Not that those tests aren't "real", but like f4 said -- they're biased, I'm sure they chose those specific tests that play to Ford's strengths. That being said, I've traveled around the block as a green engineer looking at how things are made and corporate cultures... the Tundra may very well be weaker than the Chevy or Ford, likely it is, but much of the Far East manufacturing is done to "right size" the product. For instance, if you look at a die to stamp panels for a US automotive OE manufacturer, a lot of them are built to handle multiple millions of hits with relatively little maintenance. They are just beefy. I bet there's US tooling out there that you could put into a press and still stamp out parts for an '82 Cutlass. Compare that to a Japanese tool - it's built to handle 1 to 2 million hits and if it totally crumbles into metal ashes at the 2M+1 hit - so be it, that's how it was designed. That philosophy and culture filters all the way down through the organization - the US "beefy/robust" vs. the Japanese "Right size, Right Spec, No waste". So, I'd bet that the US trucks are "tougher", but how important is that under the given circumstances? I don't use a flamethrower to light a candle when a match will do. But, then again, there's something to be said for having a tool WAY more than capable of handling the job you ask it to do.