Toyota V-8 going away

[E365]

Originally Posted by Astro14
Originally Posted by E365
Kinda of a no-brainer. The F-150 with the 3.5 EcoBoost makes much more torque than the V8 Tundra, is rated 5 MPG higher in the EPA combined cycle and is rated to tow an extra 3,000 lbs.

Personally, I couldn't imagine buying another naturally aspirated engine again.


I love turbo engines. I own four cars with turbos.

But I prefer a naturally aspirated V-8 for my truck.

The reasons for the Tundra's poor MPG v. The F-150 are many, but they include weight, transmission speeds, gearing, and aerodynamic tricks.

The turbo engines get excellent MPG under light loads, but when towing, get the same, or worse than a NA engine, as the ECU has to keep it rich under heavy boost to prevent detonation.

The 420 lbft of torque for the 3.5 EB vs the 400 for the 5.7 Tundra isn't a huge difference but where the EB shines is the ability to tune for more HP and Torque, for example, in the Raptor.

Where the EB loses is reliability in service.

And reliability was at the top of my criteria in selecting a truck.


The current version of the 3.5 EcoBoost is at 470 lb-ft for the base trims and 510 lb-ft for the Limited trim (and Raptor).

 

[klt1986]

Originally Posted by E365
Originally Posted by Astro14
Originally Posted by E365
Kinda of a no-brainer. The F-150 with the 3.5 EcoBoost makes much more torque than the V8 Tundra, is rated 5 MPG higher in the EPA combined cycle and is rated to tow an extra 3,000 lbs.

Personally, I couldn't imagine buying another naturally aspirated engine again.


I love turbo engines. I own four cars with turbos.

But I prefer a naturally aspirated V-8 for my truck.

The reasons for the Tundra's poor MPG v. The F-150 are many, but they include weight, transmission speeds, gearing, and aerodynamic tricks.

The turbo engines get excellent MPG under light loads, but when towing, get the same, or worse than a NA engine, as the ECU has to keep it rich under heavy boost to prevent detonation.

The 420 lbft of torque for the 3.5 EB vs the 400 for the 5.7 Tundra isn't a huge difference but where the EB shines is the ability to tune for more HP and Torque, for example, in the Raptor.

Where the EB loses is reliability in service.

And reliability was at the top of my criteria in selecting a truck.


The current version of the 3.5 EcoBoost is at 470 lb-ft for the base trims and 510 lb-ft for the Limited trim (and Raptor).

The H.O. EcoBoost is pretty awesome. I'm wondering if it is basically a tuned version of the standard EB engine?

 

[Astro14]

And how's that engine looking at 100,000 miles?

200,000?

 

[PowerSurge]

Originally Posted by Astro14
And how's that engine looking at 100,000 miles?

200,000?


Exactly. If F-150's (and other makes) lasted as long as Tundras, Ford would go out of business because their truck sales would drop. They can't have that.

 

[CT8]

Originally Posted by Astro14
And how's that engine looking at 100,000 miles?

200,000?

Here is one example and I have owned 5 Toyotas between the wife and I and son.239,000 mile F150 Ecoboost. I have had 4 Ford pick ups as good as my Toyotas.

 

[UG_Passat]

The Toyota Century dropped its V12 motor for a V8-hybrid system, and since the Century has extremely long model cycles, the V8 is going be around for a while.

 

[Jake_J]

What's the point of Ford offering both the 3.5 EcoBoost V6 and the 5.0 V8? In 4x2 mode the EPA numbers are identical, and in 4x4 mode the 3.5 only does 1 mpg better in city and highway (but not combined) so unless real world numbers are much different there is hardly any fuel savings. The power and torque figures are nearly a wash so I can't see the appeal of offering both. I don't know the MSRP's of the trucks but generally the added cost of turbocharging a V6 means you have an engine that isn't any cheaper to make then the V8.

 

[kstanf150]

Originally Posted by CT8
Originally Posted by Astro14
And how's that engine looking at 100,000 miles?

200,000?

Here is one example and I have owned 5 Toyotas between the wife and I and son.239,000 mile F150 Ecoboost. I have had 4 Ford pick ups as good as my Toyotas.



I've owned one Ecoboost F-150 and logged 125K miles with no issues. And as far as I know the guy who owns it now is still driving it trouble free for the last 3 years or at least since I spoke with him a couple of months ago it's was still running fine.
And just FYI the only person I know that owns a Toyota is my brother in-law and and he spends just as much as I do or more keeping his Taco running.
So I'll stick with my Fords !ðŸ‘

 

[Zaedock]

Originally Posted by Jake_J
What's the point of Ford offering both the 3.5 EcoBoost V6 and the 5.0 V8? ......The power and torque figures are nearly a wash so I can't see the appeal of offering both....


A 70 lb/ft difference in torque at a lower RPM is a long way from a wash. The 3.5 EB has a 2500+ lb towing capacity advantage to the 5.0L when both have 3.55 axle gears.

 

[Zaedock]

Originally Posted by PowerSurge
Originally Posted by Astro14
And how's that engine looking at 100,000 miles?

200,000?


Exactly. If F-150's (and other makes) lasted as long as Tundras, Ford would go out of business because their truck sales would drop. They can't have that.



We could always swap the Toyota's drivetrain into the dead Ford when it's frame rots in half. Perfect truck.

 

[4WD]

Testosterone exercise when a drivetrain can tow more than the vehicle handles when wind loads, curves, and CG meet with reality … then they get traded in on $70k Super Duty Fords …

 

[PowerSurge]

Originally Posted by Zaedock
Originally Posted by PowerSurge
Originally Posted by Astro14
And how's that engine looking at 100,000 miles?

200,000?


Exactly. If F-150's (and other makes) lasted as long as Tundras, Ford would go out of business because their truck sales would drop. They can't have that.



We could always swap the Toyota's drivetrain into the dead Ford when it's frame rots in half. Perfect truck.


An aluminum Toyota Tundra would last practically forever. Now if only someone could make a composite frame.

 

[RazorsEdge]

Originally Posted by klt1986
Originally Posted by RazorsEdge
The 2.3 Ford Ecoboost engine in the new Ford Ranger gets better gas mileage plus has better towing capabilities then Toyota's V-8 so it's time to upgrade.



Looks to me like the Ranger's max towing is up to 7,500 pounds where as the Tundra will tow up to 10,200 pounds. If I were going to tow over 5k on a regular basis I sure as heck would not use a Ranger.


https://youtu.be/Uo5quzy32Uo

 

[JHZR2]

Too bad it's not an I6. Something that would be usable in a next revision of the Supra, and be useful and overbuilt for truck duty.

Plus the efficiency of a diesel and the reliability of a very standard and established Toyota engine...

One could hope...

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted by Astro14
And how's that engine looking at 100,000 miles?

200,000?

Looking great. Own 2 of the first year Ecoboost 3.5's, one in a car and the other in the truck.
In the car, it's at 135k and it runs great at 10 years old. No engine work outside a knock sensor under warranty.
In the F150 that tows heavy it's at 104k and still runs great. We did have to put exhaust manifolds on it.

No doubts they will make 200k.

Nothing to fear. I'd buy another in a heartbeat. Its the power characteristics of a Diesel with none of the headaches.

 

[Zaedock]

Originally Posted by JHZR2
Too bad it's not an I6. Something that would be usable in a next revision of the Supra, and be useful and overbuilt for truck duty.

Plus the efficiency of a diesel and the reliability of a very standard and established Toyota engine...

One could hope...


My wife and I went to Jamaica before this virus nonsense started. We went on an off-road "safari" ride with Chukka tours. As it turned out, they use old Toyotas.

As soon as the truck pulled up to the resort, I was in love. When we stopped out in the trail, the guide let me check her out. I couldn't find a date or label anywhere (it is Jamaica!) but the engine was the 3.0L I6 N/A diesel. On the way to the trail he drove up to a scenic overlook. There were 8 of us in the back, including a couple we became friendly with from Wisconsin with the husband a big guy like me, and this truck with it's 5 speed, had no issues hauling our butts up the narrow and steep roads.

Anyway...quick story..carry on.

 

[glock19]

Originally Posted by CT8
Originally Posted by glock19
I wish Ford would make a 5.0L Ecoboost. I think it could put down 450hp, 500lb/ft pretty easily. It would have the benefits of twin turbos with the V8 sound.

The 3,5 in a Raptor puts out that much HP . Lets be looking at 700+ possible HP. and tons of the most important number , torque.


I'm sure they could milk 1,000 hp out of it, the key word was easily. I would love if they would build the 5.0L Ecoboost and just use really low boost (under 10 lbs) to get the numbers I mentioned. That way you would still get the linear torque curve without stressing the engine very much at all.

EDIT: I own a 3.5L Ecoboost and I love it. I do wish it had the V8 sound though.

 

[Oldswagon]

I am not surprised the Toyota V8 is on it's way out. The Tundra has a small piece of the market and it makes more sense to pick one type of engine for the smaller numbers it is produced in compared to the Ford. The twin turbo V6 is probably the better route at producing a powertrain that meets Toyotas reliability standards and boost the fuel economy to more competitive levels. I'd rather have a twin turbo V6 than a V8 with a bunch of fuel economy add-ons, or the hybrid powertrain that Ram offers. But that's me. These features kind of eliminate the simplicity of the V8.

As someone who owns a 5.7L Toyota, I will lament the loss though. They are an awesome engine, with lots of power and pull nicely at high RPM while singing a sweet song. But the fact is they haven't been update since 2007 and it is time to move forward.

One note on the gearing. People love to bring up that the Tundra has 4.30 gears but this isn't 1980 where all trucks used three speed transmissions with essentially the same ratios and the same tire sizes. There are big differences today. In comparing a Tundra to a Ram, the Ram has a 4.71 first gear ratio vs Tundras 3.33. That's a huge difference which more than makes up for the difference in the rear. The fact is the Tundra with its old circa 2007 V8 will run right with a Ram for acceleration and the fuel economy in the real world isn't that drastically different.

When it comes to fuel economy, yeah the Tundra is the least efficient but the difference isn't that big. The way people talk you'd think it sucks as much fuel as a 460 Big Block. Bottom line is my average annual fuel costs wouldn't be significantly cheaper enough for me to consider switching trucks based on fuel economy alone.

 

[SeaJay]

Originally Posted by CT8
Originally Posted by glock19
I wish Ford would make a 5.0L Ecoboost. I think it could put down 450hp, 500lb/ft pretty easily. It would have the benefits of twin turbos with the V8 sound.

The 3,5 in a Raptor puts out that much HP . Lets be looking at 700+ possible HP. and tons of the most important number , torque.


I was just thinking to myself that the most important thing missing from today's market for pickup trucks is a power plant that hits 700HP or better on the dyno. The world will be a much better place when that happens!

 

[RodneyM]

Originally Posted by Zaedock
Originally Posted by JHZR2
Too bad it's not an I6. Something that would be usable in a next revision of the Supra, and be useful and overbuilt for truck duty.

Plus the efficiency of a diesel and the reliability of a very standard and established Toyota engine...

One could hope...


My wife and I went to Jamaica before this virus nonsense started. We went on an off-road "safari" ride with Chukka tours. As it turned out, they use old Toyotas.

As soon as the truck pulled up to the resort, I was in love. When we stopped out in the trail, the guide let me check her out. I couldn't find a date or label anywhere (it is Jamaica!) but the engine was the 3.0L I6 N/A diesel. On the way to the trail he drove up to a scenic overlook. There were 8 of us in the back, including a couple we became friendly with from Wisconsin with the husband a big guy like me, and this truck with it's 5 speed, had no issues hauling our butts up the narrow and steep roads.

Anyway...quick story..carry on.

That was most likely a 4.2 naturally aspirated diesel I6

. The 1HZ engine. Most likely in a land cruiser 70 series still made new to this day but of course we can't have them in the US