Tundra vs F150

[tacollie]

Actually, with a new diesel you'll pay upfront and at the pump. While they offer amazing performance, they are neigher efficient or economical.

Agreed! They get better milage but it isn't worth it IMO.

Last time I filled up the VW diesel was $0.20 per gallon more than 85 .

 

[Deleted member 9101]

Agreed! They get better milage but it isn't worth it IMO.

Last time I filled up the VW diesel was $0.20 per gallon more than 85 .

I work for the gubment and even we recognize that there is no finincial benifit to owning a diesel.

 

[Bayou Boy]

Actually, with a new diesel you'll pay upfront and at the pump. While they offer amazing performance, they are neigher efficient or economical.

You guys keep telling yourself this. I get better than stock Powerwagon mileage with my Cummins on heavy 36s with stock gearing. 18mpg with no trailer at 80 on the interstate. 11mpg pulling my 9000# camper at 75. All you guys talking about single digit mileage is just ridiculous.

I could easily get above 20 mpg at 75 when it was stock.

It also has nothing to do with money, purely range and comfort pulling a load.

And I have never had any of the truck stop issues talked about above, ever. I use the truck lanes exclusively on trips and not only is it a very simple matter but it ends up being significantly faster than shuffling around up front with the idiots in their cars. Who cares whether or not they have pay at the pump. You probably have to go inside to use the restroom anyway. The lightning fast pumps is just a bonus.


It's incredible that this thread has gone 31 pages. Just go drive both and buy whatever makes you happiest. Nobody makes "bad" trucks today.

 

[Kors Camps]

Agreed! They get better milage but it isn't worth it IMO.

Last time I filled up the VW diesel was $0.20 per gallon more than 85 .

Which for the VW 14.2 gallon tank is less than $3.00 additional cash per fill. Only about $150 additional fuel cost per year if you fill up every 7 days. Our Mk6 TDI Golf was totaled, and the Mk7 TDI's were pulled from the dealers during their emissions fraud investigation so sadly we were unable to buy a new diesel at the time of our Mk7 GTI purchase. Stock with the DSG I got 43mpg highway consistenly.

The gas vs. diesel break even point for fuel costs at the time of our TDI purchase was 15k miles per year. After that point, we actually saved money on fuel even after the small initial purchase price premium. With diesel, there are indeed financial benefits for those who rack up a lot of miles. Basic mathematics...

I get better than stock Powerwagon mileage with my Cummins on heavy 36s with stock gearing. 18mpg with no trailer at 80 on the interstate. 11mpg pulling my 9000# camper at 75. All you guys talking about single digit mileage is just ridiculous. ...It's incredible that this thread has gone 31 pages.

Cool story . This diesel discussion stems specifically from the F-150 vs. Tundra comparison. I mentioned previously how these half ton trucks are flexing into the 3/4 & 1 Ton price range... and in all seriousness if I were in the full size truck market I'd get a 2012 Ram 3500 SRW 6.7. No DEF in the 2012 model year... Yes I am a Cummin's Fan Boy as well... ? I didn't want to muddy the waters with Ram comparisons 31 pages into such a polite thread, but you mentioned it first - what happens to this thread henceforth is all your fault!

P.S. I like the Outdoors RV travel trailer line. Too heavy for my 4runner though. A Ram won't happen for me unless I can sell the idea of full timing in a big 5th wheel. My Girl isn't 100% convinced yet, so we're planning a long term trip with an "ultra light" TT to test the waters...

 

[bkg]

I work for the gubment and even we recognize that there is no finincial benifit to owning a diesel.

There is some irony in the statement - government has made diesel fuel worse and diesel emissions so complicated and expensive, that the government stops using diesels....

 

[tacollie]

Which for the VW 14.2 gallon tank is less than $3.00 additional cash per fill. Only about $150 additional fuel cost per year if you fill up every 7 days. Our Mk6 TDI Golf was totaled, and the Mk7 TDI's were pulled from the dealers during their emissions fraud investigation so sadly we were unable to buy a new diesel at the time of our Mk7 GTI purchase. Stock with the DSG I got 43mpg highway consistenly.

The gas vs. diesel break even point for fuel costs at the time of our TDI purchase was 15k miles per year. After that point, we actually saved money on fuel even after the small initial purchase price premium. With diesel, there are indeed financial benefits for those who rack up a lot of miles. Basic mathematics...

I like driving the diesel. Our next car won't be a diesel or a VW. VW electronics suck! We are coming up to the 5 year mark next year and will have to stay getting emissions test every 2 years. Summer blend we get 41 mpg. Winter blend and snow tires yield 33. Bikes on the roof 35 and it struggles to keep speed on some passes.

3/4 ton trucks a freaking heavy. One of the things I like most about the f150 is it's light!

 

[Buliwyf]

''I scored 4 touchdowns in a single high school football game, and I drove a dodge.''

2-3 mpg. 2 measly mpg. If a 2 mpg difference breaks your bank, this might be the wrong hobby.

 

[Highlander]

Ok since the diesel get mentioned what about F150 diesel vs Tundra?

 

[Buliwyf]

I think it might be a good little engine. It won't win any races. I wouldn't tow much with one. It's a neat little Land Rover engine. Might be nice for long trips, if all you tow is an off road trailer or two jetski's.

I don't think it stands a chance of getting it's tow rating to go uphill. Then again, the ecoboost is rated to tow more than an F250. So it's to be expected. People that buy fake ratings are fun.

 

[Dalko43]

Of course. And I am not even suggesting it is a good thing. Toyota has to somehow improve the MPG of Tundra. A Ford HD 6.2 makes the same mpg... for god sake.

Maybe according to some overly-optimistic Ford owners. Going by fuelly results or any number of magazines results, those 3/4 ton gasoline trucks are less efficient compared to the Tundra. There is no magic sauce going into those big heavy gasoline trucks that somehow makes them just as efficient as the 1/2 tons.

The most of the website is full with this information. The same happened with the tacoma. it was the rumors regarding the engine that came to be true.

The problem is we don't know which rumors are true until the products finally come out. Toyota has said repeatedly that they see little value in putting turbo gasoline engines into work trucks...there is little to no mpg gain when under load.

 

[Bayou Boy]

''I scored 4 touchdowns in a single high school football game, and I drove a dodge.''

2-3 mpg. 2 measly mpg. If a 2 mpg difference breaks your bank, this might be the wrong hobby.

The difference between 8 and 11mpg is almost 40%. But maybe math is hard if you were too busy scoring touchdowns in school...

 

[Buliwyf]

Sorry your truck has such bad mileage.

My mileage hasn't effected my overlanding budget in 20 years, gas or diesel.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

There is some irony in the statement - government has made diesel fuel worse and diesel emissions so complicated and expensive, that the government stops using diesels....

Very valid points... Although my agency deals with nuclear reactors emissions, not vehicles...lol.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

Ok since the diesel get mentioned what about F150 diesel vs Tundra?

It's a diesel for guys who at bad at math. Unless you have a trailer hooked to it the majority of the time and don't mind camping in the right lane it's not the motor for you. The 3.5 destroys it in pulling performance... It just uses more fuel to do so.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

You guys keep telling yourself this. I get better than stock Powerwagon mileage with my Cummins on heavy 36s with stock gearing. 18mpg with no trailer at 80 on the interstate. 11mpg pulling my 9000# camper at 75. All you guys talking about single digit mileage is just ridiculous.

I could easily get above 20 mpg at 75 when it was stock.

It also has nothing to do with money, purely range and comfort pulling a load.

And I have never had any of the truck stop issues talked about above, ever. I use the truck lanes exclusively on trips and not only is it a very simple matter but it ends up being significantly faster than shuffling around up front with the idiots in their cars. Who cares whether or not they have pay at the pump. You probably have to go inside to use the restroom anyway. The lightning fast pumps is just a bonus.


It's incredible that this thread has gone 31 pages. Just go drive both and buy whatever makes you happiest. Nobody makes "bad" trucks today.

You paid thousands more to buy a diesel, you pay more for insurance, you pay more for maintenance, you pay more per gallon of fuel, you pay more for oil changes, and to top it off your repair cost are drastically more. At the end of the day a diesel cost much more per mile driven for the vast majority of consumers. Even if you only look at fuel economy, it takes hundreds of thousands of miles to recoup the increased purchase price of a diesel.

While the new diesel trucks deliver amazing performance while towing, it comes at a higher operating cost and reduced payload rating. The new breed of gas motors are making diesels far less appealing to people who track their operating cost.

Once Ford starts selling the "Godzilla" motor and Chevy counters it, diesels will be far less attractive to those who can do basic math.