2013 Tundra vs 2013 Ford

fordmantpw

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2013
Messages
2,043
Location
Central MO
Tractor
John Deere 2720
deerefan,

congrats & enjoy your truck! sorry we got a bit carried away with new trucks, but you gotta admit this is pretty interesting stuff!

have fun!

Agreed! I think the next 5-10 years is going to be really exciting for the light truck market. Fuel economy is going to become even more important with the pending CAFE changes, and it will be interesting to see what each manufacturer does to make the grade.

On a side note, Ram outsold Silverado in March for the first time in who knows how many years. Ram sold a couple hundred more trucks in February than Chevy did...42k or so compared to Ford's 70k. The battle for second place is on, and it's going to be exciting to watch!
 

TSO

Elite Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
4,439
Location
SouthEast Michigan
Tractor
Massey 1652 HST Cab
Well since I started the thread and have now owned the Tundra for over 6 months, let me provide an update that may help. Overall, we are averaging 17mpg. This is the 5.7l, 4.30 gears 2wd crew max. It is the quickest 1/2 ton I have owned or ridden in. To be clear, I have not ridden in a new hemi. We have 9200 miles on it. It has been in the shop once for a sticking radio button. It tows very well, handles the load well. I pulled my 97 F150 ext cab 4x4 to the shop to get the spark plug blowout issue resolved. With trailer and truck, I was near 7k pounds (this includes fuel and tool box with tools on the F150). When shopping, it came down to this truck and a F150 CC with the 5.0. Really no comparison on power. The Tundra felt bigger, stronger and frankly looked better imo. They also made me a better deal on price and trade in.

Congrats! That 5.7 is a great motor.
 

Spindifferent

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Messages
437
Location
Central Texas
Tractor
JD 3520, JD X584
Well since I started the thread and have now owned the Tundra for over 6 months, let me provide an update that may help. Overall, we are averaging 17mpg. This is the 5.7l, 4.30 gears 2wd crew max. It is the quickest 1/2 ton I have owned or ridden in. To be clear, I have not ridden in a new hemi. We have 9200 miles on it. It has been in the shop once for a sticking radio button. It tows very well, handles the load well. I pulled my 97 F150 ext cab 4x4 to the shop to get the spark plug blowout issue resolved. With trailer and truck, I was near 7k pounds (this includes fuel and tool box with tools on the F150). When shopping, it came down to this truck and a F150 CC with the 5.0. Really no comparison on power. The Tundra felt bigger, stronger and frankly looked better imo. They also made me a better deal on price and trade in.

Excellent mpg! My 2013 Tacoma with the 4.0l v6 averages 20mpg.

Toyota should take care of you. Been very happy with the Tacoma.
 

jejeosborne

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Messages
1,679
Location
Southern Indiana
Tractor
Kubota/B7800
Sure, I concur & understand, as Mechanical Engineer.

But that's also why I can't understand how a spark-ignited, stoichiometric combustion engine can produce that torque (read: high cylinder pressure & temperature) at low rpm without detonating. Defies thermodynamics. Is it GDI that injects fuel just prior to spark? :confused:

That is the beauty of direct injection. It doesn't rely on the intake valve to determine when fuel is introduced into the chamber. Fuel timing, duration , and even multiple injections per burn cycle open up new opportunities not otherwise possible.

Yes cylinder pressures are high but no different than a high compression turbo diesel. Just have to design it to take the stress a diesel sees.
 

jejeosborne

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Messages
1,679
Location
Southern Indiana
Tractor
Kubota/B7800
Thanks Bullitt.

Alright, well we can see the baseline for the other graph was lifted from this one from Ford, which is reported to be an engine dyno. What's the source and standard for the other three makes.

From that Article we can also see that the wheel dyno profile does not look anything like the numbers Ford supplies, driveline losses aside.

<img src="http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=368466"/>

Maybe this will be helpful describing the difficulties of using a chassis dyno with turbo charged engines. Read the geek techie notes. Loads added to the engine are met with more boost but with a lag. If a constant load that doesn't have to be chased is applied, then you will be real output values. I think of it as climbing a long hill with the turbos spooled up.

http://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/track-tests/2011-mercedes-benz-s63-amg-dyno-tested.html
 

DeereMann

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
806
Location
Oak Grove, MN
Tractor
John Deere 1026R
That is the beauty of direct injection. It doesn't rely on the intake valve to determine when fuel is introduced into the chamber. Fuel timing, duration , and even multiple injections per burn cycle open up new opportunities not otherwise possible.

Yes cylinder pressures are high but no different than a high compression turbo diesel. Just have to design it to take the stress a diesel sees.

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.
 

DeereMann

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
806
Location
Oak Grove, MN
Tractor
John Deere 1026R
Agreed! I think the next 5-10 years is going to be really exciting for the light truck market. Fuel economy is going to become even more important with the pending CAFE changes, and it will be interesting to see what each manufacturer does to make the grade.

On a side note, Ram outsold Silverado in March for the first time in who knows how many years. Ram sold a couple hundred more trucks in February than Chevy did...42k or so compared to Ford's 70k. The battle for second place is on, and it's going to be exciting to watch!

Yup - and I'm one of those that converted from Chevy to Ram....no contest.

P.S. - yes, I owned Fords, too. Hence my interest in this EB engine.
 

aczlan

Super Star Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
17,713
Location
Northern Fingerlakes region of NY, USA
Tractor
Case 480F LL, Kubota L3830GST, B7500HST, BX2660
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.
Probably has to do with the cost of the emissions system on the diesel and the fact that big diesels are more spendy, so buyers are conditioned to thing that a diesel should cost more.

Aaron Z
 

Diamondpilot

Super Star Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
16,326
Location
Daleville, IN
Tractor
Jinma 254/284 Ford 861 Powermaster at work
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.

It's less costly because of mass production vs diesel counterparts are still relatively built in small numbers plus the emissions stuff.

Also they can just charge more for something that is seen as a premium.

Chris
 

DeereMann

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
806
Location
Oak Grove, MN
Tractor
John Deere 1026R
It's less costly because of mass production vs diesel counterparts are still relatively built in small numbers plus the emissions stuff.

Also they can just charge more for something that is seen as a premium.

Chris

Good point, DP -

So I guess it's EB vs. the light diesels. Watching with great interest.

For me, I'm pretty satisfied with the HEMI. It's got enough torque for moderate towing, and good mileage empty. And 'cost thousands less' than EB. :rolleyes:
 
 
Top