Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-24-2016, 12:10 PM   #57
Rivet Master
 
dznf0g's Avatar

 
2007 30' Classic
Oswego , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,475
Images: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by m.hony View Post
Drive each one.
Feel the acceleration.
Feel the responsiveness.
After driving a Titan 5.6, Ford EcoBoost, and GM 6.2 I'm like, "Really? That's all?"
Transmission Type 6-speed automatic 6-speed automatic
overdrive overdrive
Gear Ratios
1st 3.520 3.333
2nd 2.042 1.960
3rd 1.400 1.353
4th 1.000 1.000
5th 0.716 0.728
6th 0.586 0.588
Reverse 3.224 3.061
The first column of numbers is for the 4.6 motor.
The second column is for the 5.7 motor.
My comment wasn't to "dis" your "feel" comment, but there is something needed to be brought up here about throttle feel. In the days of mechanical (cable most recently) throttle actuation, the response of the throttle body was linear, or in some cases, a smooth curve from closed throttle to WOT. With the advent of fly-by-wire, the opening of the throttle plate relative to foot pedal apply is a compound curve relationship....and is engineered for various end means manufacturer to manufacturer...and even between models within a manufacturer's stable. The curve can be manipulated to reduce the propensity for the consumer base to perform unneeded "jack rabbit" starts. This helps fuel economy. This is only one example of the type of programming done. There are many. They are computer controlled and differ in different gears, in TH mode, etc.

As a real world example. The 5.3 L seems to require a lot of throttle input to "get going", as perceived by the driver, but then...say after 1/4 pedal depression, it ramps up more aggressively. Some owners don't like that, but it really helps with city fuel economy.

Conversely, I wish my 6.2 L were a bit more like the 5.3 in throttle response. It ramps up more quickly off idle and, because it is so torquey, has a tendency to spin...particularly when wet. Even dry, it'll chirp when crossing the painted stop line or cross walks. Add a trailer, and a very light foot is required when pulling away.

I don't know if Tundra has gone to fly-by-wire yet, but every truck's "feel" is determined by the calibration engineer.
__________________

__________________
-Rich-

"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy." - Red Green
dznf0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2016, 12:29 PM   #58
Rivet Master
 
dznf0g's Avatar

 
2007 30' Classic
Oswego , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,475
Images: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by m.hony View Post
Drive each one.
Feel the acceleration.
Feel the responsiveness.
After driving a Titan 5.6, Ford EcoBoost, and GM 6.2 I'm like, "Really? That's all?"
Transmission Type 6-speed automatic 6-speed automatic
overdrive overdrive
Gear Ratios
1st 3.520 3.333
2nd 2.042 1.960
3rd 1.400 1.353
4th 1.000 1.000
5th 0.716 0.728
6th 0.586 0.588
Reverse 3.224 3.061
The first column of numbers is for the 4.6 motor.
The second column is for the 5.7 motor.
8L90 trans, 6.2L

First: 4.560
Second: 2.970
Third: 2.080
Fourth: 1.690
Fifth: 1.270
Sixth: 1.000
Seventh: 0.850
Eighth: 0.650
Reverse: 3.820

3.42 gear in the Maxtow


Read more: http://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/gm-tr...#ixzz4IGuJIPbR
__________________

__________________
-Rich-

"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy." - Red Green
dznf0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2016, 01:12 PM   #59
Rivet Master
 
m.hony's Avatar
 
2013 30' Classic
Greenwood , Mississippi
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 10,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by dznf0g View Post
My comment wasn't to "dis" your "feel" comment, but there is something needed to be brought up here about throttle feel. In the days of mechanical (cable most recently) throttle actuation, the response of the throttle body was linear, or in some cases, a smooth curve from closed throttle to WOT. With the advent of fly-by-wire, the opening of the throttle plate relative to foot pedal apply is a compound curve relationship....and is engineered for various end means manufacturer to manufacturer...and even between models within a manufacturer's stable. The curve can be manipulated to reduce the propensity for the consumer base to perform unneeded "jack rabbit" starts. This helps fuel economy. This is only one example of the type of programming done. There are many. They are computer controlled and differ in different gears, in TH mode, etc.

As a real world example. The 5.3 L seems to require a lot of throttle input to "get going", as perceived by the driver, but then...say after 1/4 pedal depression, it ramps up more aggressively. Some owners don't like that, but it really helps with city fuel economy.

Conversely, I wish my 6.2 L were a bit more like the 5.3 in throttle response. It ramps up more quickly off idle and, because it is so torquey, has a tendency to spin...particularly when wet. Even dry, it'll chirp when crossing the painted stop line or cross walks. Add a trailer, and a very light foot is required when pulling away.

I don't know if Tundra has gone to fly-by-wire yet, but every truck's "feel" is determined by the calibration engineer.

Not taking it as a dis-
Realizing throttle response could be as simple as the spring in the accelerator pedal-
I still love my truck and think is totally up to the task of hauling my Classic 30 around almost every weekend.
Whatever brand someone likes-
Whatever features convinced them one or the other was best for this reason or that-
Whatever you like will serve you well with good dependability, reliability, longevity-
The million mile Tundra has the now defunct 4.7.
I wonder if the 5.7 or 4.6 will ever have a million mile video on YouTube.
I honestly don't think the numbers are figured the same way from brand to brand- there is no standard unless all manufacturers have adopted J2807.
Otherwise it is impossible to compare apples to apples.
The Tundra only has 2 engine choices backed by one each transmission choice and one each rear end gears slightly different depending on 2-wheel drive or 4-wheel drive and tow package.
I opted for the bigger engine due to testosterone maybe, but it is a hoss.
Mine is a 2 wheel drive tow package truck.


Sent from my iPad using Airstream Forums
__________________
2013 Classic 30 Limited
2007 Silver Toyota Tundra Crew Max Limited 5.7 iForce
2006 Vivid Black Harley-Davidson Road King Classic
1999 Black Nissan Pathfinder LE
TAC #MS-10
WBCCI #1811, Region 6, Unit 56
Airforums #70955
m.hony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2016, 02:35 PM   #60
4 Rivet Member
 
Alluminati's Avatar
 
Vintage Kin Owner
St. Louis , Missouri
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 312
Images: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by dznf0g View Post
Facts please: Is the 5.7 Toy over 420HP and 460 Torque?
Sorry, I was comparing only the two trucks he mentioned: Ford F150 and Chevy 2500. The 6.2L engine is not available on the 2500.

Just the facts: That model Ford requires high octane, and that model Chevy requires diesel to surpass Tundra's torque.
__________________
The Morgans
1989 Avion 34VB, "QE3"
2008 Toyota Sequoia 5.7L "Tug"
(Is there no respect for an 8-ton CGVWR truck? *sniff* )
Alluminati is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2016, 03:05 PM   #61
Rivet Master
 
dznf0g's Avatar

 
2007 30' Classic
Oswego , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,475
Images: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by m.hony View Post
Not taking it as a dis-
Realizing throttle response could be as simple as the spring in the accelerator pedal-
I still love my truck and think is totally up to the task of hauling my Classic 30 around almost every weekend.
Whatever brand someone likes-
Whatever features convinced them one or the other was best for this reason or that-
Whatever you like will serve you well with good dependability, reliability, longevity-
The million mile Tundra has the now defunct 4.7.
I wonder if the 5.7 or 4.6 will ever have a million mile video on YouTube.
I honestly don't think the numbers are figured the same way from brand to brand- there is no standard unless all manufacturers have adopted J2807.
Otherwise it is impossible to compare apples to apples.
The Tundra only has 2 engine choices backed by one each transmission choice and one each rear end gears slightly different depending on 2-wheel drive or 4-wheel drive and tow package.
I opted for the bigger engine due to testosterone maybe, but it is a hoss.
Mine is a 2 wheel drive tow package truck.


Sent from my iPad using Airstream Forums
Just an FYI..I believe everyone is now J2807 as well as Torque and HP number compliance. I forget the J-number for power ratings, but all complied with that quite a few years ago. Apples are pretty much apples nowadays. FYI also, back in the day, Toyota was indeed the "marketing offender" with T and HP. They tested with no belts driving A/C, PS,, water pump etc. Everyone else had driven components in the test routine. SAE thought better of that one as well as towing figures later.
__________________
-Rich-

"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy." - Red Green
dznf0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2016, 03:11 PM   #62
4 Rivet Member
 
Alluminati's Avatar
 
Vintage Kin Owner
St. Louis , Missouri
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 312
Images: 3
401 ft lb torque is sufficient to pull my 34' trailer, and my Sequoia does it comfortably.

If I were in a race I could just put on the OEM supercharger for that engine. Then I'd get 510 hp and 550 ft lbs of torque.
__________________
The Morgans
1989 Avion 34VB, "QE3"
2008 Toyota Sequoia 5.7L "Tug"
(Is there no respect for an 8-ton CGVWR truck? *sniff* )
Alluminati is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2016, 03:13 PM   #63
Rivet Master
 
dznf0g's Avatar

 
2007 30' Classic
Oswego , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,475
Images: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alluminati View Post
401 ft lb torque is sufficient to pull my 34' trailer, and my Sequoia does it comfortably.

If I were in a race I could just put on the OEM supercharger for that engine. Then I'd get 510 hp and 550 ft lbs of torque.
And I'm not saying otherwise. If youz happy, that's all that matters. I'm just a stickler for accuracy of facts and figures.
__________________
-Rich-

"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy." - Red Green
dznf0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2016, 05:46 PM   #64
Rivet Master
 
m.hony's Avatar
 
2013 30' Classic
Greenwood , Mississippi
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 10,796
The GM 6.2 gas is rated at maybe 425 hp and 425 ft. lbs. of torque.
The 5.7 Tundra has 381 hp and 401 ft. lbs. of torque.
Facts, but...
To my foot and gut the Tundra FEELS stronger, more responsive, quicker accelerating.
I said this in an earlier post.
It could be transmission gears.
It could be rear end gears.
It could be the spring in the accelerator pedal.
It could be any and/or all of the above.
The Tundra CrewMax still has a larger rear seat area with larger rear doors that open to nearly 90 degrees rather than the 45 degree opening rear doors of others.
It is easier to exit the rear seat of a CrewMax Tundra. The cab is just bigger. The B-pillar isn't in the way of your feet. You just stick your foot out and exit.
When exiting a GM crew cab my feet get hung up at the B-pillar. It takes some thought to figure out how to turn my foot to get it out.
Even compared to Duramax/Allison GM 3/4 ton and 1 ton trucks I can't tell a nickel's worth of difference.
True, the GM trucks at work are towing trailers heavier than my Airstream...
The Tundra feels good to me.
I like it.


Sent from my iPad using Airstream Forums
__________________
2013 Classic 30 Limited
2007 Silver Toyota Tundra Crew Max Limited 5.7 iForce
2006 Vivid Black Harley-Davidson Road King Classic
1999 Black Nissan Pathfinder LE
TAC #MS-10
WBCCI #1811, Region 6, Unit 56
Airforums #70955
m.hony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2016, 05:48 PM   #65
Rivet Master
 
m.hony's Avatar
 
2013 30' Classic
Greenwood , Mississippi
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 10,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alluminati View Post
401 ft lb torque is sufficient to pull my 34' trailer, and my Sequoia does it comfortably.



If I were in a race I could just put on the OEM supercharger for that engine. Then I'd get 510 hp and 550 ft lbs of torque.

Too bad the TRD supercharger is no longer being built.
Maybe there are still some of them hanging around in parts bins.
Who else has 501 hp and 550 ft. lbs. of torque?


Sent from my iPad using Airstream Forums
__________________
2013 Classic 30 Limited
2007 Silver Toyota Tundra Crew Max Limited 5.7 iForce
2006 Vivid Black Harley-Davidson Road King Classic
1999 Black Nissan Pathfinder LE
TAC #MS-10
WBCCI #1811, Region 6, Unit 56
Airforums #70955
m.hony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2016, 05:56 PM   #66
Rivet Master
 
aftermath's Avatar
 
2006 25' Safari FB SE
Spokane , Washington
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by m.hony View Post
We were talking about the 4.7 million mile Tundra in the video.
Not sure the 5.7 will last as long as the 4.7, but I'm sure it will last a long time.


Sent from my iPad using Airstream Forums
Thanks, I missed that. I had a 4.7 in my 4Runner. It was a great engine. Still wish I had it.
__________________
aftermath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2016, 07:36 PM   #67
4 Rivet Member
 
Alluminati's Avatar
 
Vintage Kin Owner
St. Louis , Missouri
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 312
Images: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by m.hony View Post
The GM 6.2 gas is rated at maybe 425 hp and 425 ft. lbs. of torque.
ggreen was comparing Tundra to Ford F150 and Chevy 2500.

Yes, Chevy makes a strong 6.2L engine, but you can't get it in the 2500

Likewise, Toyota makes diesel engines, but they don't put them in Tundras in the US.
__________________
The Morgans
1989 Avion 34VB, "QE3"
2008 Toyota Sequoia 5.7L "Tug"
(Is there no respect for an 8-ton CGVWR truck? *sniff* )
Alluminati is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2016, 10:10 PM   #68
Rivet Master
 
dznf0g's Avatar

 
2007 30' Classic
Oswego , Illinois
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,475
Images: 5
"The GM 6.2 gas is rated at maybe 425 hp and 425 ft. lbs. of torque."

420hp and 460 torque. Geez guys, it would take 2 seconds to google this stuff. Again, I'm a stickler for accuracy and facts and figgers.
__________________
-Rich-

"If the women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy." - Red Green
dznf0g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2016, 11:05 PM   #69
Rivet Master

 
2007 22' International CCD
Corona , California
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,353
I still like my toyota pickups. They take the abuse I dish out, seem to run forever in spite of it, and they seem to be the right fit for my family. If we go to a bigger truck to haul our 22' International better/faster/stronger it will be a nice Tundra crew cab setup. 4x4 optional. Diesel would be nice, but I'm sticking with what I like.

GMC has been a total pain to me in the past, and I won't consider a Ford for similar reasons.

As the old saying goes, you pay your money, and you take your choice. To me and my family, it's Toyota or a Toyota product (Lexus). We've tried other brands, had s fleet of Volvos for a while, but that fleet, while very safe, took far more engineering and hard work to maintain. I don't have to sweat the Toyotas...


Sent from my pocket Internet using Airstream Forums
__________________
KE4GNK/AE
'The Silver HamShack' (2007 International 22FB CCD 75th Aniversary model)
Multiple Yaesu Radios inside and many antennae sprouting from roof, ProPride hitch
2012 shortbed crewcab 4x4 Toyota Taco TV with more antennae on it
rmkrum is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2016, 06:31 AM   #70
Rivet Master
 
GettinAway's Avatar
 
2011 23' FB Flying Cloud
Chesterfield , Missouri
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 587
It will be very difficult to get me out of a Toyota. We've just had great luck with them for years and years. We've run the landcruisers up to 250,000 before we sold them, and they still had good resale. Same with 4 Runners, and a Tacoma. I a sales rep,,so I put on a lot of miles.
The right diesel in one of the big three, at the right price, may tempt me, but they way they are now priced, I'm not interested.
__________________

__________________
2011 FC 23FB
2012 Toyota Tundra Dbl Cab, 5.7 4x4
GettinAway is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Toyota Tundra as a Tow Vehicle evsjr Tow Vehicles 788 05-27-2016 07:55 PM
Asking for Toyota Tundra owners and tow veterans... westcoastas Towing, Tow Vehicles & Hitches 40 10-04-2014 11:05 PM
Should I tow my 1991 Airstream Classic Limited 34' with a 2013 Toyota Tundra Crewmax? auburns2003 Tow Vehicles 8 08-16-2013 07:42 AM


Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by



Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.