 |
|
11-05-2007, 12:27 PM
|
#81
|
1 Rivet Member 
2007 16' International CCD
Rancho Palos Verdes
, California
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 15
|
[quote=rbkhale]Let me put to rest the question of the Tundra (new 2007 5.7) 1/2 ton ability to pull a 25 ft airstream. I have over 3500 miles including mountain passes.
What was your average gas mileage on your 3,500 trip? What was your average towing speed?
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 01:19 PM
|
#82
|
3 Rivet Member 
Austin
, Texas
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 219
|
Consumer Reports Article Tested Diesel 3/4's
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thecatsandi
What they do not say there is that is for the gas engines. The F-250 Diesel is noteven in the same league.
|
Actually that's incorrect. The Consumer Reports article (Sept. '07) tested Diesels in all of the domestic 3/4's. The Tundra beat them all in acceleration with AND without a 7,400 pound trailer in tow.
Unloaded (Info from Consumer Reports Article)
Tundra 0-60: 6.7 sec
Ford F250 Turbo Diesel 0-60: 9.8 sec
Chevy 2500 Turbo Diesel 0-60: 8.4 sec
Dodge 2500 Turbo Diesel 0-60: 9.1 sec
Loaded w/ 7,400 pound trailer
Tundra 0-60: 16.1 sec
Ford F250 Turbo Diesel 0-60: 18.9 sec
Chevy 2500 Turbo Diesel 0-60: 17 sec
Dodge 2500 Turbo Diesel 0-60: 18.9 sec
This is NOT to say the Tundra is better at towing heavier loads but simply to correct some earlier posts regarding the Diesels ability to beat the Tundra in accelleration while towing similarly sized loads.
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 01:31 PM
|
#83
|
3 Rivet Member
Austin
, Texas
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 219
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jaxon
The Tundra may be able to out-accelerate an F250 off a light (not by much, though) w/o the Airstream, but it won't towing one. Guaranteed. The F250 turbo diesel absolutely will take you to highway speeds coming off a ramp towing a trailer just like the Toyota truck with a load of potting soil in it's bed...
|
The Tundra 5.7 can out accelerate an F250 Diesel from 0-60 by 3.1 seconds. That's significant. It can also out accelerate an F250 Diesel from 0-60 while towing a 7,400 pound trailer by 2.8 seconds. Also fairly significant.
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 02:24 PM
|
#84
|
Rivet Master 
2002 27' Safari
Carmel-by-the-Sea
, California
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,388
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Barkingspider
The Tundra 5.7 can out accelerate an F250 Diesel from 0-60 by 3.1 seconds. That's significant. It can also out accelerate an F250 Diesel from 0-60 while towing a 7,400 pound trailer by 2.8 seconds. Also fairly significant.
Joe
|
Well that's all fine and dandy for acceleration, lets see some results on a few inclines. How about longivity? And my favorite, cost per mile?
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 03:21 PM
|
#85
|
3 Rivet Member
Austin
, Texas
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 219
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Coastalview
Well that's all fine and dandy for acceleration, lets see some results on a few inclines. How about longivity? And my favorite, cost per mile?
|
In reading my previous posts you may notice that the only reason I posted the acceleration info was due to some F250 owners making some unsubtantiated claims about Consumer Reports not testing diesels and how their vehicles could take the tundra while towing a trailer.
What's probably most signifigant in this overall discussion of the Tundra vs ford, chevy, dodge 3/4's is that we're even able to have it. And do remember this truck is marketed as a half ton but sure seems to be coming a little close to home for some 3/4 ton owners based on the spirited discussion I've seen in these posts.
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 06:49 PM
|
#86
|
Rivet Master
2002 27' Safari
Carmel-by-the-Sea
, California
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,388
|
When Toyota adds the diesel from their medium duty sister company, I'll take a closer look. Otherwise tweaked gas engines pulling maxium weight ratings doesn't equate longivity in my mind regardless of brand.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 07:04 PM
|
#87
|
|
Master of Universe
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction
, Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 12,711
|
My results with an '07 5.7 L Tundra towing an Safari SE is 11.6 mpg (all from 4,000' to 9,000' on regular gas), easy towing at 65 mph and well below weight limits—somewhere below 70% of maximums. Accelerates easily onto the interstate and up major Colorado passes. It handles responsively and there's zero sway. The brakes are the best I've ever experienced on a Toyota.
Gene
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 07:18 PM
|
#88
|
|
_
.
, .
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,812
|
my mom can beat up your dad, girly man...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Barkingspider
What's probably most signifigant in this overall discussion of the Tundra vs ford, chevy, dodge 3/4's is that we're even able to have it...
|
but WE aren't having that discussion, you are.
outthere started a fantasy thread with a flawed comparison...
then has occasionally boosted the thread up with more info on the new 1/2 ton tundras...
that's great, its' what we do here and might even be enjoyable reading...
the new tundra will prove to be a capable (but ugly  ) 1/2 ton work horse...
but these 'objective' acceleration comparisons are misleading...
and the reported times correlate directly with how much each truck weighs...
including the trailer pulling time trial.
acceleration times aren't magic.
start with mass, factor in hp and gearing and a little c/d and they can be calculated without running for pink slips...
my ford has a daily functional weight of 8.5k, easily a ton more than almost every 1/2 ton truck on the road, including the t-ota.
even at 9,000 lbs and the shape of a brick, the 250 handles better than many vehicles at 1/2 that weight...
BUT if i wanted to race other trucks, it would only be other 4-5 ton buggies.
if you toy' truck owners want a reasonable comparison go back to playing with 150s and 1500s that ARE in the same class.
only with decades more history and dna....
besides i've got cars that take 1/2 the time to 60 and 1/2 the distance to stop of your 1/2 ton truck...
so bring on yer tundra bubba 
and don't 4get the title...
cheers
2air'
__________________
all of the true things that i am about to tell you are shameless lies. l.b.j.
we are here on earth to fart around. don't let anybody tell you any different. k.v.
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 07:21 PM
|
#89
|
2 Rivet Member 
2004 30' Classic Slideout
Ft. Myers
, Florida
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 62
|
Hello All, Anyone that knows anything about engines knows that Diesel = torque. When towing or hauling a variety of things, not just AS trailers, you want a lot of torque, and the only engines that do that well are the big block gas (454 etc.) or diesel. Ask anyone who hauls or tows for a living. Just my 2 cents worth. --Mark--
__________________
S/OS #045 2006 GMC Sierra 2500 Duramax w/ Hensley Hitch, 15" GY Endurances and Tire Minders
--Mark and June-- "Every time I feel the urge to exercise, I go lay down until it passes." Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 07:34 PM
|
#90
|
Rivet Master 
2005 28' Safari S/O
Paradise
, California
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,446
|
Reliability
The December 2007 Consumer Reports no longer recommends the 4WD Tundra for it's reliability(pg 6), citing problems with the 4WD system. The Ford F150 is now a CR recommended vehicle for reliability. Toyota overall has dropped to 3rd for predicted reliability after Honda and Subaru (they were 2nd). Fords overall reliability has risen considerably with 93% of their vehicles now average or better.
This video seals the deal for me..
__________________
Steve
"THE OLDER I GET, THE BETTER I WAS"
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 07:40 PM
|
#91
|
3 Rivet Member
Austin
, Texas
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 219
|
2air - Glad to see the 3/4 owners have now moved on to "why" their vehicles can't beat the Toyota in acceleration. Gotta try to gain back some ground somehow.......
If you read my original post you'll see I ended it all with:
"This is NOT to say the Tundra is better at towing heavier loads but simply to correct some earlier posts regarding the Diesels ability to beat the Tundra in accelleration while towing similarly sized loads."
I wholeheartedly agree that the 3/4 ton trucks are the way to go when towing above a certain weight limit. I just don't think they take the cake when it comes to towing a 7,000 pound safari. The '07 Tundra is more than enough truck for this.
Joe/sure seems like 2air is having this discussion/Zabreznik
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 07:48 PM
|
#92
|
|
Vintage Kin
Fort Worth
, Texas
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,014
|
7,000-lbs is the reasonable working limit of the last of the real cars: the 1965-78 Chrysler or Dodge full-size (and 7,500-lbs was the factory limit at the end of the run of the V8-440 in cars). I should hope a 1/2T could do the job.
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 07:51 PM
|
#93
|
|
_
.
, .
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 8,812
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CA Streamer
This video seals the deal for me...
|
shake your booty!
clearly staged by an oval loyalist!
here are 2 i really like...
View the New Toyota Tundra CrewMax Pickup Truck in Italian - blip.tv (beta)
i'm pretty sure she said "rides like butter" in there somewhere...
and THIS original TEXAS stout teeyota...
Rare Toyota Stout Pickup Truck View - blip.tv (beta)
the thing is for fans of this brand, they really have come a-long-way...
cheers
2air'
__________________
all of the true things that i am about to tell you are shameless lies. l.b.j.
we are here on earth to fart around. don't let anybody tell you any different. k.v.
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 07:57 PM
|
#94
|
Rivet Master
2002 27' Safari
Carmel-by-the-Sea
, California
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,388
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CA Streamer
This video seals the deal for me..
|
If you were to be looking at off road capability, then the flexible Toyota would be the better choice for frame articulation capability when you get into the rough stuff.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 08:22 PM
|
#95
|
Rivet Master
2005 28' Safari S/O
Paradise
, California
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,446
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 2airishuman
|
What a great old truck! Reminds my of my old 1970 Toyota Hi Lux. It was a good truck. Oval loyalist you say? I've owned Toyota, Nissan, Chevy and Ford Pickups, so I feel PU eclectic. I've had the best luck with the Fords. For towing the diesel is the king IMHO.
__________________
Steve
"THE OLDER I GET, THE BETTER I WAS"
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2007, 09:36 PM
|
#96
|
|
The Silver Biscuit
2004 28' International CCD
Austin
, Texas
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 65
|
Just sold my Diesel Excursion last month and towed my 28 foot CCD with my new Tundra 5.7 L this past weekend. While the Tundra gets the job done, it certainly is no comparison to the unlimited power of that Ford Diesel. Big difference in both engine power and suspension capability to handle the loads. Also seems like I'm getting around 9 MPG, with a smaller tank than the X had. BUT when the Excursion stranded my family and went on the tow truck for the fourth time in a year, that was it for me. The Tundra is sure a luxury in my daily driving, which is about 98% of what I use it for. Like everything in life, it's all about tradeoffs, and I guess there is no perfect commuter that will tow our big rigs.
|
|
|
|
|
11-06-2007, 06:00 AM
|
#97
|
Rivet Master
2006 25' Safari FB SE
Currently Looking...
Durango
, Colorado
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,112
|
My first Chev vs Ford encounter was in 8th grade back in the fifties. 50+ years later, we've added Dodge, Toyota and Nissan to the never ending "my truck (car) is better than yours."
From my perspective, there is a whole generation that started buying Japanese cars/trucks in the late seventies because they were superior to American offerings. However, a lot of my friends that bought imports have become so closed minded that they refuse to look at a US made truck or car today.
Consider this: there are less than a 1000 Toyota dealers and over 4,000 Chevy dealers. Which dealer is going to make more money? Which dealer can afford to suck it up and fix a problem that isn't a warrantee issue?
Nobody makes a "bad" truck. However, I'd rather see my profits go to US corporations in Michigan rather than overseas to companies with quasi-government support.
My boys drive Ford trucks because I refused to co-sign loans for Toyotas back in the day when they bolted a bed made in Long Beach on a chassis made in Japan to get around import taxes.
|
|
|
|
|
11-06-2007, 06:29 AM
|
#98
|
Rivet Master
2002 27' Safari
Carmel-by-the-Sea
, California
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,388
|
Well aren't Toyota's built here now?
And the profits shipped back to the Island?
|
|
|
|
|
11-06-2007, 07:25 AM
|
#99
|
|
Master of Universe
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Grand Junction
, Colorado
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 12,711
|
Has anyone sold their truck as a result of what they've read on this thread?
There are a lot of good trucks made now, not so in years past. My '72 Chevy pickup was a good truck for the time, now, no. Our standards are much higher today and we all have benefitted from foreign competition.
By the way, those Toyota profits go back to Japan so the Japanese can buy US bonds and finance our spendthrift government administration.
Gene
|
|
|
|
|
11-06-2007, 08:42 AM
|
#100
|
|
1 Rivet Short
1989 25' Excella
By The Bay
, Rhode Island
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,620
|
More interesting news on Toyota truck;
Tundra problems bring "shame" to Toyota
sure would hate to have one of those cam shafts go while I was "haulin #$%" past all those other trucks...or maybe it will be the torque converter?
No thanks, I'll stick with my poke along (bullet proof) DuraMax.
Bill
__________________
*Life is Good-Camping all around the Continent*
*Good people drink good beer-Hunter S Thompson*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
