Tundra Ranked

[TundraSoul]

Toyota has some big plans for the Tundra, so I recommend you keep yours for another year.

Originally Posted by PJGrimm

Bottom line? I might just have to put a bag over the front end of a Titan, and buy one.

[v8Toilet]

You guys who test drove the HEMI Ram and weren’t impressed with the power should take a closer look. My friends 2WD QC HEMI Ram ran consistent 15.1 quarter mile times with 0-60 times under 7 seconds. Although I can match his MPH he always gets me out of the hole. Motor Tend magazine got a 2WD regular cab HEMI Ram to go 0-60 in 6.8 seconds. How can you guys not be impressed by those numbers? Did you guys drive duds or something? I should go test drive one now!

[ChuhBaca]

V8, those numbers are impressive. I drove the 4x4 Quad Cab with the 3.92 rearend, which is the lower gearing (higher numerically). I just think that 345 hp with that rearend should have at least chirped the tires. It wouldn't.

This is just my own theory as to why it felt like such a dog: In a lighter 2 wheel drive, the hp and torque characteristics can really shine. I think that in the heavier versions, there isn't enough low end torque to make the heavier truck jump off the line. I was very disappointed.

[PJGrimm]

Originally Posted by ChuhBaca

V8, those numbers are impressive. I drove the 4x4 Quad Cab with the 3.92 rearend, which is the lower gearing (higher numerically). I just think that 345 hp with that rearend should have at least chirped the tires. It wouldn't.

This is just my own theory as to why it felt like such a dog: In a lighter 2 wheel drive, the hp and torque characteristics can really shine. I think that in the heavier versions, there isn't enough low end torque to make the heavier truck jump off the line. I was very disappointed.

v8 - look at your own numbers to answer your question about the "duds" we drove. According to your numbers, a 345 HP Hemi is only .4 seconds quicker in a 1/4 mile than a 245HP Tundra. 100 more horsies and only .4 seconds off the ET? What a bunch of crap. If that Dodge does sub 7 sec. 0-60 then the Titan does it in sub 6, judging by my test drive. Of course, you and I know that both of those numbers are baloney. Drive a Titan, and feel what 305HP feels like. Remember, the Dodge weighs about the same, and SUPPOSEDLY has 40 more HP than the Nissan. It certainly shouldn't feel slower, like it does. My guess is that the Dodge puts out more like 280HP.

As for my purchasing a new truck....

I must admit to being smitten with the Titan. Please forgive my temporary insanity and sacrilege against Toyota. Hopefully I'll come to my senses...

My Tundra has 73K on the clock. Local papers are listing 2000 SR-5s like mine from 16K to 19K. Bet I can get 16K for it. If I put many more miles on my truck, the price is gonna start to drop like a stone. Also, I'm nearing the point where I need a new timing belt, tires, brakes and new plugs again. So, do I drop $1500 into this beast and keep it, or dump it for a <insert favorite truck here>?

I never thought the "big three" had anything on a Tundra. Maybe they were bigger and now they have more power, but they just couldn't (and can't) match my Toy's refinement (and frankly, they STILL can't match the WAY it puts power to the pavement). That Titan is a different story. It's smooth, refined, big and powerful. If it turns out to be at least as reliable as the big 3, well then we have a real contender in our midst. As others have said, it's not nearly as ugly in person, save for that tacky grille. A few tweaks here and there and Toyota better stop "promising" more in the future and get it here pronto.

Now, if this post doesn't get me exiled from TS....

[v8Toilet]

Originally Posted by PJGrimm

v8 - look at your own numbers to answer your question about the "duds" we drove. According to your numbers, a 345 HP Hemi is only .4 seconds quicker in a 1/4 mile than a 245HP Tundra. 100 more horsies and only .4 seconds off the ET? What a bunch of crap. If that Dodge does sub 7 sec. 0-60 then the Titan does it in sub 6, judging by my test drive. Of course, you and I know that both of those numbers are baloney. Drive a Titan, and feel what 305HP feels like. Remember, the Dodge weighs about the same, and SUPPOSEDLY has 40 more HP than the Nissan. It certainly shouldn't feel slower, like it does. My guess is that the Dodge puts out more like 280HP.

My Tundra is modified. The best I could do stock in the same weather conditions was a 15.7+ @ 87 mph. I know from reading the Dodge forums that the Dodge HEMI has throttle by wire and the computer limits tire spin through torque management (Dodge has to warranty the transmission for 70k miles). The Dodge guys pull some wire that eliminates this torque management. The same day that I was running those 15.7+ quarter mile times I did run against a QC 4*4 HEMI and he was running 15.8+ quarter mile times. His truck has about 1500 miles on it though so it wasn’t broken in yet. The day I had the dyno run there was a HEMI Ram that ran on the dyno after me and he pulled this wire after running a baseline run with it connected. See the graph here . They are impressive results with the wire pulled!

I’m sure you know you cannot feel horsepower but you can feel torque. The Dodge HEMI makes 375 lb. feet of torque in a 5100 lb. vehicle or about 13.6 lb per a lb. ft. of torque. My Tundra makes 315 lb. ft. stock or about 14 lb per a lb. ft. of torque. They are very comparable too since the Tundra seems to get more of its available power to the ground as you can see in the graph.

The Titan has a DOHC V8 engine. The endurance V8 probably is biased more towards low-end torque than the HEMI is so that is why it feels stronger off the line but makes less overall horsepower. When a motor is designed to make lots of low end torque often times the top end horsepower is compromised like the case with the Tundra only having 245 horsepower. For example the similar sized Chevy Vortec 4.8-liter engine makes 270 horsepower @ 5600 rpm and 285 lb. ft. of torque @ 4000 rpm. The I-force I have has 245 horsepower @ 4800 rpm and 315 lb. ft. of torque @ 3400 rpm. See the difference! You can see a comparison of a Chevy vortec 4800 compared to my engine in my dyno pictures listed in my signature. More low end torque less top end horsepower more top end horsepower less bottom end torque. VVT-i would help give you the best of both worlds and it seems like Ford is the only one who has it in a truck.

[red's tundra]

Here is a dyno of a Hemi. Looks to have about a 25% power loss through the drivetrain. This may be why it doesn't feel as power full as it should.

http://forums.pickuptruck.com/showfl...t=1#Post309268

[file014]

Theres only one way to settle this. Chain together the rear bumpers of a similarly equipped titan and ram. See who is boss.

[PJGrimm]

Originally Posted by file014

Theres only one way to settle this. Chain together the rear bumpers of a similarly equipped titan and ram. See who is boss.

WOOT! Love it.

Hey V8 - thanks for the info. Good stuff. I bet Red's hypothesis is correct - parasitic HP loss through the drivetrain is probably worse in the Hemi than in the Titan.

As for the drive by wire thing - the same is true for the Tundra. I remember a post WAAAY back (before TS crashed in late 01, I think) where some guys were running the Tundra throttle manually and getting massive power off the line. I'm sure they were getting more than Toyota wanted while honoring a drivetrain warranty.

Since V8 is definitely more informed on this issue than I am, I'll defer to his expertise. I will say, however, that I still maintain that "out of the box", the Hemi wasn't that impressive, as compared to the Titan.

[crfoot]

Everyone is saying "wait for the new tundra". Sorry Toyota, I'm not waiting anymore. I love my 2000 tundra, but the new DC's don't have what it takes. I can't believe underneath the DC lies exactly what I have had for the last 4 years. It looks like the Titan may be sitting in my garage soon. Billet grills are already on E-bay! CST makes a 6" lift. And just read the write ups! When Toyota finally makes the new Tundra, (and I know they will) I will be back!

[Verndog]

I can't believe underneath the DC lies exactly what I have had for the last 4 years. It looks like the Titan may be sitting in my garage soon.

I can...Toyota got to where they are by using and reusing same running gear in different models. That is one reason you can usually count on quality...they aren't messing around with new designs all the time.

Just 4 years on this design 4.7L would be a relitively short period to expect major changes...although that motor goes back further with Lexus...still I'd be surprised to see a bigger V8 next year...

99.5% of the time...this truck has way more power then I use...it's hard to figure why some people make so much of power they rarely use or need.

[molex]

Originally Posted by Verndog

99.5% of the time...this truck has way more power then I use...it's hard to figure why some people make so much of power they rarely use or need.

Amen, brotha! I just read the Four Wheeler (I think) comparo of the Tundra, F-150 and Titan, and one of the "cons" of the Tundra was low power. Huh? Since when was 245 not enough? Why would you expect more out of a 1/2 ton rig? Why would you need more?

During my callow youth, my father was good enough to school me repeatedly on just how much cr@p you can haul and tow in a seriously underpowered 4 cylinder truck. He never owned a V8 truck, and he worked his trucks, I mean HARD. My Tundra has more power than anything my Dad ever owned.

I would guess than 99% or more of truck owners never actually use the full power of their truck. I know I've only done it twice.

[RockyMtnRay]

Originally Posted by DeepStealth

i think it's a size comparison thing. it still don't matter how many ponies you got.

...it's just a number to generate sales. you're completely correct, nobody really needs that much power in a half ton pickup, but it's awful nice to feel the power press you back in your seat. -s

Actually, those of us who tow at high altitudes (like around 11,000 feet) do need that much power in a half ton pickup. My trailer weighs around 3700 lbs when loaded and I'm hoping my Tundra is gonna have enough torque to get it over Colorado's 11,000 foot passes and their 6 to 8 percent, 6 to 10 mile long grades with reasonable alacrity...that is not having a long line of cars stacked up behind me 'cause all I can do is 35 mph on these climbs.

The problem is at 11,000 to 12,000 feet (the elevation range of most of the passes over the Continental Divide in Colorado) the Tundra V8 is only putting out about 130 lbs-feet of torque at 3400 RPM (40% of sea level). I'm going to see how the truck does stock before I start spending money on headers, low restriction exhaust (versus simply a louder exhaust), and maybe the supercharger, but I'm budgeting for performance enhancements cause I suspect I'm going to really need them.

I was up at 11,000 feet yesterday to go skiing at the Monarch Ski Area (it's one of the highest in the state) and I have to say that even with an empty truck and no trailer, on a 6% grade the engine didn't have a heckuva lot of oomph left in 3rd gear after it got down around 2000 RPM. (I had to slow down because of speed limits and intermittant ice.) Didn't give me a warm, fuzzy feeling about having lots of power for towing up that grade.

[crfoot]

Yes, I agree the Tundra has good power, but I am wanting to buy a toybox that will weigh more than I would like to pull with my tundra. Yea, I could buy a 3/4 ton or more but then it comes down to the "other" manufacturers and i'm not going there. Nissan has the power i am looking for and the ride of a 1/2 ton. I just wish Toyota could have beat them to it.

[DevinSixtySeven]

well, the part i was leaving out...a hamster in a wheel, properly geared, could pull your trailer up and over the eisenhower, but it'll take forever. a small engine can do the job, but a big engine will do it faster.

on the subject of towing in colorado, does any gasoline engine pull very well at 2K rpm? try running it at 3K and leave it there, it pulls beautifully. i never had a problem in all the time i was there with a lack of power (until i swapped to 33s), regardless altitude or grade, but then i didn't expect the truck to perform like a champ at 2K rpm.

there are a couple people who tow in the mountains in colorado. the only thing i remember them complaining about was their brakes, but the threads should be around somewhere.

[RockyMtnRay]

Originally Posted by DeepStealth

well, the part i was leaving out...a hamster in a wheel, properly geared, could pull your trailer up and over the eisenhower, but it'll take forever. a small engine can do the job, but a big engine will do it faster.

on the subject of towing in colorado, does any gasoline engine pull very well at 2K rpm? try running it at 3K and leave it there, it pulls beautifully. i never had a problem in all the time i was there with a lack of power (until i swapped to 33s), regardless altitude or grade, but then i didn't expect the truck to perform like a champ at 2K rpm.

Exactly! The 4.0L I6 w/5 spd manual tranny in my Jeep could pull my trailer up the grades too...if I was willing to stay in 2nd gear for 8 miles at 35 mph with it revving at 4000 rpm (and the temp guage steadily heading for the red zone). I'm hoping the Tundra has enough torque that I don't have to resort to 1st or 2nd gear and lots of revs to stay with the traffic.

The approaches to the Eisenhower tunnels on I70 aren't my real concern...I don't often cross the mountains on that route and it's possible (and legal) to drive at 65 to 70 mph, which means good RPM (over 3000) in 3rd with OD off.

My concern is with the passes on the 2 lane roads: Monarch, Berthoud, Hoosier, Wolf Creek, Fremont, Tennessee, Rabbit Ears, Lizard Head, Molas, Coal Creek, Red Mountain, etc...where the curves and/or speed limits necessitate speeds more like 50 to 55 mph. Those speeds mean roughly 2500 RPM in 3rd with the TC locked. If I have to go to 3000 to 3500 RPM to get enough torque to maintain 50 mph, it'll mean running at 3/4 throttle for 6 to 8 miles in 2nd gear...and that's not conducive to long transmission life even with the towing package transmission cooler and transmission fluid changes every 15K miles. Admittedly, this is not a biggie for folks who do this maybe once or twice a year...but I'm a real outdoors guy who takes his trailer across those passes almost every week during the summer.

Bottom line: IMO, for me more torque = longer transmission life. Ideally, I'd like the transmission to be able to stay in 3rd with the TC locked on a climb with trailer in tow. I'm going to see how close I can come to that ideal on my first outings next summer...if just a little more torque at 2500 RPM will let me accomplish that, then here come the headers, exhaust, and maybe supercharger. If not, and long climbs in 2nd gear are inevitable, then I'll just budget for regular transmission servicing and eventual overhaul.