I’ve given it some thought over the years, and there’s only one truck that I’ve seriously considered as a replacement for my ’66 F-100, and this is it. In fact, it’s almost a perfect update on the Ford, with the benefits of modern technology. Don’t laugh, but I’ll take mine with the 2.7 liter four cylinder. It’s got more (net) horsepower (150) than the Ford (129), and a pretty healthy dose of torque. It’s not like I’m planning on pulling 10,000 pound trailers down the road. Oh wait; I actually have done that with the Ford…
As far as I’m concerned, Toyota made a giant blunder when they abandoned their T-100/gen1 Tundra platform for the current monstrosity. And I don’t just say that in hindsight. But then my perspective is not Texan, and I accept that different folks have different ideas about how massive trucks need to be. But here’s the ironic thing: these T-100 trucks are very popular around here with professional landscapers, who try real hard work them to death, but rarely succeed.
The thing about big new trucks as I pointed out in my earlier post is that you pretty much have to use a trailer for hauling materials that some of us like to still put into beds. But landscapers (and others like me) like a low bed for placing materials, often need to back into tight spaces, or just don’t care to pull around a second bed on wheels. And the T-100 is old-school Toyota rugged and simple, has a full-sized bed and can fit three in the cab. And it gets up to 25 mpg with the four. Just the thing to keep operating and maintenance costs low. That explains why the resale value on these trucks are still holding up.
Well, I doubt Toyota is going to bring back the T-100, but sooner or later someone’s going to see the hole in the market for a full size bed that’s reasonably low to the ground and married to a mid-sized cab big enough for a tall guy. A torquey four cylinder, gas or diesel, and we’re good to go. Well, my old Ford isn’t exactly getting worried yet.