How does the performance of the 4.7L i-force V8 compare to the 5.3L LS1-based Chevy?

[Threxx]

Side-by-side comparison as far as performance goes.

Obviously the Toyota motor will probably last 2-3 times as long... but I'm talking about straight-line acceleration goes. Is there even a comparison?

On paper it looks like an extended cab 2WD Silverado with the 5.3L V8 would eat a 4.7L Tundra Extended cab for lunch..

What have been your experiences with the new Chevy motors?

It's nothing that a TRD s/c wouldn't take care of for sure.. but I'm considering getting a 4.7 Tundra, and not sure if I want to supercharge it.. but at the same time I'd like to be able to dispatch rival Chevy and Dodge trucks at the light.

Speaking of, how do you think the 4.7 Tundra motor compares to the 5.9 Dodge? I've driven an 02 Tundra and an 02 Ram, and just by the seat-of-the-pants feel that I get, the Tundra felt a little faster, but it also felt like it had to rev higher to get the torque flowing.

So can I get a 4.7L Tundra with confidance of winning in a race against newer rival trucks, or do I need to wait for Toyota to redesign their 4.7 for higher performance? Hopefully Toyota will come out with the rumored 5.8L V8 and resolve and previous doubt.

[awesometundra]

Dude, you need to get a Corvette, not a truck

[Lazy Ace]

Remember the days when people used to buy pick-ups to haul stuff? Maybe this is why the price has skyrocketed on these specialty vehicles.

[Threxx]

There are MANY other factors I take into account when purchasing a vehicle, not just straight line acceleration.
However, UBB topics tend to be more effective and more interesting when one particular subject is discussed on a micro scale.
I've already done my homework on frame rigidity, interior decible levels, paint specs, body-panel specs, interior dimensions, available features, aesthetic layout, towing/bed capacities, etc...

But at this particular time I was curious as to how the straight-line performance of the Tundra was compared to other trucks.

Would it have made you happier if I made an extremely broad topic like "Which is better... Tundra, Silverado, F150, or Ram?"??

In that case 98% of the information I would have gotten would have been information that was either overly subjective, or information that I was already well aware of.

So back to the topic at hand...

[Lazy Ace]

Didn’t mean to ruffle your feathers dude. I meant no disrespect and my comment was off topic anyhow. My bad and I’m sorry.

From what I understand the Toyota 4.7 Tundra will actually out pull the Chevy 5.3 Silverado. Perhaps there is a weight differential or gearing difference that comes into play.

[Blender]

I've only driven the chevy 5.3 in a Z71 suburban but is rather doggy. Perhaps the silverado's lighter weight would make it seem to have more power, but who knows.

[twowheeler]

From what I can remember reading in some articles, the two trucks are within about 2 tenths in the quarter mile. Even though the Chevy has like 300 hp, I think it is heavier. However, the Chevy has more lowend. The Tundra however, whips on the smaller Chevy V8 (4.8?) pretty good.

[Genthar]

Well, in 2000 when the Tundras were introduced, if I remember correctly, they could beat everything except the 5.4L Fords...of course with any design changes in the intervening years, I don't know.

[whizzer]

Threxx-
Off the line, I think the Chevy would jump ahead. My Tundra just doesn't have the burst. If you could get a Chevy next to you at say, 25-30mph and stomp on it, when you drop into first, I think it would leave him behind.
A friend of mine has a S/C Tacoma, and he smoked me so bad from a standing start, my jaw was draggin'. I raced him from about 30 mph up to about 60 and he BARELY pulled a half length on me. His truck has claimed 260HP with the S/C and another 15 or so with his headers/exhaust and weighs considerably less. You just have to get into the meat of the powerband to be most effective. The Tundra is a revver. Once you're there tho' the thing pulls forever.

-Clay

[longwoodklon]

I would have to agree with Whizzer. The Chevy would be faster off the line. But I have raced a Chevy 1500(looked brand new, this was about 6 months ago) on the freeway. It was late, we were both cruising about 80, looked at each other, and new what had to be done. Slowed down to about 50, then both punched it. My tundra outpulled him, by the time I hit 85~90 I was a truck length ahead. I carpool with a guy who has a Tahoe, and I get the same impression. It is decent off the line, but at passing speeds the Tundra wins hands down. I must say, I like the Tundra power band, reminds me a little of a 'peaky' 2 stroke bike, you can definitely feel it kick in ~3500RPM.

[DevinSixtySeven]

same experience here, even on 33" knobbies. i occasionally scare the hell out of the ricer guys on the highway, leaving them a few lengths behind on the jump from 65-100. at about 75 or thereabouts, the truck's right in the powerband, and leaps ahead like its got a few more gears in the transmission. i didnt get over 100 tho, its really unhealthy to get pulled over at anything over 99 ...

off the line tho, eyyech. waiting for those s&s headers.

-sean

[dwagner825]

Originally posted by longwoodklon
I carpool with a guy who has a Tahoe, and I get the same impression. It is decent off the line, but at passing speeds the Tundra wins hands down. . [/b]

I recently raced a new Tahoe LT with the 5.3L engine off the line. It was a teenage kid in Daddy's truck accelerating from one light to the next cutting in and out of traffic. I decided to show him how slow his truck really was. He initially had about two car lengths on me then at about 50 MPH I started pulling him in like nothing. As I started to pass him at 80 MPH he slammed on his brakes coming almost to a complete stop. When we pulled up to the light a block down I rolled my window down and I said to him " great off the line acceleration but she bogged down on you after 50 huh" He replied " Man I would've have eaten you up had I not been worrying about the cops" I told him not to worry. I am a cop and he could race me off this next red to show me how bad he could "eat me up" he just came off the line as slow as my grandma going to church searching for her favorite AM radio station. I think he felt especially dejected since his girlfriend was sitting next to him in the front seat.

[Lightning]

I love the roll-on power of the Tundra. It's off-the line performance is okay, but not neck-snapping by any means. But once it gets to 25-30 mph, the power builds nicely. I like punching it at 25 mph, and when it downshifts to first gear, it's a real kick. Really great for passing. Roll-on power at highway speeds is good too, but aerodynamics starts to tone things down a bit.

I raced my friend's 6 cylinder BMW sports car (can't remember the model, but it was a '78 two seater), and from a standing start, he pulled about half a car length ahead initially, but once I hit 2nd gear, I was slowly reeling him in, and by 70 mph, I was nearly even with him. Maybe he couldn't shift well, but I was impressed with the Tundra.

I don't get challenged much in the Tundra or on my bikes, but when I'm in the Lightning, I get lots of 'invites'. And my RSVP comes in the form of red taillights and smokin' Goodyears in their eyes

[v8Toilet]

Well I can give you a 4.7 to 5.3 comparison. I own a 2WD V8 Tundra, which is a little faster than the 4WD Tundra. Toyota claims a 0-60 time of 7.9 seconds. We have two Chevy Silvorados at work both with the 5.3-liter engines. They're both 4WD extended cabs too just like mine. The Weight difference between the Silvorado and the Tundra is very close when they are equipped similarly with the Chevy weighing a couple hundred pounds more. We have a 99 Silvorado (270 horsepower) and a 2002 Silvorado (285 horsepower). I have driven mostly the 99 model but from the seat of the pants they both feel about the same. I also had a 2002 Silvorado as a rental for three days that had the 4.8-liter engine in it (270 horsepower).

The silvorado with the 5.3 feels stronger off the line with more low-end torque than my Tundra but the difference is not night and day. The Tundra feels like it has more low-end torque than the Chevy 4.8-liter engine but less than the 5.3-liter engine. It’s somewhere between the two. I would say that if they raced from 0-60 the Silvorado would start to pull ahead slightly. Then the Tundra would start to gain on the Silvorado and by 60 mph they would be neck and neck. The Tundra would blow the doors off the 4.8-liter engine. For an engine that has 270 horsepower it sure doesn't feel like it. The rental I had had absolutely no passing power on the highway compared to my Tundra. Even the 5.3 doesn't feel as strong in the upper rpm range as my Tundra does although they are close.

Another thing I noticed about the two engines is the way the power comes on. The Chevy 5.3liter motor pulls very strong down low and pulls consistently too the reline. The Tundra doesn't wow you under 3000 rpm but once the engine hits 3000 rpm and above it's like you hit a small nitrous switch and the thing just comes alive.

Also I really love the intuitive shifting of the Tundra transmission. It is always in the right gear at the right time. The Chevy on the other hand seems reluctant to downshift when you want it to and during normal shifting it is biased towards shifting early, which I don't like. I remember it was hard to get the engine to rev past 4500 rpm on the Chevy 4.8-liter equipped rental I had and when it did rev that high it made a lot of noise and didn't pull that hard. I had to keep the thing in tow haul mod to get the engine to rev. The Tundra on the other hand can visit 4000 rpm easily pulling very hard and sometimes you don't even know its revving that high because the dam thing is just so smooth.

The Tundra feels like it could also easily pull away from the Silvorado from 30-70 mph, that’s were the Tundra accelerates the best. I also brought my truck to the dragstrip on a 91 degree day with high humidity and ran a 16.066 @ 87 mph totally stock. I even beat the Ford lightening next to me to the 60-foot mark. He got a 2.659 60-foot and I got a 2.509. Both of us didn’t spin the tires. This was for a baseline so I could test the effectiveness of some modifications. I wasn’t trying to be the first down the track.

One last thing! I got these statistics from Motor trend magazine and they are listed here http://www.car-stats.com/stats/search/choosemodel.aspx They list a regular cab Silvorado going 0-60 in 7.8 seconds and running the quarter mile in 16 seconds @ 85 mph. They list an extended cab going 0-60 in 8.4 seconds and running the quarter mile in 16.3 seconds @ 83 mph. They also list another one as going 0-60 in 8.2 seconds and running the quarter mile in 16.4 seconds @ 83 mph.

Motor Trend lists a 2WD access Cab Tundra going 0-60 MPH in 8 seconds and running the quarter mile in 16.2 seconds @ 86 mph. They list an access cab 4*4 going 0-60 in 8.5 seconds and running the quarter mile in 16.6 seconds mph NA. They list a 2002 Limited Tundra (the heavies Tundra) going 0-60 in 8.2 seconds and running the quarter mile in 16.2 seconds @ 86 mph.

As you can see the straight-line performance is very close. Not considering reliability they are both great trucks each with different strengths and weaknesses.

If Toyota puts a larger engine like the 4.7-liter in a Tundra that weighs about the same its going to be a rocket for sure.

[TundraVvti]

I raced a 2000 GMC SIERRA and I won real easy, We did it again in the next stop light and I won again. I has the 5.3 engine.


Joe