If you define Big Macs as being the "best burger", your criteria is price, taste, availability....it probably is the "best", which is why it sells a lot. Point being, depends on your criteria. Is axle size or disc size a criteria for truck purchase? Seems it is for you, but that doesn't have any tangible benefit to the end user from a performance perspective, Fords are not breaking rear axles.
Big axles are cool, I guess, but if the platform doesn't support that with a strong Transmission, Tcase, axle tubes, shafts and all the other stuff, who cares? Unless you talk to a Toyota engineer and Ford engineer, your not going to be able to discern the design criteria.
What about front diff size - did you look at that?
Simple fact is Fords are not breaking axles and don't have braking (no pun intended) problems. The Ford Raptor uses the same parts from the F150-HD, no issues, same engine (highly Tuned version of), trans, tcase and F/R axle.
Seems like this is really a value assessment to you, $/mile or ownership cost. If I was keeping the rig 15 years, I'd agree, the Toyota is probably a cheaper / safer option, but I'm not (nor are a lot of folks), which is why this comes full circle, how do you define "best truck"? Ask most expedition guys how they'd define it and it would include things like "load carrying capability, towing capacity, fuel mileage, range, durable platform, reliability, ease of repair, interior room...etc"...I think the Ford ticks those boxes better than the Tundra. If you wanna include things like "long term cost of ownership, resale value, rear axle size, front disc size, muffler bearing diameter..." so be it, your value assessment differs from what most folks need or want.