Toyota Tundra Forums banner

1 - 20 of 61 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,235 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
New issue comparison:

Gm's 6.0 L with fuel management w/ 367 hp @5500 rpm's & 375 lb/ft @ 4300 r's, 4.10:1. vs. tundra dc,ltd,trd,5.7L w/ 6 sp. auto.
Tundra has a wider powerband with 2000 rpm between peaks as opposed to the gm's 1200 rpm spread. Almost double.
With the 6 speed in the tundra it puts 20% more twist to the wheels in 1st gear and the gap widens from there. Gm just can't get the 6 speed in their trucks soon enough. The tundra was 18% quicker in our towing tests, 0-65,45-65, & 20-65mph. Even when towing a 5500 lb trailer with 806 lbs on the bumper, the tundra spun the tires at start. The tundra averaged 15% better fuel efficiency while towing. The gm's v-4 did not engage very often other than at drop throttle. Gm's Epa numbers show 1 mpg better but our exercises didn't agree with that.
They loaded the tundra with over a ton of cement bags & then offloaded half of that into the gmc. Being well over weight limits, the tundra still had travel in the rear leafs! They did like how the gmc handled with the weight due to it's lower center of gravity. However, they said the gmc was noisier in cabin than the tundra. The trd bilstiens proved their worth in this test. They claimed their 4x4,trd,ltd,dc has a payload of only 1180? Don't know where they got those figures. My dc sr5 says it is 1655 lbs.
The tundra's brakes are no less bulletproof than the gmc's, but were used less due to tundras sequential trans braking. They wished it didn't go into 4th while downshifting as 5th was often just right. They think the tundras trac should be toned down a bit. I don't think they knew how to turn it off! with 800 lbs tongue weight added to each truck, they both dropped 4" (4.2 for tundra & 4.0" for gmc) even though the claimed gm's payload was 600 more than the tundra. And the tundra wasn't even on the bumpstops w/ 1800 lbs payload. Once hooked to the trailers, the gmc's comfort immediately went away due to no tow mirrors. The tundra's AT temp guage never moved while the gmc's showed 199 degrees in acceleration tests. It was fairly cool outside though. The trailer tended to drive the back of the tundra & had more effect on the front of the gmc's. Which required more frequent steering corrections on the gmc. Toyota had better directional stability.
After a few hard trips down a bumpy road, the gmc's fuel door popped open several times. They commented on the pricing of the tundra as a bit higher than average but fully competitive. Similarly equipped, the sierra had a $900 higher price tag but the 6 speed auto is not available yet, nor is front side airbags, or brake assist.

Truck trends prediction:
The gmc equipped for family recreation as tested, with a more appealing interior, & greater payload capacity are not enough to overcome the tundra's superior powertrain performance,safety equipment, larger cabin, & better fuel economy in every situation.
The 3rd time is indeed the charm for toyota as the 3rd generation full-size pickup has set the bench mark another notch higher!

Long post but now we know what truck trend thinks about our new 3rd Generation Tundra's!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,235 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
Also, the gmc didn't offer a plug & play brake controller while the tundra does.

curb weight:
gmc---5393lbs.
tundra-5620lbs
payload:
gmc--1807lbs
tundra-1180lbs.???
tow capacity:
gmc----10,453
tundra--10,226
fuel economy towing:
gmc----7.20
tundra--8.55
price as tested:
gmc----$40,760
tundra--$41,055
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
Gm's 6.0 L with fuel management w/ 367 hp @5500 rpm's & 375 lb/ft @ 4300 r's, 4.10:1. vs. tundra dc,ltd,trd,5.7L w/ 6 sp. auto. Tundra has a wider powerband with 2000 rpm between peaks as opposed to the gm's 1200 rpm spread. Almost double.
The Tundra has a wider gap between TQ and HP peaks, but that doesn't necessarily mean it has a wider powerband. It's probably due more to the VVTi in the engine. GM small blocks have a much broader torque curve than the VVTi Toyota engine. They have perfected the 2-valve per cylinder pushrod engine (as shown with the C6 Z06). The early LS1 engines (now an 11-year-old motor) made its torque peak (350) at 4400, but made over 300 lb-ft all the way from 1000 RPM up to the redline.

There's no argument though that the Tundra is the momentary king of the 1/2 ton truck world when it comes to specs (0-60, HP, tow rating, etc etc etc). However with the 5.7 having dual VVTi and header-like exhaust manifolds, it seems that Toyota is already squeezing a lot of power out of it and not leaving any room for adding more power down the road. GM is notorious for boosting the power output of its engines every couple of model years. That, coupled with the 6-speed being introduced soon, could whittle down the Tundra's performance difference. Hopefully Toyota will find ways to either squeeze a little more power from the engine, or make some good interior/styling differences down the road to keep the truck as relevant in 2 or 3 years as it is today, because GM and Ford devote a lot of their resources to their full-size truck lineup.

I wouldn't mind having the 5.7 in my 06 Tundra :devil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,235 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
The Tundra has a wider gap between TQ and HP peaks, but that doesn't necessarily mean it has a wider powerband. It's probably due more to the VVTi in the engine. GM small blocks have a much broader torque curve than the VVTi Toyota engine. They have perfected the 2-valve per cylinder pushrod engine (as shown with the C6 Z06). The early LS1 engines (now an 11-year-old motor) made its torque peak (350) at 4400, but made over 300 lb-ft all the way from 1000 RPM up to the redline.

There's no argument though that the Tundra is the momentary king of the 1/2 ton truck world when it comes to specs (0-60, HP, tow rating, etc etc etc). However with the 5.7 having dual VVTi and header-like exhaust manifolds, it seems that Toyota is already squeezing a lot of power out of it and not leaving any room for adding more power down the road. GM is notorious for boosting the power output of its engines every couple of model years. That, coupled with the 6-speed being introduced soon, could whittle down the Tundra's performance difference. Hopefully Toyota will find ways to either squeeze a little more power from the engine, or make some good interior/styling differences down the road to keep the truck as relevant in 2 or 3 years as it is today, because GM and Ford devote a lot of their resources to their full-size truck lineup.

I wouldn't mind having the 5.7 in my 06 Tundra :devil:
I don't think toyota left no room for improvement with the 5.7. I read a post here somewhere that toyota easily had 450-480 hp but toned it down a bit. I don't know if these are the exact numbers, but it was pretty impressive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
I don't think toyota left no room for improvement with the 5.7. I read a post here somewhere that toyota easily had 450-480 hp but toned it down a bit. I don't know if these are the exact numbers, but it was pretty impressive.
Well it would definitely be awesome once GM and Ford up the power ante if Toyota matched the increase.:tu:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
888 Posts
Something as simple as a cam regrind will put these VVTI's out over 500 hp real easy. The rest of the platform is setup for it RIGHT NOW.
Plenty of fuel,solid bottom-end etc.... JUST NEED NEW CAMS !!:tu:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
Something as simple as a cam regrind will put these VVTI's out over 500 hp real easy. The rest of the platform is setup for it RIGHT NOW.
Plenty of fuel,solid bottom-end etc.... JUST NEED NEW CAMS !!:tu:

Sure it will..You put 500hp out of that motor and there goes your so called reliability. You'll need a better transmission too. Any manufacturer can pump up the numbers on their motors but they are not building race engines.

All I know is that Toyota needs to do something quick. These trucks are not selling here. They still have many of the original shipment trucks sitting on the lots here. I've seen a handful of them on the road in the city, but while at work in rural areas I have yet to see the first one. I hope this magazine article helps because I'm starting to see LOTS of new Chevy's on the road. Right now it appears Toyota is getting their arse handed to them in the real world.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
251 Posts
Sure it will..You put 500hp out of that motor and there goes your so called reliability. You'll need a better transmission too. Any manufacturer can pump up the numbers on their motors but they are not building race engines.

All I know is that Toyota needs to do something quick. These trucks are not selling here. They still have many of the original shipment trucks sitting on the lots here. I've seen a handful of them on the road in the city, but while at work in rural areas I have yet to see the first one. I hope this magazine article helps because I'm starting to see LOTS of new Chevy's on the road. Right now it appears Toyota is getting their arse handed to them in the real world.
I agree with you sir. I have yet to see one new tndra on the road here, but do see them on the lot. I don't put a lot of stock in anything a mag says, but if what they claim is true, then there is one simple explanation here. It is the dreaded GM torque management that they compute into the ECM. IMO GM needs to get rid of that or at least some of that. I have ridden in a 6.0l 1500 series silverado that has a tuned ECM with the torque management removed, and let's just say that maybe GM is right, that thing will be buying tires every other week. And the quiet issue is BS. My 07 silverado is definately quieter than my 06 tundra, but cannot attest to the 07 tundra.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
338 Posts
I agree with you sir. I have yet to see one new tndra on the road here, but do see them on the lot. I don't put a lot of stock in anything a mag says, but if what they claim is true, then there is one simple explanation here. It is the dreaded GM torque management that they compute into the ECM. IMO GM needs to get rid of that or at least some of that. I have ridden in a 6.0l 1500 series silverado that has a tuned ECM with the torque management removed, and let's just say that maybe GM is right, that thing will be buying tires every other week. And the quiet issue is BS. My 07 silverado is definately quieter than my 06 tundra, but cannot attest to the 07 tundra.

I personally am not concerned how many they sell, I got mine! I was at my dealer last week, they had many Tundras. Almost all were 4.7's which they seem to be pushing. Any new truck is expensive, so people should buy what they like at the best price.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
I agree with you sir. I have yet to see one new tndra on the road here, but do see them on the lot. I don't put a lot of stock in anything a mag says, but if what they claim is true, then there is one simple explanation here. It is the dreaded GM torque management that they compute into the ECM. IMO GM needs to get rid of that or at least some of that. I have ridden in a 6.0l 1500 series silverado that has a tuned ECM with the torque management removed, and let's just say that maybe GM is right, that thing will be buying tires every other week. And the quiet issue is BS. My 07 silverado is definately quieter than my 06 tundra, but cannot attest to the 07 tundra.
I agree with you both. I pass the Toyota dealer every day and it is full of new Tundras but I have never seen one on the road. Do people buy them and not drive them? No wonder they are reliable :D And on the issue of noise in the cabin, my 2001 is OK on a perfectly smooth road but on regular roads it has a lot of road noise. I have Michlin LTX tires which may not be as quite as other brands but my half deaf brother sure complains of the noise when he rides with me. He has a Chevy dually that rides quiter. Hope the 07 is better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
GM's 6.0L VortecMax V8 engine certainly does NOT have a broader torque curve than Toyota's 5.7L V8. All you have to do is compare the dyno charts.

This is yet another review which shows Toyota's 5.7L gets superior fuel economy compared to GM's 6.0L. I think with the updated 2008 EPA testing, the EPA ratings for GM's 6.0L V8 will drop more than GM fans would like.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
"However with the 5.7 having dual VVTi and header-like exhaust manifolds, it seems that Toyota is already squeezing a lot of power out of it and not leaving any room for adding more power down the road."

EXACTLY! that is why I would rather have the Toyota, because they are giving you as much as they can right from the factory. They aren't holding back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,279 Posts
I disagree w/ the "no room for improvement" remark. You add a set of LTs, higher stall tq converter and a set of cams and these would be unheard of fast. Not to mention the supposed supercharger. There is room for improvement on most anything.

I am excited since the Tundras were built w/ such beefy internals and rear end/tranny. You could probly put 450hp through it everyday w/o a hiccup. Maybe 500+ w/ just a little strengthening.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
888 Posts
Based on the re;s to the thread,it clear people DO NOT Understand what this motor is.
Argue this with me .......

LS7 GM 505hp C6/Z06 Platform(underrated buy nearly 30hp)
IForce 5.7 07 Tundra 381 hp

Which is the better built motor and why ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
330 Posts
Based on the re;s to the thread,it clear people DO NOT Understand what this motor is.
Argue this with me .......

LS6 GM 505hp C6/Z06 Platform(underrated buy nearly 30hp)
IForce 5.7 07 Tundra 381 hp

Which is the better built motor and why ?

Better built? For what, who cares? I know which one I'd rather have and you're a liar if you say the 5.7.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
Direct injection is not out of the question down the road either. Take a look at the 3.5 in the camry vs the 3.5 DI lexus is350, 268hp vs 306, in basically the same engine. Also Lexus's DI 4.6 is making some good power at 380 hp and 367 lb-fts.

I don't believe Toyota is pushing the 5.7 or all their technology at it yet.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
888 Posts
Been there done that ........ wouldnt own another GM built before 1957.
Im done with high maintence vehicles,when I play its in 3' or better of MUD :tu: (Love My Jeep)

Better built? For what, who cares? I know which one I'd rather have and you're a liar if you say the 5.7.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,279 Posts
Based on the re;s to the thread,it clear people DO NOT Understand what this motor is.
Argue this with me .......

LS6 GM 505hp C6/Z06 Platform(underrated buy nearly 30hp)
IForce 5.7 07 Tundra 381 hp

Which is the better built motor and why ?

Well, considering an LS6 isnt in the C6/Z06 thats a difficult question...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
Argue this with me .......

LS6 GM 505hp C6/Z06 Platform(underrated buy nearly 30hp)
IForce 5.7 07 Tundra 381 hp

Which is the better built motor and why ?
That's comparing apples to oranges. The LS7 (the LS6 was in the C5 Z06) is for all intents and purposes a racing engine. It was built with top-notch internals, titanium intake valves, sodium-filled exhaust valves, and dry sump lubrication. It redlines at 7000 RPM but has been tested at 8000 RPM with no problems (reason it doesn't rev that high from the factory is that the power drops off due to the intake manifold's inability to supply enough air at that high of an RPM). I don't think it's underrated either- GM has nothing to gain by underrating a $70k Corvette, especially when they would be able to rate it past the Viper if it really had the power. With the SAE Certified horsepower ratings now being used by GM, it's impossible for them to underrate any more of their engines.

The 5.7 tundra engine on the other hand is a truck engine. It is not made for top-end horsepower, but for towing ability and low-mid range torque. The only reason it makes as high HP as it does is due to the dual VVTi. The cylinder bore in the 5.7 is identical to the 4.7. The 5.7 just has a MUCH longer stroke (a generic rule is bigger bore= more horsepower, bigger stroke= more torque). The stroke on the engine is actually larger than the bore diameter. They could have made more horsepower out of the 5.7 if they increased the bore size from the 4.7 instead of only raising the stroke length.

If you really wanted to make a real comparison, you should compare the Toyota 5.7 to the GM 6.0. GM is GREAT at making small-block V8s. They've done it for 6 decades. Look at it this way- the Toyota 5.7 makes 14 HP and 26 lb/ft more than the GM 6.0. However, Toyota employs a dual overhead cam, 32-valve, dual VVTi, and headers. While GM has a 14 cubic inch advantage, the 6.0 still uses the traditional cam-in-block, pushrod setup with only 2 valves per cylinder and no variable valve timing. Both engines run on 87 octane. If that isn't a testament to how well GM can engineer a V8, I don't know what is.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
888 Posts
No doubt LOL!! my bad edited typo :sleep:
LS7 7.0 .......:clown:
speaking with a Dealer Tech thats been thru two phases of training and getting first hand views of bare block and itemized rotating assemblies etc ..... seems to think 500 hp+ and still remain near stock numbers for fuel mileage etc.I liked what he said about the trans :tu: :tu: :tu:
You could run 650hp thru it and it wouldn't feel it :eek: (He has been a local "Lead" Toyo wrench for over 20 years and owns 4 sub 7 sec. Yota's)I think he knows what fast is with this brand.;)

Anyway ......... Bad Boy Toy IMO !

:devil:

Well, considering an LS6 isn't in the C6/Z06 thats a difficult question...
 
1 - 20 of 61 Posts
Top