2013 Tundra vs 2013 Ford

[fordmantpw]

You are correct, they should not. However the shape of the plots tells me they are from a chassis dyno and the peak values should be down by 20 to 25% from advertised numbers from driveline losses. Do you see where I'm going with this..

No, not really. The shape of the graph should be similar regardless, once you take out the 20-25% driveline loss.

 

[sd455dan]

I totally understand the difference between a chassis dyno and an engine brake dyno, that's why I'm saying the plots from your graph are comparing data using two different techniques which is not relevant.

Yeah i can hear the yelling from here if GM or Dodge used a brake dyno for theirs and then stuck Ford on a chassis dyno and then printed up a dyno sheet as if they were all tested in an identical manner AND on the same dyno

 

[fordmantpw]

Yeah i can hear the yelling from here if GM or Dodge used a brake dyno for theirs and then stuck Ford on a chassis dyno and then printed up a dyno sheet as if they were all tested in an identical manner AND on the same dyno

Yep, just like if Ford had done the same thing. Point is, it doesn't look like that is the case. And, according to the poster who posted the graph, it came from PUTC, not from Ford, or GM, or Ram.

 

[sd455dan]

Yep, just like if Ford had done the same thing. Point is, it doesn't look like that is the case. And, according to the poster who posted the graph, it came from PUTC, not from Ford, or GM, or Ram.

well then it would appear the only way to be sure would be to find the actual procedure and list how all the engines or vehicles were tested - hopefully either ALL engine or ALL chassis and on the same dyno

 

[Diamondpilot]

That's it? No driveability report? Come on! Did you tow with it? Does your dad tow with it? What does your dad say? :drool: I wonder what the price delta is today? My buddy bought the V8 5.0L a couple years ago because of te cost delta & newness reliability concern. He has been very happy with his V8. He is like me, occasional moderate tower.

My dad very rarely tows with it. I ordered it the way I would want one. It rides great but in my opinion all Super Crew F150's always have. It handles loads great. We put a 3000# pallet of salt in it with no issues. As for towing I did a comparison on here about 2 years ago using identical 20' enclosed tandem axle trailers loaded to 6000# over a 300 mile trip using my 08 Tiitan and his EB. I got 9 mpg hand calculated and he got 13. There is a big right up on this site about it.

Chris

 

[jejeosborne]

I totally understand the difference between a chassis dyno and an engine brake dyno, that's why I'm saying the plots from your graph are comparing data using two different techniques which is not relevant.

If you don't trust the dyno charts, look at real world towing and 0-60 acceleration times that have been published. You will find the ecoboost out performing most any engine under 6.2 liters.

 

[TSO]

If you don't trust the dyno charts, look at real world towing and 0-60 acceleration times that have been published. You will find the ecoboost out performing most any engine under 6.2 liters.

Can you post some of these comparisons you are talking about?

 

[fordmantpw]

Can you post some of these comparisons you are talking about?

Go to PickupTrucks.com - New & Used Trucks, Truck News and Reviews and read until your heart's content. Or, go to New & Used Trucks, SUVs Reviews at the Pickup & SUV Authority - Truck Trend Magazine and read some more. Plenty out there.

 

[Kyle_in_Tex]

I hear ya - GDI solves a lot of sparky issues. What I find difficult to believe is building a gasoline engine as heavy as a diesel engine for diesel cylinder pressures, and still being "thousands" of dollars less costly than a diesel engine.

If you want to see something cool (as a motorhead), look at the Mazda Skyactive technology. 14:1 compression ration gas engines.

 

[94BULLITT]

If you want to see something cool (as a motorhead), look at the Mazda Skyactive technology. 14:1 compression ration gas engines.

The 14:1 compression ratio on those Mazda's amazes me. I thought i read somewhere that Mazda had a diesel that was 11:1 and very efficient.