I'm definately not interested in 0-60 times either with MY TRUCK.
Those so called goofy little japanese trucks aren't so little anymore my friend.
My 6k lb DC is putting out sports car numbers performance wise, towing and empty. The closest truck in the shootout was your humble GM dummax 3/4 ton.
Try low 6 second 0-60 times; 130' 60-0 stopping distances, not to mention it's at the top for crash test ratings. The almighty oil burners couldn't even match the performance. Not only that, but the tundra got the best mpg in the testing. Go figure.
Some of these numbers are better than your average 2500lb sports car.
Those little goofy japanese trucks......give me a break.
But it's nice knowing how well it did.
Because you don't care right?
Obviously, you didn't care to comment on the stopping distance comparisons. Why's that? After all, at rv.net they all stress the importance of GOOD braking don't they?
I'd say 20-40 feet shorter can mean the difference between crash or no crash, wouldn't you say?
Hey, lets disregard the fact that a Crew Cab Super Duty weighs almost 8,000lbs too. (7,986lbs for slammds15's '05). Because I'm sure that would have no impact on stopping distance.......
You surely weren't thinking about a 10k trailer without brakes were you? That would be pretty stupid. Oh, btw The tundra would be at max capacity at 10k. Would your 3/4 ton turbo diesel be at max as well? I seriously doubt it, so the playing field would need to be equal. Something like 8k-tundra/10k turbo diesel, or max tundra/max TD.
No, a "level playing field" would have the net mass of both setups being the same. That would mean a 10K trailer on the Tundra and an 8K trailer on the diesel to make both "assemblies" the same total weight.
Mainly because according to you, the turbo diesel must be far more superior so it should be able to tow 25% more weight, while maintaining MUCH better mpg and keep the same speed. Right? This would be interesting to see ACTUAL comparisons here, that's for sure.
It is rated to tow more weight, period. Once you step beyond the bounds of your truck's towing capacity, the diesel's performance becomes a touch irrelevant does it not? Since we would have to be working within the confines of the limitations of the Tundra's capacities to make an EQUAL comparison.
I really don't care how hard my truck has to work towing 10k, as long as it does what i ask of it. Which it does quite nicely.
That's because you get rid of your vehicles every four years....
Fuel and repair bill? That was a good one there. Towing for over 20 years with toyota products, and i have yet to see a repair bill. And you were saying?
Yeah, your chance at getting a lemon is very slim with a toyota product. I've had 14 since 88, and 1 has give me problems.
So there. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Pretty easy to have that kind of maintenance history with that kind of vehicle turnover......
Real world towing mileage is quite close with a slight edge to the diesel. Maybe 1-2 mpg from what i've read up on.
As far as a turbo working, yes i understand it now thanks to your expertise. haha I do know they like to burn up quite often if the EGT's get too hot from what i've read. As far as holding in OD while towing; the tundra has 2 overdrive gears and yes, it holds on the flat in 5th just fine. When i come to a good hill, i just expect to drop a gear. No big deal to me, and i hardly even feel it shift. You see, the tundra has a HUGE trans cooler up front unlike the ford's i've seen which were half the size.
Now don't get your panties in a bunch on that. I've only seen a few fords, so maybe that's changed since then. Don't know, i don't pay much attention to ford's.
My Expedition has an extremely large transmission cooler, as do the Super Duty trucks. The "Torqueshift" transmission in the 'duty even has a built-in bypass filtration system.
Not trying to revive the argument started in the other thread (OK, I guess I am, but beyond this post, I'm not participating), but you are contradicting your info from the other thread with your posts in this thread....