IMO, it makes no sense to go with the 4.7L instead of the monster 5.7L> Cost wise it's only about a $2000 difference between the two. MPG's are almost the same or even better for the 5.7L. But I guess it comes down to a personal decision.whats the reason? Less cost up front?
My 4.7 consistantly gets in the mid to high 16s...not 14s. For my needs, it has plenty of zip. I paid 30, 300 for my sr5 double cab and the way my dealer ordered and optioned other vehicles with the 5.7 the cost was well over 2000k difference.... not worth it for me to get less mileage. I had a 2000 4.7 and it did about the same as my 2007, with less horsepower and one less gear.Not sure how others are getting 11-12? Must really be enjoying the 5.7! Mine has 20's w/275/55 and 4.3 rear and I am getting 15-16 rural and 17-18 highway and still romping on it some. I am getting a least the same if not better milage than my 4.7 '04 with 4 speed and 4.10 rear.
Hey the new Tundra is an awesome truck with the 4.7 which is good because there seems to be more of them for sale than the 5.7, at least at the dealerships in Houston and Austin I have been to. When I was shopping prices it was more like 1200.00 more for the 5.7 6speed and 4.3 gears. I am not rich, but I'll find the extra $20.00 month. Depending on the driver, I think the claim that the 5.7 gets the same or better milage over the 4.7 is valid.