Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-26-2009, 02:32 PM   #99
Rivet Master
 
hampstead38's Avatar
 
1967 26' Overlander
Upperco , Maryland
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
Blog Entries: 22
It looks like the 19' Fun Funder has a gross weight of just over 6k. I don't know what model of Tundra you owned, but you might have found the performance a bit sluggish with the 4.7l V8 and if the trailer was fully loaded. I think a Tundra with the 5.7l V8 could tow 6k competently... bu that depends on your driving style and expectations.

As for transmission costs, our family logging company recently lost an Allison transmission running behind a diesel pickup engine. The core charge for the swap was $7k. Now, I think Allison makes a great tranny, but anything mechanical can and does break. And it is all expensive.

If you need a 3/4 ton truck, you need a 3/4 ton truck. The Tundra isn't a 3/4 ton. The F150 isn't a 3/4 ton. As for reliability, most of us base our opinions on personal experience... and most of us only drive a small handful of vehicles rather than a statisically significant sample. I'm sure there are people out there who bought an AMC Pacer or Gremlin and had a great experience. So it goes.
__________________

hampstead38 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2009, 05:09 PM   #100
Rivet Master
 
Gene's Avatar
 
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,842
I don't understand why a transmission was not covered under the powertrain warranty which is 60,000 miles/5 years, if the truck had 50,000 miles on it and was a 2007 or newer. A tranny for $2,000+ is a pretty good price for today's transmissions. Replacement and installation of a new one on a Mini, according to a TV report I saw in Michigan several weeks ago, is about $10,000.

I've had the '07 Tundra for nearly 25,000 miles and 20 months, have received no recall notices and one push button needed to be replaced. It was an American made switch.

I have driven this truck while towing more than 3 tons of Safari over Colorado mountain passes many times and if I want to, I can go well over 65 mph over any one of them. It does suck gas and no truck is perfect.

If you read the many threads about different grands of trucks, many people are very happy with Toyota trucks, get good performance and excellent reliability. There have been 2 negative posts about Toyota trucks in the past year. Many people are very happy with their Chevy, GMC, Ford and Dodge trucks, but the percentage of those with the American brands with problems seem somewhat higher.

I must have read a few thousand posts about which brand of truck is the best and now understand why people stop posting. My first reaction is now: here we go again.

Gene
__________________

__________________
Gene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2009, 05:54 PM   #101
3 Rivet Member
 
2009 30' Classic
Salem , Alabama
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 96
Hampstead

I agree totally with your point of view. Mechanical thing's do break. During my previous RV exp , mainly in the southwest, my basic TV was a Ford 250 HD 460 4 B H carb ext cab w/all the tow bells. I ordered the vehicles from a dealer, assembled in Kan. Good power, etc, terrible gas M, but with duel tanks. I travel extensively in that region A good deal of time on Indian RES. where gas stations at the time (1981-1988) were few an far apart;towing a 30 HR. I conducted business with the numerous trading post's. I purchased a 2008 T 5.7 in Feb 08.Commenced our long month trip, 5 Apr, returned 5 May, traded the T 6 May. You are correct, T is a 1/2 Tn but I thought adequate for the light FF. I did take a loss on the process. I would do it again. I purchased the AS 30 C L 2009 in Mar 09, 10 months after my T exp.. I just think Toyota light trucks are more myth than reality . My son-laws 2007 required warranty break replacement the R/C an pads.woppa4
__________________
woppa 4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 10:45 AM   #102
Rivet Master
 
hampstead38's Avatar
 
1967 26' Overlander
Upperco , Maryland
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,087
Blog Entries: 22
A great deal depends on what you expect. I'm a pretty conservative driver, even more cautious when towing. I don't go over 65 mph, don't pass and plan every stop in advance. A person who wants to drive more aggressively than me may need "more truck." While I don't own a Tundra, if I bought a new half-ton truck, the Toyota would be my first choice. If I needed a 3/4 ton truck, I honestly don't know which way I would go.
hampstead38 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2009, 11:35 AM   #103
Rivet Master
 
purman's Avatar
 
1968 28' Ambassador
Cedaredge , Colorado
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,542
Well we have had our sequoia just over a year, Same motor as the Tundra. have 30,000 miles on it and no problems.
Man I gotta stop taking those long trips...
__________________
Jason

May you have at least one sunny day, and a soft chair to sit in..

2008 5.7 L V8 Sequoia
AIR # 31243
WBCCI # 6987
FOUR CORNERS UNIT
purman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2013, 09:04 AM   #104
2 Rivet Member
 
2017 25' Flying Cloud
west plains , Missouri
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 96
We have a 2010 Tundra 5.7 and pull a 25' SLEFB with comfort...recently 10K up the Rockies. Average of 11-12 mpg. Have driven stock and horse trailers for 50 years and am totally okay with the Tundra. Novice drivers might consider a driving tutorial which are available in most places. Jack
__________________
rjack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 10:24 PM   #105
New Member
 
Spokane , Washington
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1
4.6L Tundra

I'm wondering if anyone tows with the 4.6L Tundra. I have a 26' Overlander. The gross weight is 3100#. I expect I will be around 5000# loaded. The Tundra specs show a gross weight capacity of 8300#. I'm certain it will tow the trailer, but I'm wondering how it does in the hills. Thank you!
__________________
trebouchet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 10:48 PM   #106
Rivet Master
 
2005 19' Safari
GLENDALE , AZ
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,441
The 5.7L actually gets better gas mileage, if you can control your right foot. Plus, it has lots more HP and torque. Unless you get a great deal on the 4.6L, which is still a very capable engine, I'd get the 5.7L.

Just guessing, but I'd bet the 4.6L would do fine in the mountains. However, we have a 2008 CrewMax Limited with the 5.7L and tow a 2005 19-foot Bambi that weighs around 4,400 pounds. We have towed all through the Rockies, and our Tundra will charge up hills faster than I personally think it is safe to drive. Just don't expect to get very good mileage, if you have your pedal to the metal all the time.
__________________
Phoenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2013, 09:00 AM   #107
Rivet Master
 
TG Twinkie's Avatar
 
1974 Argosy 26
Morrill , Nebraska
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,140
Images: 2
Blog Entries: 5
I am confused. How do you load almost a ton into a 3100# trailer?
Are you saying the dry weight of the coach is 3100? What is the GVWR on the nameplate?
__________________
Knowledge: "A gift to be shared. A treasure to receive."
TG Twinkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2013, 03:17 PM   #108
Rivet Master
 
Gene's Avatar
 
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,842
I was driving along US 50 in western Colorado yesterday with our 5.7 L. Tundra and passed an older, first generation Tundra towing a trailer full of firewood. He had to have had a 4.6 L. engine. Wood is pretty heavy, but not as heavy as an Airstream. The hills on US 50 in that stretch are not very steep or long, but the older Tundra noticeably slowed down going uphill. I passed him primarily because his load of wood looked poorly secured and I didn't want to be behind him if a log fell off.

The smaller V8 is a very good engine, but a bit small for anything but the smallest Airstream I believe. If you buy the supercharger ($3,999) for it, you will get a big boost of power and better gas mileage.

Gene
__________________
Gene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2013, 03:36 PM   #109
Moderator
 
DKB_SATX's Avatar

 
2017 26' Flying Cloud
1976 Argosy 28
Alamo Heights , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,401
Images: 1
Blog Entries: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene View Post
~~
The smaller V8 is a very good engine, but a bit small for anything but the smallest Airstream I believe. If you buy the supercharger ($3,999) for it, you will get a big boost of power and better gas mileage.

Gene
Gene,

I've seen you post about the blower for the smaller V8 and Tacoma V6s before.

I definitely agree you'll get a big boost of power. I strongly doubt you'll get better gas mileage compared to stock unless the blower kit comes with a LOT more than just a supercharger and software. Even if you run it a little lean (generally a bad idea with forced induction unless you have direct injection and a VERY good engine management system) you're going to be forcing in more air, which requires more fuel. Blowers can be lots and lots of fun but they're not fuel economy boosters.
__________________
David

Zero Gravitas 2017 Flying Cloud 26U | Il Progetto 1976 Argosy 28 Center Bath | WBCCI# 15566

He has all of the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire. Sir Winston Churchill
DKB_SATX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2013, 04:05 PM   #110
Rivet Master
 
Gene's Avatar
 
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction , Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,842
Yes, I have mentioned the supercharger before when the question of engines on Toyotas comes up. Toyota does not promote this option and it is only available from a Toyota dealer as an option when you buy a Toyota or buy it from the dealer later.

As I have said before, I did talk to someone who bought a Tundra with the 4.6 L. and a supercharger. He reported much better mileage when not towing and a bit better mileage when towing. I have researched this and cannot find much on the internet about the supercharger except it makes Toyotas really fast. I surmise most people who buy them are more interested in speed than gas mileage. Perhaps deeper research would turn up more information, but the price put me off and I don't need a new truck now. In a few years when a new truck makes sense, I will check it out.

Eventually Toyota is going to have to compete better on mileage for the Tundra. Toyota's approach seems to be more gears—9 or 10 automatics are on the horizon and I believe they are working with another manufacturer on transmissions. They don't seem to be interested in making a supercharger or turbos part of the standard package as Ford and GM are doing. This doesn't make sense to me as they have experience with the supercharger and could produce it cheaper if they sold a lot of them as part of a new truck, but I don't always understand why Toyota does the things it does.

I have seen it posted before that a blower (supercharger) uses more gas, but I don't agree as more oxygen burns fuel more efficiently, thus creating better mileage. Toyota apparently has a very good fuel management system as we get the same mileage at 6,800' as we get at sea level.

Gene
__________________
Gene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2013, 04:21 PM   #111
Moderator
 
DKB_SATX's Avatar

 
2017 26' Flying Cloud
1976 Argosy 28
Alamo Heights , Texas
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,401
Images: 1
Blog Entries: 7
I'd just have to say anecdote != data as far as your acquaintance's supercharged 4.6l. Maybe he drove everywhere with the accelerator floored before the blower and it scared him to do so after the blower? I'm actually much more inclined to believe that he had a real-world improvement in towing mileage because he may have been running closer to the engine's capabilities pre-supercharger and had much more "headroom" after, but it shouldn't make a big improvement in the unladen economy.

There's an ideal fuel-air mixture that's based on the mass of the air, called a stoichiometric mixture (or ratio.) The engine management system strives for this mixture, but never achieves it for long periods because there are always some inefficiencies, but basically it means that there's a target fuel amount per mass of air, and if you're jamming in more air it will require more fuel for the engine to run properly. Also, you have some mechanical losses from the operation of the blower itself, TANSTAAFL.

I really like forced induction. Both of our cars are turbocharged, and they're QUICK but somewhat thirsty compared to similarly-sized cars with boring powertrains. It's a good way to make a smaller engine do more, and can get you better net mileage if you only need big power in a fraction of your operating range. Case in point, the Ecoboost F150s get about the same towing mileage as a V8 of much larger displacement (though the Ecoboost has a much nicer torque curve) but return higher mileage when using the F150 like a car.
__________________
David

Zero Gravitas 2017 Flying Cloud 26U | Il Progetto 1976 Argosy 28 Center Bath | WBCCI# 15566

He has all of the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire. Sir Winston Churchill
DKB_SATX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2013, 04:24 PM   #112
Rivet Master
 
RickDavis's Avatar

 
1961 24' Tradewind
1969 29' Ambassador
1970 21' Globetrotter
Jamestown , Tennessee
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by TG Twinkie View Post
I am confused. How do you load almost a ton into a 3100# trailer?
Are you saying the dry weight of the coach is 3100? What is the GVWR on the nameplate?
It is not difficult, and I suspect the real world weight as opposed to dry weight is is a lot higher than 3100. I suspect dry weight back in those days was determined with out gas bottles, air conditioner and they may even have left the hubcaps off. Most people were towing with cars and advertised weights were somewhat dishonest until more recently

My 24 ft 1961 24 foot comes in right at 5000 lbs with full water and propane
and all the stuff we normally carry.
__________________

__________________
Rick Davis 1602 K8DOC
61 tradewind, plus a few others
13 Ram 2500 TD
99 Dodge TD 577K miles

RickDavis 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
2007 Toyota Tundra V8 4.7 6700LB OutsideSuppl Tow Vehicles 1 01-22-2008 06:09 AM
2007 Toyota Tundra CanoeStream Tow Vehicles 78 03-30-2007 05:59 PM
Toyota Tundra kontiki Tow Vehicles 19 11-24-2006 10:48 AM
Toyota Tundra RV mirrors Cornfred Tow Vehicles 7 10-16-2005 09:26 PM
Toyota Tundra 7 pin connector Bonitafarms Lights - Interior & Exterior 13 02-09-2005 06:14 AM


Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:49 PM.


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.