Tundra vs. Big 3

12345679»

Comments

  • swobigswobig Member Posts: 634
    diesel. May have to look into when they come out. Ford definatly seems to come up with changes more quickly than the others and I think that's why they stay on top. If GM can keep pace instead of lagging behind like they have, maybe they can challenge...
  • superjim2000superjim2000 Member Posts: 314
    Guess we'll see when it comes out. Like I said I think its a torque engine for people who dont want a diesel. besides, 496 sounds good, remember the 396?
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    Are they still talking about using some type of soleniods to kill off cylinders while idling and cruising at highway speed?
  • markcordmarkcord Member Posts: 113
    Maybe the Dodge V10 doesn't impress as a drag racer because that's not what it was designed for.
    And maybe the 6.8 will outrun it empty, I don't know, but it is lighter. But as stated earlier, the reason for the cubes is torque. The 8.0 still has more torque than the 6.8 and was voted trailering vehicle of the year by Trailerboat magazine. It can't be all that unimpressive.
  • quadrunner500quadrunner500 Member Posts: 2,721
    Look no farther than the Viper. Dodge apparently knows how to get good horsepower out of a V10 when they want to. Getting killed by Ford and GM trucks would seem to make good incentive for an aging design.

    Towards the end of a model run is usually when the manufacturers up the horsepower, make 'em exciting, then kill them. I.E. Impala SS, Scyclone, Typhoon, the original Lightning, Little Red Truck, 454SS.
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    the 8.1 is that big so it can produce a monster big as diesel torque curve, with great hp. without the cost of a diesel.

    i've heard conflicting reports on the exact functionality of the cylinder cut out, but it WILL exist for the function of getting good mileage under no load. you would be effectivley using ~350 cubes with the cut out engaged. I think it will be a switch the driver can turn on/off.

    bigsnag
    you're the only one reporting Chevy speedometer calibration problems. many many people have argued you otherwise.

    Pull-off contests between the 6.8 and dodge v10 have usually been dead heat or slightly favored to Ford. Why: the broad powerband of the V10 gives it breathing power all the way up to redline, the Dodge v10 starts out with great power, but falls off in the upper RPMs. normal pulling, you won't notice the diff, other than the better mileage of the Ford. but in passing situations, the higher revving Ford kicks the dodges butt.
  • swobigswobig Member Posts: 634
    I've also heard the Dodge and Ford V-10's being about equal, but Ford's is much smaller. Why couldn't GM do the same? 496 sounds good, but 427 sounds better - remember the glory days?

    Speedo being off - don't think so. Give me a break! I've checked my the the mile marker signs and also compared it to my car and it's right on. It gets good gas mileage period. Speedo's are not off...
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    Cdean:
    You get angry about me saying that, yet have you ever really checked yours. BTW, I am NOT the only one that has reported it. Other's have you just haven't been looking.
    Swobig: Believe me, you are in the vast minority, having actually checked yours. Most haven't. Many, if they did, would find it incorrect. I never said they don't get good mileage. Just not as good as some people think.
  • swobigswobig Member Posts: 634
    I don't doubt some people have had problems. Just like some have had vibration problems etc., but I think it is the vast MINORITY instead of majority. EPA mileage seems to be right on with what everyone has posted on the MPG topic (I forget what #). Some are even getting close to 20. So what else does the odometer tells you besides MPG (and distance)? The only people I've heard saying it's been off are people who don't have one (very few). No one that I know of that has one has reported it - at least on this forum. One of my biggest points for buying a GM over Ford was MPG - 15 compared to 13 for Ford - and I know it's not a odometer trick...
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    I never disputed that Chevy gets better mileage than a Ford. The fact does remain ,however, that the vast majority of people have never checked their speed/odometer against anything.
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    why yes bigsnag, I have checked mine vs mile markers. i've checked mine vs Fords. I've checked mine vs Internatinals. the difference is usually 1/2%, if any. Usually, vs mile markers it is DEAD on. Thats on the 3 Chevy's i have owned as personal vehicles, the 4 or 5 my family has owned, and the 20 or 30 GMs and Fords that i've driven in the fleets for various companies i've worked for.

    sorry dude, but you're full of it. just looking for an excuse to put down the GM performance. I guess the EPA testers don't check the odometers when they rate the GMs 2 or 3 mpg better than Fords?

    I've been reading this b-board for 3 years, EXTENSIVELY, and you are the ONLY person EVER to come up with this lamo excuse.

    whatever you think of GM, i don't care, but its a ludicrous argument. Sequential Port Fuel injection is what i would call a difficult engineering feat. A *&*%%# speedometer is not!
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    Get mad all you want, big guy. Who said anything about putting down Chevy? I think it's kind of interesting that you feel the need to defend what was never attacked. I asked a simple question and you get all defensive, like I attacked you personally. Here's another one for you. Have you ever checked any other discussion boards? I know for a fact I have seen complaints about Chevy speedo's on other boards. I can point anyone to it, if they need me to. I'll have to take some time and go through all the boards I frequent and find the particular topics and posts. Bottom line: Chill out, man. It's just a truck. Not your mom.
  • swobigswobig Member Posts: 634
    it's lame anyway. Bigsnag - didn't you mention the 300 H.P. version of the 5.4 (that's currently available in the Navigator) making it's way to the F-150 in 2001? Do you know what plans they have for the 4.2L or 4.6L? In my opinion those two engines need the most help. I've heard GM is comming out with a couple new 6 cylinder to replace what they have. 4.3L is decent, but overdue for upgrades...
  • markcordmarkcord Member Posts: 113
    I beg to differ. The Viper V10 and Ram V10 share displacement, block casting and that's about it. You're talking aluminum vs. cast iron, induction, exhaust, and internals are quite different. But you're right in that Dodge could make a high revving high horsepower V10 truck engine. I guess they just intended this one to be a true truck engine (that is-a torque monster that makes it's peak torque at a low rpm and delivers over 400 ft-lbs. across a wide power band.) Still, it will be interesting to see if that 353 hp 5.7 hemi gets in the new Ram.
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    I have mentioned the 300 hp 32V 5.4. It looks like, however, that Ford is going with a 305 hp, 24V (3 per cylinder). At least for the next couple of years. The 32V is capable of 385 hp, and then some. That's what the '00 Cobra R has in it. They talk about getting over 400 hp out of a 32V 5.4. It's just the same old crap from Ford. Incrementalism. Only do just enough to stay close, even, or slightly ahead at times. Never go out and even attempt to build a vehicle that is by far the best and most powerful ever.
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    sorry bigsnag, didn't mean to come across like that. still think its ridiculous. Yes, I read many other boards. Not as much as I read this one. Motortrend, pickuptruck, diesel page, etc. I keep tabs on quite a few of them. NEVER seen it. I call BS. show me links.

    i don't feel like you attacked me. I just believe your making all this up, for whatever reasons

    see ya.
  • quadrunner500quadrunner500 Member Posts: 2,721
    V10's share block castings?....I rest my case.
    Dodge can tweak that engine if they want to, and probably should.
  • superjim2000superjim2000 Member Posts: 314
    I read that theyre using a special lifter that can be shut off when necessary for 4 of the cyl. Seems like just cutting the injectors (which would be done anyway) from the cycle would be easier. And cheaper.
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    I have seen it. The first time I saw it, I was driving a buddy's 4X4 Chevy following my dad in his truck. I had to register 75-80 mph to keep up. I asked my dad how fast he was going (it's not like him to drive that fast) and he told me he had set the cruise on exactly the speed limit, 70 mph. He and I both know that his speedo is dead on. Checked it several times, several different ways. After this first experience, I have checked other guy's trucks, most by gauging against my Cruiser. I know it is right at 2% fast. Several other Chevy's have been off even more than it is. I have seen some that were dead on, too. I have seen it on other boards. I think it was on

    http://www.fordvschevy.com/index.shtml">

    but I could be mistaken. I will try to find the discussion ASAP.

  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    SuperJim
    The special lifter is basically to open up the valves on the non-firing cylinders, I believe. Why compress the air in the cylinder, when not needed. Doing this takes away half of the internal resistance when in low power mode. I just hope the overall reliability is there, as the complexity increases.
  • RoclesRocles Member Posts: 982
    cdean,

    Hey!! Er...My speedo is off!! LOL!

    bigsnag,
    -just having fun........;)
  • andy_jordanandy_jordan Member Posts: 764
    I don't know about North America, but in the UK the law only requires speedos to be accurate + or - 10% at the speed limit. So at the UK speed limit of 70mph, it is perfectly legal to have a speedo that reads 63 or 77 - one reason why you never get stopped for speeding below 80.
  • RoclesRocles Member Posts: 982
    ...then again...it could be that the radar guns that the police use aren't 100% accurate and any smartass could request a calibration test in a court of law.....
  • markcordmarkcord Member Posts: 113
    Now, you wouldn't be speaking from experience now would you Roc?
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    well i'm going to be so paranoid about my speedometer now, i'm going to start counting the road dashes and timing them. better get a Swiss watch...
  • quadrunner500quadrunner500 Member Posts: 2,721
    Now that Clinton has rescinded the SA random error, along with better positional and elevation accuracy, speed over ground accuracy should be about dead on too.
  • swobigswobig Member Posts: 634
    and it shows the Tundra 10th on the list. Is this about the same as the T-100 or better? Just kind of curious...
  • bigsnagbigsnag Member Posts: 394
    You guys are killing me!! Seriously though.
  • RoclesRocles Member Posts: 982
    Markcord,

    Oh yeah.....many moons ago on an old Sportster.....;)
  • trucksrmetrucksrme Member Posts: 381
    Any folks heard this tell yet?

    Size-wise the Tundra appears to be about a 9/10 scale full-size truck. It's about 3-inches narrower than the F-150 and parked next to a midsize Dodge Dakota 4x4 it only looks slightly larger.

    Looks like that truth is startin to get out on them limited ones quick. Good luck on this one now!
  • markcordmarkcord Member Posts: 113
    I see! Did your defense work? Sounds like a great ploy!
  • trucksrmetrucksrme Member Posts: 381
    Here is another tell on them tundras now:

    No its not a full-size truck, but its close. Eveyone--except the work-people who need a big, deep, bed or an interior large enough for three or more--was interested.

    Hmmm.... if that workin man aint interested in them limited ones who that be leavin? Yup, them yuppies. Figures. So much for "Tundra vs Big3" now. Good luck on this one now!
  • rooster9rooster9 Member Posts: 239
    ...or is everyone else ignoring *ucksrme? Every time I see a loser post by him, I just shake my head now and go "idiot".
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    that trucksrme is an idiot...but he does pose good questions...maybe posts the same questions too many times but I think if someone answered it, he would stop. Thing is, are there answers for the questions that he asks?
  • trucksrmetrucksrme Member Posts: 381
    Hmmm... ya paided bout 25% more for a "full size" truck that folks be sayin aint even "full size" and I be the idiot? When that smoke clears way, best be lookin in that mirror, then figure out who that dumb one be. Good luck on this one now!
  • jcmdiejcmdie Member Posts: 594
    Size and price are not related. Shall we compare a chevy Impala and a BMW 540? Size issue only comes into play if the size of the truck means that it can not do its intended job as well. Most of the people buying a Tundra will never use half the bed that it has. By the way I'm no Tundra fan.
  • swobigswobig Member Posts: 634
    two vehicles in two totally different classes. These trucks are all in the same "full size" class. Unlike the Lincoln Blackwood and Cadillac version that would be "luxury class," the Toyota touts itself as a "full size" truck and even compares itself to Chevy, Dodge, Ford in their commercials as having a stronger acceleration. It's an apples to apples comparison brought on by Toyota themselves...
  • meredithmeredith Member Posts: 575
    For purposes of efficiency....

    this topic has been "Frozen." Please continue these discussions in Topic 1870 Tundra vs Big 3. Thanks!

    Front Porch Philosopher
    SUV, Pickups, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.