be inappropriate based on the how unstable it must be at Interstate speeds. That's something we've talked about before I think. I certainly want a Hilux to replace my Tacoma, but I can't see a Hilux carrying 2000 kg on I-80 keeping up with semi traffic as being all that safe.

But that's also aside a typical use here for trucks, which is towing. A 70 series is going to be easily out matched with a large trailer. Not to mention the point of the 70 series in particular is doing work over poor roads, rather than strictly a large number game but about carrying a significant cargo without breaking for decades. But it's not going to be doing it at 80 MPH all the time. This is the root of why I want them. So carrying my relatively meager payload while 'wheeling compared to the vehicle max doesn't wear it out as fast.

I never meant to imply that the LC 70 is a substitute for the domestic 3/4 and 1 tons. My meaning was that both vehicle types are designed and built with a bias towards functionality and durability rather than comfort and on-road handling. Both vehicle types are designed to endure long working lives in austere environments. I think the 'poor roads' attribute is applicable to our HD's, but the caveat is that the poor roads are generally a bit bigger here than they are in Australia and other parts of the world.

I do agree that the overseas vehicles would be out their element when towing/hauling at the speeds which are common on North American highways. I think the Hilux's payload is closer to 1k kg's (~2.2k lb's), and, to be honest, I would still prefer a bigger, more robust vehicle to carry that amount of weight. I believe the Aussie's rely on OEM recommendations rather than a standardized rating system (the SAE standards that most domestic trucks now adhere to). Here's an article covering that issue: Payload and Tow Ratings.

 

[DaveInDenver]

Indeed, I believe I have a typo on Hilux payload.

 

[phsycle]

https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-reviews/toyota-hilux-66272

"The HiLux doesn’t offer the best carrying capacity of its competitive set. The high-end dual-cab SR5 4x4, for instance, can only cope with 925kg, while the SR dual-cab 4x4 is rated at 920kg - the lowest in the HiLux range. The best is the base manual WorkMate, with a payload capacity of 1225kg."

That's 2,700lb (!!) payload for the base model. Yowsers.