The Hemi's cylinder shutdown must certainly help it. It's too bad Toyota didn't use such a system. Cylinder shutdown and a 6 speed auto combined would definately help somewhat.
I believe it was the edmunds comparo where the Chevy/GM had the cylinder shut down feature and better EPA mpg estimates than the Tundra, however in real life road testing the Tundra had significantly better MPG than the Chevy/GM.
From what I have heard the cylinder shut down feature does not improve mileage as much as they said it would. I don't know why Toyota would even offer the 4.7 for the 07 Tundra in anything other than the regular cab 2WD version and as mentioned for an extra $1200.00 it's a no brainer, more power and the same or even better mileage with the 5.7. As far as the 5 speed 4.7 versus the 6 speed in the 5.7 version I suppose it might make a difference but I think more so that the 4.7 just has to work harder in a new truck weighing 1000 LBS more than the older version. Actualy if comparing the older Tundras 00-04 models with the 4 speed to the newer 05-06 VVTi models with the 5 speed, from what I've seen it made pretty much no improvement in mileage over the older 4 speeds, infact it looks to me like the older 4 speed versions were actualy even a little better on fuel if anything.
If you're worried about the gas then you can't afford the truck. Get a Camry.
__________________
2004 (Former, debadged) Texas Editon Double Cab SR5 4x4. Removed 20" rims and tires. Installed 17" Graphite TRD wheels and Bridgestone Dueller Revo tires. Reinstalled front mud guards. Added Husky heavy duty floor liners. Coming soon: Line X and Z series bed cap.
The Hemi's cylinder shutdown must certainly help it. It's too bad Toyota didn't use such a system. Cylinder shutdown and a 6 speed auto combined would definately help somewhat.
I have an 04 Dodge....doesn't have the mds on it....the new dodges don't get much if any better mpg than i get....I wouldn't consider the smaller engine in a truck as big as the Crewmax...NO WAY!
If you're worried about the gas then you can't afford the truck. Get a Camry.
Totally agree - even though I like getting great fuel mileage, I don't expect it all the time. Even little things like running your AC or driving with the windows down will kill your mileage. I only get 19-20 mpg on the freeway in steady traffic and only while the weather lets me. Even displacing the extra water when it rains with your tires will make a noticeable difference in your fuel mileage. Once you step on the gas and feel the capability of the V8, all that mileage goes out the window big time! Don't depend on a trip computer or scan tool to give you accurate mileage readings. These only inferr airflow from the MAF along with a few other sensors to somewhat roughly calculate the amount of fuel going into the engine.
__________________
2007 Tundra 5.7 4x2 RCSB slate metallic
2005 Corolla - all stock, cause it's the wifes
1986 Mustang GT - the stereo is under the hood
1990 Corolla - cause it was really cheap
I've driven both the 4.7 and 5.7 DC's now and it will be interesting to see what the real world mileage difference is. In test driving them in city driving and at highway speeds there didn't seem to be a huge difference - at least the way I drive.
Has anyone seen performance numbers for the 2007 Tundra with the 4.7 in it?
The 4.7 would work fine for what I do.....if it got better mileage than the 5.7. The CrewMax weighs nearly the same as the DC so the performance/mpg should be similar.
Also, I don't buy the resale arguments one way or the other. Features and prices are all relative in depreciation. Usually the trucks with standard motors are discounted best.
Also, I don't buy the resale arguments one way or the other. Features and prices are all relative in depreciation. Usually the trucks with standard motors are discounted best and wind up being the 'ad' vehicles for dealers.
I don't necessarily think the resale value will make up for the price increase, just that it will re-sell much easier/quicker with the 5.7l.
I believe it was the edmunds comparo where the Chevy/GM had the cylinder shut down feature and better EPA mpg estimates than the Tundra, however in real life road testing the Tundra had significantly better MPG than the Chevy/GM.
I hope you are right. I've put roughly 600 miles on my 06 DC 4x4 SR5 and am averaging 12.3 mpg (mostly in town driving due to my job). I hope to God I can chaulk up the pathetic mileage to very cold weather, or the truck being new and engine not being broke in. I've been very light on the gas, trying to coast as much as possible, and only running the heat through the upper vents. I had an F150 extended cab 4x2 that got a horrible 14 mpg. Even in the cold, I'd get at least 13+. I was anxious to hopefully get around 16.5 mpg with my new Tundra. I'm not even close.
__________________ 2006 DC SR5 V8 4x4 Phantom Gray Metallic
2003 Honda Pilot EXL 4WD Black
Don't know enough about VVT-i to know for sure, but in all of the advertising, the 5.7 is billed as having "Dual Independent" VVT-i, whereas the other two aren't described this way. Maybe a slightly different/more advanced valve timing system is used in the 5.7 to get better MPG ratings?
I believe it was the edmunds comparo where the Chevy/GM had the cylinder shut down feature and better EPA mpg estimates than the Tundra, however in real life road testing the Tundra had significantly better MPG than the Chevy/GM.
The edmunds test used the 6.0 Chevy motor. The 5.3 gets better mileage. It also has the cylinder shutdown.
The interesting thing is that Chevy has an indicator on the dash to watch, letting you know when you are in V-4 mode. You can adjust your foot accordingly. Unfortunately, with full size trucks it isn't in V-4 mode too often.
I've read the same thing about the 5.7 having the dual Independent VVT-i but I don't know how or if that affects mileage.
The other day someone posted that the 4.7 is quieter than the 5.7, which makes sense I guess, but none of the reviews I have read mentions this.
For people who use their truck for lots of highway driving, would a 4.7 be better than a 5.7 if you don't need the towing power? Or are both engines equally good at higher RPMs?
I've also been told the 5.7 uses dual timing chains whereas the 4.7 uses a timing belt.
I was all hyped up to get a 4.7 because I don't have a lot of heavy towing needs, but the gas mileage thing has me really confused.
....The other day someone posted that the 4.7 is quieter than the 5.7, which makes sense I guess, but none of the reviews I have read mentions this.
....I was all hyped up to get a 4.7 because I don't have a lot of heavy towing needs, but the gas mileage thing has me really confused.
I've noticed the same thing when test driving them. The 5.7 seems a bit louder in the cab.
I'm going to watch for some real world reports on gas mileage with the 4.7 and go with whatever motor gets the best, because I also don't have heavy towing/hauling needs.
Mileage on the highway depends on the gearing and speed you travel. The 5.7 has 6 speeds, and the overdrive may be more efficient than the overdrive in the 5 speed 4.7 at 70mph. I find the 4.7 to be buttery smooth at any speed. When I test drove the 5.7, it didn't seem as buttery, and was obviously a bit louder as others have said. I only test drove the 5.7 in the city, so I cannot comment on dB's on highway. I can say the mpg in the 4.7 has not impressed me so far, so the larger engine may do better than my average 12.3 mpg around town.
__________________ 2006 DC SR5 V8 4x4 Phantom Gray Metallic
2003 Honda Pilot EXL 4WD Black
Mileage on the highway depends on the gearing and speed you travel. The 5.7 has 6 speeds, and the overdrive may be more efficient than the overdrive in the 5 speed 4.7 at 70mph....
According to the brochure, the first 5 gears of the 6 speed pretty much match the the gears on the 5 speed. The 6 speed has an additional overdrive gear - which may help it's highway mileage, but won't help too much around town.
Re: 5.7 versus 4.7 fuel economy
disappointed with the 4.7
Linear Mode
