Aesthetically, the windowsill's dips are the only jarring moment in an interior that's almost embarrassingly attractive in a glimmering, Mighty Wurlitzer sort of way (and it goes with big, shiny rodeo belt buckles, too). By comparison, the Tundra's instrument panel is merely conventional. Or worse, something of a hodgepodge, a mash-up of several Toyota sedan dash cues and Dodge Ram-like barrel gauges, which don't quite fit within the steering wheel's viewing slot. We all enthusiastically preferred sitting before the Wurlitzer. And the F-150 also gets the nod for second-row functionality, as its rear seats neatly compress against the rear bulkhead revealing a perfectly flat floor--lots more useful than the Tundra's fold-down seatbacks.
Tundra's sloping nose offers...
Tundra's sloping nose offers better forward visibility, but less impressive prow. Beneath is a mighty 381-hp V-8.
Power is a big deal in truckland, and here the Toyota has a major muscle edge, producing 381 horses, 401 pound-feet of torque, and a lot more crispness from its 5.7-liter V-8 than does the F-150's 5.4-liter, which trails with a paltry 310 horses and 365 pound-feet. The result was a Ford spank-fest at the track, the Tundra hitting 60 mph in a scalding 6.5 seconds against the F-150's lukewarm 8.1. And there seemed to be no Ford upside at the pump, either, the F-150 fumbling its theoretical EPA mileage edge (14/18 city/highway to the Tundra's 13/17) as both yielded an identical 16.2 mpg along our trip. Double drat.
The table tilted further at tow-test time, where the chore was to lug a nearly 6000-pound Chaparral boat and trailer combo. While both trucks did the job, the Tundra was whistling on its toes the whole time. We measured each rig's 0-to-50-mph time on a real-world freeway entrance: The Tundra growled for 12.6 seconds, the Ford, for 14.2. A big 1.6-second, or 13-percent, difference in growling.
The story wasn't nearly so simple while descending, though. Here's our in-the-cab report from Greg Whale, Truck Trend editor-at-large and extreme tow-meister: "Dropping the Tundra's transmission into manual mode automatically dumps two gears (if you're in fifth or sixth when you do so), but at that point you have the option of choosing any of the six ratios. By contrast, the Ford offers only D321, and going from D to 3 slowed it down more than I wanted, so controlling descent requires either shifting back and forth between D and 3 or tapping the brakes every so often. Still, of the two, which would I choose? The Ford for its better long-distance comfort. It would be less fatiguing." (Read more in the sidebar on the following page.)
Some of that comfort is traceable to our F-150's cushier 18-inch wheels and 65-series sidewalls compared with the Tundra's 20-inchers and 55-series rubber. But even discounting that, the Ford is a veritable reading room, matching the Tundra's 66 dBA at 60 mph but less punctuated by impact noise. It's simultaneously smoother-riding too, registering gentler vertical g's under your rump--whether on asphalt or choppy concrete--with a less distinct pitching motion (the bane of unloaded trucks).
So which way have the truck tectonic plates migrated? With crisper handling, better forward vision, and superior acceleration and towing oomph--gosh, that seems to cover just about everything, right?--the tectonic advantage appears to be the Tundra's.