|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Senior Member
I don't doubt you I just look at those cars like sports cars off road or lawn tractors on 22s and spoilers!Originally Posted by Adrenaline_6
It's cool I just don't get it and not what I look for when car shopping. I don't look at a sports cars off-road worthiness or an SUVs speed.
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
Senior Member
I think it will look better with a steel bumper.
Site Sponsor
I get what your saying, but a LX570 is a Landcruiser with Lexus badges. They are incredibly capable off road. A couple guys in the ih8mud forum just ran the Rubicon with them. Modded of course, buy you don't run the Rubicon stock and come back with minor damage.
Last edited by Adrenaline_6; 09-20-21 at 21:50.
Senior Member
Another video with a small gap, I guess he slowed down too so he would not "destroy" him with his massive 75 foot lead.
Trying to compare motors from vehicles of different years, weights, gearing, transmissions, tires ,etc., self-dragging across sand/pavement is folly.
Sooner or later real numbers will be published and we will see a 21 Tundra vs 22 Tundra comparison. I just do not see a 389/479 HP/T motor replacing a 381/401 HP/T as much improvement.
Last edited by Renegade; 09-20-21 at 23:41.
Senior Member
I have a 21 Sequoia and a 21 LC, you seemed focused on power, but nobody buys these for that. At then end of the day 99% are grocery getters and soccer busses. What Sequoia and Tundra need is more MPG. The 5.7 sucks at that. 381 HP is more than plenty. But 12 MPG sucks. If the new motor can deliver 50% more than that, that is where the win is. Not in how fast it might drag race across the sand.
Last edited by Renegade; 09-20-21 at 23:30.
Senior Member
DT.....
Senior Member
I have owned my 2007 Limited Tundra double cab 4X4 with the 5.7L V8 now since December of 2007, and it has about 142,000 miles on it now. Just developed a check engine light for the first time and looks like a catalytic converter has gone bad on bank 1, oh well at near enough 15 years of service that isn't surprising. Sounds like maybe an exhaust leak near the cat or catalyst material has come loose inside. Otherwise the truck has been trouble free, and with any luck a new catalytic converter will make the check engine light go away and it will continue to give good service. When I pulled the original spark plugs at 139,000 miles they still had intact electrodes, no excessive carbon fouling, no signs of running lean, no signs of oil consumption. Changed rear diff gear oil around the same time (2nd fill was done by me at about 35K) and the Mobil 1 75W-90 I had put in over 12 years ago came out looking brand new, didn't smell like death, still poured like 75W-90 too. I will be keeping my truck even if I buy a new Tundra because it is worth more to me as a winter beater deluxe for my wife, and knock around truck than it is as a trade in. Besides I just put $966.81 worth of new tires (Falken Wildpeak AT/3W) on it and will probably be $600-$700 more into it for a new catalytic converter, and a couple hundred more for new brakes.
The new Tundra I have mixed opinions on but as an owner of the current truck here is my unsolicited list of good and bad points of the new Tundra as well as the unknowns:
The Good
1.) Significantly improved interior functionality (mostly...) I like the tech, I like the large 14" screen, I like the plethora of device charging options and integration of Apple CarPlay or Android Auto.
2.) More options for cab and bed combinations. I don't know if I can fit a crew cab with the 6.5' bed in my garage like I can the current double cab with a 6.5' bed, but would be tempted to try. Although that would rule out the TRD Pro since it is crew cab short box only. I still probably will wait for a TRD Pro, and deal with the short box given I will still have a 6.5’ bed in the fleet.
3.) Larger fuel tank than my 2007. My truck has a 26.4 gallon tank and that is not adequate for the truck, at some point Toyota introduced a 38 gallon tank for the current Tundra after mine was built. The 2022 will have a 32 gallon tank regardless of standard or hybrid engine. Even if it only gets 20MPG on the highway that gives me significantly more fuel range than I currently enjoy.
4.) Toyota has given power ratings on 87 Octane fuel, so they are conservative but will more accurately reflect what the vast majority of their customers will feed the truck.
5.) The hybrid sandwiches an electric motor generator in between the engine and transmission instead of integrating it into the transmission. In the unlikely event some thing goes wrong with the motor generator or the transmission each can be dealt with independently. In the long term I suspect that will be more serviceable.
6.) Leaf springs have been banished in favor of dual rate coil springs. I will enjoy having a 1/2 ton that rides like a car on sealed roads, not gonna lie.
7.) Rear locking differential. About damn time Toyota.
8.) Drive modes for various terrains etc. I know I can do it myself, but I hear these are really really useful on other vehicles. Plus if my wife were to ever drive into a ditch or something she'd be way more confident putting the truck in a drive mode and worrying only about steering.
9.) Trailering technology. I don't tow frequently with an automobile, therefore I don't get a lot of practice towing, I'll take any help I can get.
10.) Significantly improved aerodynamics not only oriented towards fuel efficiency but also stability. For example the air dam on the front of the truck is powered, Toyota discovered that at highway speeds when towing the air dam actually creates a wake behind the truck that buffets a trailer. So if there is a 7 pin connected the air dam raises to improve fuel economy and stability when towing. The truck also manages air flow on the sides to increase stability when meeting or passing semis to reduce the buffeting or vacuum affect you get. I'm also very curious to see how well their efforts to reduce turbulence in the bed of the truck off the cab roof pay off, Mike Sweers (the chief engineer for Toyota trucks) claims you can drive around now with the rear glass all the way down and get no buffeting or crap being blown into the cab.
11.) Composite bed. No rusting, no denting, no need for spray in lining. Put in a rubber mat if it's too slick, or roll up the mat when you want your cargo to slide in or out easily. I've always liked that about the Tacoma.
The Bad
1.) Where in the hell are the front recovery hooks? It's a truck dammit, sometimes you need them and when you do you need them damn bad. Maybe there is a solution that is not readily apparent?
2.) The hybrid battery lives under the rear seat. So if you want the extra power (I do) or fuel economy (could care less), or both you give up the under rear seat storage. Dammit Toyota, my current truck has lousy under seat storage in the back already, I was hoping for a big improvement there. Oh well.
3.) Toyota tuned the truck to run on 87 Octane fuel to accommodate cheap ass bastards who will buy it and use cat piss for fuel instead of 91 Octane or higher. Got to cater to the cheapskates and dumb dumbs to avoid warranty claims, or complaints. I wish Toyota had tuned for 91 Octane because I like power, and know under light loads the ECU could pull boost to accommodate 87 Octane and reduce performance a bit. That said some idiot would fill the tank full of 87 Octane and try to tow a 10,000lb travel trailer up a mountain on a 99F day at 70MPH and get all the detonation possible, make a few adjustable connecting rods and new crank case “vents”; then blame Toyota because he can't read the gas cap or he's too cheap to spring for the better fuel.
Yes I have it listed in both good and bad sections.
4.) A turbocharged engine isn't going to tolerate lax maintenance, especially oil change intervals. If you can't be bothered to maintain your truck, this one will not be for you, stick to a naturally aspirated engine preferably one with port fuel injection.
The Unknowns (ranked potentially good or bad)
1.) Forced induction engine in a brand new application for Toyota. Of all the auto manufacturers on the planet I trust them to get it right out of the box, but it is still unproven in this application. Forced induction will be nice for those of us above sea level. I live at over 3000ft so a naturally aspirated engine is already down 9% of its rated power where I am, and forced induction gets almost all of that back. Plus the big slug of torque at reasonable engine operating speeds will be a big boon to normal driving. Over all I rate this as a high probability of being good.
2.) Forced induction hybrid engine. Just ditto everything I just pointed out, and add the uncertainty of battery life, performance while being worked etc. Toyota has more experience with hybrid power trains than any other manufacturer so I am not particularly worried they will mess it up. Unknown for me if giving up interior storage space is worth picking up 48hp, and 104lb-ft of torque though.... OK who am I kidding it totally is.
Mike Sweers claims that the 583lb-ft of twist is going to be available from 2400 RPM, so that means the new Tundra will make 266hp @ 2400 RPM. For reference the 5.7L 3UR-FE has peak torque of 401lb-ft @ 3600 RPM for 275hp at that engine speed under full load. Assuming that the new hybrid will hang that torque over a broad plateau 1200 RPM later once it hits 3600 RPM that 583lb-ft is making 400hp @ 3600 RPM.... so the amount of power under the curve should be impressive to say the least.
Plus being turbocharged on the ICE side and electrified on the motor generator side if you live in the mountains or high plains you get almost all that power, where your naturally aspirated 5.7L V8 is making a lot less. For example the 3UR-FE makes 381hp @ 5600 RPM, and 401lb-ft @ 3600 RPM. Sounds stout, and in 2007 it was class leading. However if you live at 5,000ft of elevation it makes 15% less power (for every 1000ft of altitude you lose 3%) so it's only making 324hp up there, and only 341lb-ft. So at altitude either one of these turbocharged engines are going to be whipping a naturally aspirated V8's ass in most cases.
Over all probably a good thing.
3.) New 10 speed automatic. Lots of gears, huge spread of gearing. Could be great, could be a nightmare. We'll have to see how well it is tuned, and how well it is made. Someone said it has a transmission cooler again, so there is that! Probably a good thing, but other manufacturers have had trouble with their 10 speed automatics.
4.) Fuel economy. We don't know what it is yet, I can't imagine it not being a higher EPA rating than the 5.7L though. What we also don't know is whether or not the truck will actually achieve what it is rated for in real world driving.
Either way I will not rush out and buy one of these because the current auto market is absolutely stupid. Someone else can beta test this one for me for a year.
Last edited by Coal Dragger; 09-21-21 at 03:04.
Senior Member
To put into perspective the differences in performance between the V35A-FTS (new 3.5L twin turbo V6) and the 3UR-FE (current 5.7L V8) we can break it down like this:
As you note the peak power outputs are pretty similar for horsepower. The 5.7L makes 381hp @ 5600RPM, and 401lb-ft of torque @ 3600RPM. If we do some math we can calculate how much torque is being produced at peak power, and how much power is being produced at peak toque. This will give us an idea of how efficiently the cylinder head is moving air into the engine and exhaust out.
Horsepower = Torque X RPM / 5252
So the 5.7L making 381hp @ 5600 RPM is making 357.3lb-ft of torque up there. Down 43.7lb-ft from a peak of 401lb-ft @ 3600 RPM, not a bad performance for sure. For comparison that turbocharged V6 is making 389hp @ 5200 RPM, so it is making 392.9lb-ft up there so it's moving more air at a lower engine speed and making more power. Why Toyota shuts the party down at only 5200 RPM is a mystery, probably because they're sand bagging and leaving room for incremental power increases, plus it keeps the turbos and everything else under less stress.
Realistically none of us spend much time flogging our truck or SUV at or near engine redline, so that peak power number is nice to look at but rarely used. The real story is power under the curve, and that is where torque production is king. We don't know the claimed peak torque RPM for the new engine is US spec so I am going to use the information for the same engine in the Land Cruiser 300 in case you wonder where I'm coming up with this shit.
We will start with the 5.7L V8 making 401lb-ft @ 3600 RPM, that equals 274.8hp @ 3600 RPM; again not bad at all and makes for nice relaxed daily driving with no need to flog the engine like a rented mule.
However, the new engine is making 479lb-ft, and unless the tuning is drastically changed aside from lower octane rating killing top end power in the US, that 479lb-ft is available from 2000 RPM to 3600 RPM. So you're looking at 182.4hp @ 2000 RPM, and 328.3hp @ 3600 RPM. Now we both have vehicles with the 5.7L V8, I can tell you that the overwhelming majority of my driving falls within 1500-4000 RPM and I'll bet yours does too. The new 3.5L TTV6 makes 53.5hp more under the curve at day to day operating speeds than the 5.7L V8 in the current truck. That is a huge advantage. If you live at altitude knock 3% off the number for 5.7L V8 for every 1000ft.
You can plug in the same formula for the iForce Max once all the numbers become available, Mike Sweers said in a TFL interview that peak toque is available from 2400 RPM but didn't specify if that rating covered a wider RPM range, and did confirm peak power at 5200 RPM. So we could be looking at a huge difference in performance in the midrange engine speeds we actually use. For the sake of argument lets theorize that the 583lb-ft the iForce Max produces are available from 2400 RPM - 3600 RPM, that is 266.4hp @ 2400 RPM and 399.6hp @ 3600 RPM; that would be an advantage in power over the current 5.7L at its peak torque of 124.8hp. That's as much power as a lot of compact sedans can muster at wide open throttle worth of extra power at a pretty low engine speed!
Now put those two new engines in front of a 10 speed with enough gears to surf that torque wave in almost any situation, and you should have effortless power basically all the time.
Member
When did trucks stop being trucks?
How many chips in that sucker to get back-ordered????
geezer john
jmoore (aka - geezer john)
"The state that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools." Thucydides
Site Sponsor
I guess you missed my earlier post about the mpg. My posts about power were due to people posting about V8s vs the V6 turbos and proving that there is plenty that the the V6 provides.
A long time ago man...long time.
Last edited by Adrenaline_6; 09-21-21 at 07:25.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks