Quote:
Originally Posted by jtsailjt
Sorry, I didn't mean to mix the numbers (I referenced edmunds and took numbers from there.) between models so according to the chart you linked to, the 5.3 liter engine tows a max of 8500# as compared to the Tacoma's 6500#. Going back to the comparison I was using, the flexfuel 5.3 liter engine gets 14/19 (not 13/17), which is VERY close to the Taco's mileage, and it seats/tows/payloads significantly more than the Taco does. My purpose is not to nitpick or knock down the Tundra, the Tacoma, or the Sierra, but instead is to merely illustrate that some American products (the GMC Sierrra in this case) use innovation and technology to provide performance that is even more efficient than that of vehicles (such as the Tacoma) that some seem to assume have it all over American products in this area, and are thus a very viable choice for savvy buyers. There are very valid reasons for buying a GMC Sierra or similar American vehicle that have nothing to do with the earlier talk of proving their manliness or other such silly assumptions people were making in this thread. |
IMO, all cylinder deactivation does is scam the EPA ratings system, it is hardly as efficient in real world driving. If you compare EPA numbers, the Tacoma still is significantly better in the city. Of course the American made vehicles have their own technology, and IMO Toyota has more efficient real world driving vehicles with out the use of cylinder deactivation. The 5.7 is more efficient than the 4.7 because of new technology. I would be willing to bet the next replacement of the 4.7 (when ever that may be) will be more powerful than the 5.3 and offer better fuel economy with out cylinder deactivation.