Don't trust the EPA what is on the sticker -- they are always on the higher side. My highlander said 20/24 and can go to 24/28 (on magic driving conditions) -- I don't get anything more than 18/20 MPG.
NEW Toyota Tundra - 381hp 401lbs of tq
- Thread starter buster
- Start date
- Status
Don't trust the EPA what is on the sticker -- they are always on the higher side. My highlander said 20/24 and can go to 24/28 (on magic driving conditions) -- I don't get anything more than 18/20 MPG.
To me, horsepower in a truck doesn't mean squat. What counts is load carrying capacity, towing ability, and low-end torque. None of which Toyota has.
from Edmunds link above: "
The towing package adds cooling, extensive trailer wiring, extendable towing mirrors and upgraded rear springs, and substitutes a 4.3:1 rear-axle ratio for the standard 4.1:1 setup. As a result, this configuration achieves another best-in-class: a tow rating of 10,800 pounds. That's no fluke either, as our 4x4 Double Cab with tow package is rated for 10,300 pounds."
So, it looks like the towing ability is there?
JHZR2
Staff member
345, 367, 381 hp are all more or less the same... why should I care? One is not going to make such an amazing new amount of functionality that it is earth shattering compared to the other... it only impresses those who want to put #@$%! on stickers on their back window.
If Im reqally hauling stuff, that I need a LOT of power, ill buy a diesel. if I want lots of HP, Ill buy a corvette. To think that you have a rocket or a super hauler because you have 381 hp or 401 lb-ft of torque is ridiculous.
JMH
If Im reqally hauling stuff, that I need a LOT of power, ill buy a diesel. if I want lots of HP, Ill buy a corvette. To think that you have a rocket or a super hauler because you have 381 hp or 401 lb-ft of torque is ridiculous.
JMH
381 horsepower at 5,600 rpm and a whopping 401 pound-feet at 3,600 revs
That's not a truck.
381 hp at 3600 rpm and 401 pound feet at 2600 rpm begins to qualify as a truck.
Ed
That's not a truck.
381 hp at 3600 rpm and 401 pound feet at 2600 rpm begins to qualify as a truck.
Ed
Good point, I'd like to see horsepower and torque numbers at 2000rpm or less where trucks actually need it. I personally can't imagine a better pickup than the new GM trucks. They look great inside and out and have all kinds of great features. If I were drag racing I might consider the tundra.
I will agree that the Tundra's first generation dash does indeed look cheap and feel cheap but to date Mom's 2002 Tundra is still squeak and rattle free even going over washboards and rail tracks. It is vualt like once the doors are closed. It has only been in in for warranty work one time. The front axle acuator was defective.
I agree with you on this and the previous post. As I recall (in my limited reading on the industry), market reserch revealed that a lot of import drivers had a half ton pickup in their driveway as well. Your point about Toyo offering an alternative to the big 3 is well taken. IMO, that is what Honda just did to try and take advantage of brand loyalty.
So Toyo did there thing with the T100. I think it was suitable for a daily driver, which is what most half tons are. Nissan took a real shot at the american trucks by trying to beat there specs in HP, low end torque, angle of approach, ground clearence, cab size, towing capacity etc. Toyota is doing that now IMO.
I'm going off topic a little here and apologize for that. I have had toyo's and so has my family. They have been totally problem free. When I saw the new truck numbers I actually considered it. They are indeed impressive, especially if you consider them to say, the Dodge Ram, when it came out. I new they would get good money for the trucks though. I watch the diesel market pretty closely and have considered the Dodge and GM products repeatedly.
I would be interested to know what you know about the Titan oil burners as far as engine supplier goes. I hear V6 turbo diesel also. Feel free to PM.
Anyway, sorry if I went off topic guys. The new Toyo numbers are outragiously impressive. I just flipped over to Edmunds.com and saw this:
Under specs:
EPA Fuel Economy (mpg): 14 City/18 Highway
Edmunds Observed (mpg): 14.3
EPA Fuel Economy (mpg): 14 City/18 Highway
Edmunds Observed (mpg): 14.3
I have seen the new Tundra up close, and I tell you, they will sell.....
Yeah, and the new Camry lost its coveted 'fit and finish' award to the new Kia Optima! I think Toyota's starting to worry too much about quantity, instead of quality. I think they've become lax in build quality, while the South Koreans are catching up very quickly, and in this case, winning...Just my .02
The new Tundra is built in San Antonio Texas.
Toyota is doing better than good at what they do. If they succeed at this big truck stuff it won't be good news for the Detroit Three. Do you think Ford and Dodge are working up a new model?
I have yet to see "So'n'So Masonry Services" on the side of any Toyota truck.
Toyota has been very slow to get the American version of a Pick-up correct. The T-100 (an attempt at Ford original F-100 ?) although a reliable truck, loved by its few owners, was a failure. The original Tundra is still only 7/8s of a domestic. We have to rememder these trucks are designed in a country that is small with restrictions on vehicle size{this is the reason why the first trucks to these shores were so narrow and why the Tacoma in its original version was such) and they also are short on natural resources and do not like waste. The marketing group at Toyota underestimatted our appetite for truely over-sized vehicles. The new Titan was probably watched closely and Toyota followed suit. They will have it right , just in time for $4.00/Gal fuel??
The new Chevy and GMC pickups have V-8 engines with the folowing horsepower and torque:
4.8 liter 295 hp @ 5600 305 torque @ 4800
5.3 liter 320 hp @ 5200 340 torque @ 4200
6.0 liter 366 hp @ 5500 380 torque @ 4300
So much for the Chevies having power down low in the rpm range.
- Status
