Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-09-2007, 04:54 PM   #1
2 Rivet Member
 
2007 20' Safari SE
Janesville , Wisconsin
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 32
Tundra 4.7 vs. 5.7 for a 20' Safari

Hi everyone, new member here and proud owner of an 07 Safari SE 20'.

The husband and I are in the process of looking and TV's and I am
wondering if the smaller of the 07 Tundra engines is up to the task
of pulling our trailer. Am I wasting the extra few thousand to purchase
the 5.7 liter?

We are flatlanders, but want to see the mountains, etc.

Any and all comments are appreciated.
__________________

__________________
marta5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2007, 05:16 PM   #2
Rivet Master
 
Wayne&Sam's Avatar
 
2014 25' Flying Cloud
Cuddebackville , New York
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,101
Images: 21
We pull ours with a Mercedes ML500. That's about a 5 liter engine. We have no problems. I can't speak to the Toyota 4.7, but I'm sure other can.
__________________

__________________
Wayne&Sam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2007, 05:19 PM   #3
Rivet Master
 
urbanfood's Avatar
 
1956 22' Flying Cloud
Venice , California
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 672
i'm sure a toyota owner will chime in here, but i'd say go for the 5.7. you'll appreciate having the extra power when you do hit the mountains and really for towing in general.

good for you for taking the logical approach to all of this, finding the airstream you want and finding a suitable tow vehicle.
__________________
david

*by asking the above question,
i verify that i have already used
the search feature to the best of my ability...
urbanfood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2007, 05:35 PM   #4
4 Rivet Member
 
B4WEDI's Avatar
 
2006 19' Safari SE
Nawthin' , Hemisphere
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 300
Images: 2
Thumbs up No Sweat !

I think either one is up to the task. After driving them both, I've got to say I enjoyed shifting through the gears and the extra power of the 5.7, fun, fun, fun ! I felt the extra cost over the 4.7 would be $$ well spent for my liking.

Having said that, we pull our 19' with a Tacoma comfortably. 6 cyl, 235 hp 4X4 with tow package. Just back from 8500 miles cross country, avg'd 12.5 mpg + with no issues. I had my doubts when the two of us left, but am assured now that we don't need a bigger truck. *( much to my dismay ! )

The Tundra is a BIG truck ! I think you have to determine realistically how much towing you'll be doing, and what other uses the truck will fulfill for you because those "other" miles will cost you dearly in fuel the rest of the time.

Good Luck and Happy Streamin' !!
__________________
*** KEEP LOOKING UP ***

T & K



B4WEDI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2007, 05:58 PM   #5
2 Rivet Member
 
Bambi75th's Avatar
 
2007 19' Bambi
Los Alamos , New Mexico
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 64
Images: 1
We pull a 2007 19 foot Bambi (75th Anniversary Edition) with a 2004 Toyota Sequoia. The Sequoia is a SUV on the Tundra frame. Ours is a 4.7 with a 4 speed auto tranmission (Toyota went to the 5 speed in 2005). We live in the mountains at 7800 feet and we do a lot of mountain towing. The 4.7 is adequate, although I must admit there are time when a little more uuumph would be nice.

We have towed up over several 10,000 foot passes and while perhaps not being the fastest, we have never really had a problem.

Good luck with you new AS and whatever TV you pick.
__________________
Bambi75th is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2007, 07:55 PM   #6
Site Team
 
azflycaster's Avatar
 
1975 25' Tradewind
Dewey , Arizona
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 12,127
Images: 62
Blog Entries: 1
Earlier this year I traded my 03 Tundra with the 4.7 for an 07 with the 5.7. The 03 pulled my 75 Trade Wind (5000 lbs) fine, but was a little under powered on the steeper hills. The 5.7 is a brute with over 400 foot pounds of torque. With the 5.7 you also get the 6 speed transmission instead of the 4 and because of that my gas mileage is better with the 5.7. Your 20 foot trailer is pretty close in weight to my Trade Wind and you want to go to the mountains. The 5.7 is what I would suggest.
__________________

Richard

Wally Byam Airstream Club 7513
azflycaster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2007, 10:49 PM   #7
SRW
TEXAS66
 
SRW's Avatar
 
Georgetown , Texas
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 291
Smile

We tow our 28 ft. International with a 2007, 5.7 Tundra. On our most recent trip we drove through the hill country of Texas, up and down some reasonable hills (OK, they were not the Rockies) and the truck performed great. Over 225 miles the mpg was 11.5.

Even though our AS is larger then what you will be towing I suggest that this is the truck to get. Not the smaller engine.
__________________
SRW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2007, 07:36 AM   #8
2 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Pearland , Texas
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 22
I would go with the 5.7. I have the 5.7 and love it, tons of power. Plenty of highway passing through the hills. I have spoken to many people with the 4.7 and they get worse gas mileage than I do without a trailer. They say the motor doesn't seem to be enough for the truck. Of course that depends on the model you get. I have the CrewMax 4x4 5.7 and I get avg 16mpg and I'm mostly city driving. A friend has the same truck in the 4.7 and it's a lot of truck for the motor.

I think it's more than worth it for the 5.7. Not only do you get the motor, but you get the transmission as well as the 4.30 rear end (if you get the tow package).
__________________
rhoward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2007, 08:49 AM   #9
2 Rivet Member
 
2007 20' Safari SE
Janesville , Wisconsin
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 32
Thanks to everyone

Thanks to everyone for their responses .
__________________
marta5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2007, 09:26 AM   #10
4 Rivet Member
 
Garfield's Avatar
 
2001 25' Safari
London , Ontario
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 298
Images: 24
My buddy tows a 30 foot 4800 lb Antigua Starcraft with a 4.7L Sequoia with no problems at all. The 4.7L's dual over head cams & VVT w/5-speed tranny delivers all the torque and HP of the push-rod 5.3L in my Yukon, so don't let the slightly smaller displacement fool you. The 5.7L would certainly provide more power, but is unnecessary for a 20 footer IMO.

Gary
__________________
Gary & Debbie
2001 Safari 25 SS
2011 Chevy Traverse 3.6L AWD Hensley DirecLink McKesh
Set-up by Can-Am RV
Garfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2007, 01:09 PM   #11
Aluminut
 
Silvertwinkie's Avatar
 
2004 25' Safari
. , Illinois
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,334
5.7L....no question about it.
__________________
Computers manufactured by companies such as IBM, Compaq and millions of others are by far the most popular with about 70 million machines in use worldwide. Macintosh fans note that cockroaches are far more numerous than humans and that numbers alone do not denote a higher life form. -NY Times 11/91
Silvertwinkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2007, 02:34 PM   #12
4 Rivet Member
 
2007 25' International CCD
Arlington , Virginia
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 323
Images: 5
Though the 4.7 may be enough, the 5.7 is DEFINITELY enough. Better to have too much power and not need it than to need it but not have it.
__________________
Streamer1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2007, 10:27 AM   #13
2 Rivet Member
 
mffjm8509's Avatar
 
2008 20' Safari SE
Colorado Springs , Colorado
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 31
Sorry I didnt see this post earlier.....I belive most will tell you that the bigger engine will perform better with 381hp vs. 271hp.

I have 2007 4.7L Regular Cab 4x4 Tundra SR5 and tow an '08 Safari with no problems. I run a Prodigy break controller and an Equalizer hitch. I live at roughly 6000' and tow primarily along I25 in Colorado and east into Kansas and Nebraska. So far I havent ventured west in higher elevations.

The 4.7 Tundra tows fine and accelerates well with this Safari. I get roughly 17mpg in town and up to 20 on the highway, and have ranged between 8-12 mpg while towing. I find that the Regular cab truck is better suited for my overall needs and has its advantages over the larger models (as well as a few obvious limitations). Many will disagree I'm sure, but this setup is what works best for me.

If a Regular Cab truck is enough truck for you, then the 4.7 is sufficient to handle your towing needs.

If you plan on a dual cab or crewmax, then you should probably opt for the lagest engine available, (the DC Tunrda price difference between 4.7 and 5.7 is only $1200).

You might also check here for Tundra information Tundra Solutions Forum

I hope this info helps in your decision.....let us know what you decided.

Mike
__________________
mffjm8509 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2007, 02:53 PM   #14
4 Rivet Member
 
bobkelly's Avatar
 
2003 22' International CCD
Whittier, California , Depoe Bay, Oregon
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 358
Get the 5.7 and don't look back. This engine/tranmission combo is a significant advancement over the smaller one and it produces similar or better over the road gas mileage. It's an win-win situation.

At GM, the 5.3 w/4speed trans doesn't provide better mileage than the 6.0l. It makes good mileage sense to run a larger engine at a partial throttle position, compared to a smaller engine with a greater throttle setting.
__________________

__________________
Bob

2003 22ft CCD Int'l
2005 GMC Yukon Denali
WBCCI #2960
bobkelly 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
Got our new 20' Safari SE Wayne&Sam 2007 Safari 10 08-24-2016 02:41 PM
2008 20' Safari SE Jeff Evans Member Introductions 12 10-31-2007 08:08 PM
2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee V8 and a 20' Safari? Roger S Tow Vehicles 10 04-15-2007 04:04 PM
axle type? '68 20' Safari 63Airstream Axles 5 12-05-2006 07:36 AM
All New 2006 Safari 20' Colonial Airstream Commercial Listings 32 04-17-2006 12:44 PM


Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:35 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.