Silver Creek durability test Silverado Tundra F150.

[the Teuton]

Why does the Toyota just look so unsettled in both wheel hop and chassis flex?

The Chevy looked like it had too stiff a suspension, but the truck frame was doing well.  Being the heaviest and best-supported truck there, the Ford had better handle the test the best.

[GoCougs]

I don't believe that the FX4 is available with 20" wheels. The Tundra would have worse as well with TRD and 20"s (a combination that is definitely available).

20" wheels are optional on the FX4 per Ford's website.

[etypeJohn]

I find it ironic that the domestics are running tests of ride compliance and chassis stiffness while Toyota fans are running tests like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2yLIQ0pRcM&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HQcJuvK73E&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pavXEwCJow&mode=related&search=

It's like a complete role reversal.

Of course one is more likely to encounter a rough road then they would a tug of war in everyday truck use.? ?

Instead of looking for excuses and manufacturer's plots you guys are missing one other possibility:? Ford just might be building the better truck.? ?

[etypeJohn]

Uh.....yeah. The one Ford came up with.

Regardless, ask yourself this:  If you had to drive down a rough road which bed would you rather have your payload in?  Ford's, Toyota's or Chevrolet's"?

[Tave]

Regardless, ask yourself this:? If you had to drive down a rough road which bed would you rather have your payload in?? Ford's, Toyota's or Chevrolet's"?

Dodge's



And don't get me wrong, Ford may very well make the better truck, and Bounty the superior paper-towel. Just don't expect any of their commercials to come out and say, "We suck and others do it better."

[SaltyDog]

One wonders why Dodge wasn't included.

Who?

[Jus2shy]

Dodge was included, just check page 3, I posted the video of an older Silver Creek test. The Brand Spankin' new Tundra frame still shakes around a lot. I wonder if this brand new Tundra is still the same frame (just with a little bit of cutting and lengthening)? Or was it a total ground up re-design?

[Secret Chimp]

I wonder if this brand new Tundra is still the same frame (just with a little bit of cutting and lengthening)? Or was it a total ground up re-design?

I know the answer to that question, and all I've done is read a print ad for the truck.

[Jus2shy]

I don't care about print ads anymore, they're all deceptive using little "Technicalities" to support whatever they put on the page. I'd like to look at an older Tundra frame from 2005 and compare it to one of the brand new ones.

[the Teuton]

On another note, HAHA!

[CJ]

They're not exactly small trucks.  I saw one go by me today and was thinking "Damn!  That's as huge truck!"

[Catman]

I was behind a new Tundra the other day as it went through a series of pot holes and pavement ripples.  The bed shakes excessively just like the vid.   

[the_koof]

For those who bring up the tug of war, have you seen an old Bronco II pull a Ram?

[S204STi]

On another note, HAHA!

My old Nissan dealer had a similar issue when the Titan came out.  They had to purchase a whole new alignment rack because of it.  The issue is that these dealers have never had a need for anything bigger, and historically Toyota has never made vehicles this large, so many of the short-sighted shops are having to pay that price.  It's part of the game.

[565]

I saw quite a few Tundras on the road this past week.  I dare say even more than the new Silverados.   The Tundras look great on the road, huge with alot of menacing presence.  By comparision the GM's look sedate and weak.  I also don't like the way the Silverados have that exposed paint in the wheel wells,  looks really cheap IMO.

I was following one particular Tundra and it completely dwarfed me in the Z06, I felt I could drive under that thing.  That 5.7 liter engine absolutely moves out, and that truck was picking it's way through traffic with complete ease.  We both came to a stop at the stop sign at the on ramp (the Rt-15 highway in CT has a stop sign at the on ramp, in heavier traffic with a slower car it's basically necessary to pull an all out 0-60 run to successfully merge).  I knew that Tundra truck was going to go WOT at the start.  The truck chirped it's wheels and reared back a bit and just hauled ass.  I couldn't resist starting hard and swinging around him to show him what GM's pushrod V8's could do, but considering he was in a huge truck and me in a light coupe, it was an empty victory.  Toyota has thrown down the gauntlet with this 5.7 liter monster.  The domestics need to step up and match or exceed this grunt, if anything just to get our bragging rights back.  Talking about bed shake and ride comfort is great and all, it just doesn't seem very truckish, or manly, or American.  Boasting to your buddies that your Ford's bed doesn't shake and rides buttery smooth just doesn't have the same ring to it.

[giant_mtb]

I saw quite a few Tundras on the road this past week.  I dare say even more than the new Silverados.   The Tundras look great on the road, huge with alot of menacing presence.  By comparision the GM's look sedate and weak.  I also don't like the way the Silverados have that exposed paint in the wheel wells,  looks really cheap IMO.

I was following one particular Tundra and it completely dwarfed me in the Z06, I felt I could drive under that thing.  That 5.7 liter engine absolutely moves out, and that truck was picking it's way through traffic with complete ease.  We both came to a stop at the stop sign at the on ramp (the Rt-15 highway in CT has a stop sign at the on ramp, in heavier traffic with a slower car it's basically necessary to pull an all out 0-60 run to successfully merge).  I knew that Tundra truck was going to go WOT at the start.  The truck chirped it's wheels and reared back a bit and just hauled ass.  I couldn't resist starting hard and swinging around him to show him what GM's pushrod V8's could do, but considering he was in a huge truck and me in a light coupe, it was an empty victory.  Toyota has thrown down the gauntlet with this 5.7 liter monster.  The domestics need to step up and match or exceed this grunt, if anything just to get our bragging rights back.  Talking about bed shake and ride comfort is great and all, it just doesn't seem very truckish, or manly, or American.  Boasting to your buddies that your Ford's bed doesn't shake and rides buttery smooth just doesn't have the same ring to it.

Cool post, good story.

[SVT32V]

I saw quite a few Tundras on the road this past week.  I dare say even more than the new Silverados.   The Tundras look great on the road, huge with alot of menacing presence.  By comparision the GM's look sedate and weak.  I also don't like the way the Silverados have that exposed paint in the wheel wells,  looks really cheap IMO.

I was following one particular Tundra and it completely dwarfed me in the Z06, I felt I could drive under that thing.  That 5.7 liter engine absolutely moves out, and that truck was picking it's way through traffic with complete ease.  We both came to a stop at the stop sign at the on ramp (the Rt-15 highway in CT has a stop sign at the on ramp, in heavier traffic with a slower car it's basically necessary to pull an all out 0-60 run to successfully merge).  I knew that Tundra truck was going to go WOT at the start.  The truck chirped it's wheels and reared back a bit and just hauled ass.  I couldn't resist starting hard and swinging around him to show him what GM's pushrod V8's could do, but considering he was in a huge truck and me in a light coupe, it was an empty victory.  Toyota has thrown down the gauntlet with this 5.7 liter monster.  The domestics need to step up and match or exceed this grunt, if anything just to get our bragging rights back.  Talking about bed shake and ride comfort is great and all, it just doesn't seem very truckish, or manly, or American.  Boasting to your buddies that your Ford's bed doesn't shake and rides buttery smooth just doesn't have the same ring to it.

Except of course the bed shake is directly related to its ability to haul loads, which is the purpose of a work truck.  I suspect people would buy other more suitable vehicles for acceleration, rather than a tow/work vehicle.   

I don't see the tundra 5.7 greatly outmatching the hemi or variants of the LSx engine in terms of hp or torque.  Even with the 5.4 Ford, the torque is similar, and its towing capacity is higher, even if down on hp.

I doubt whatever tundra hp advantage will last for very long.  All of the other manufacturer's have higher hp naturally aspirated variants of the engines in the work trucks that can quickly be added to the mix.  The only exception is the Ford 5.4, soon to be replaced with the Boss engines anyway.

In fact, I doubt toyota will get much more out of 5.7 liters, the cylinder liners are already siamesed.  Most likely, indicating there is not much room left to bore, so the size is limited.  The other engines don't have this issue, except the better selling Ford, which will have the Boss.

[565]

Except of course the bed shake is directly related to its ability to haul loads, which is the purpose of a work truck.? I suspect people would buy other more suitable vehicles for acceleration, rather than a tow/work vehicle.? ?

I don't see the tundra 5.7 greatly outmatching the hemi or variants of the LSx engine in terms of hp or torque.? Even with the 5.4 Ford, the torque is similar, and its towing capacity is higher, even if down on hp.

I doubt whatever tundra hp advantage will last for very long.? All of the other manufacturer's have higher hp naturally aspirated variants of the engines in the work trucks that can quickly be added to the mix.? The only exception is the Ford 5.4, soon to be replaced with the Boss engines anyway.

In fact, I doubt toyota will get much more out of 5.7 liters, the cylinder liners are already siamesed.? Most likely, indicating there is not much room left to bore, so the size is limited.? The other engines don't have this issue, except the better selling Ford, which will have the Boss.

I want to see more power out of the domestics as much as the next guy, but they need to start building them into 1/2 tons instead of just talking about it.? As is, the 317hp Titan will outrun the 360HP Silverado.? Edmunds did a comparo that included a dyno test, and found that GM's V8 was crippled by this stupid system that doesn't give you full power unless you keep it floored for more than a certain amount of time, (basically when your passing opportunity has passed).? And on the dyno, the Titan made more power all along the rev range except the very high range, and the Silverado only managed to exceed the Titan's output for a brief section.?



WTF were GM thinking when they mapped the Silverado's output.? Those 361 horses are a sham, they only come in the last 200rpm blast before redline.? Even my Z06's output graph isn't that peaky.? It's completely unsuited for a truck. No wonder the Titan beat the Silverado in acceleration, and the Tundra simply blew them both away.? The Ford wouldn't even be visible in the rear view.

[GoCougs]

Except of course the bed shake is directly related to its ability to haul loads, which is the purpose of a work truck. I suspect people would buy other more suitable vehicles for acceleration, rather than a tow/work vehicle.

I don't see the tundra 5.7 greatly outmatching the hemi or variants of the LSx engine in terms of hp or torque. Even with the 5.4 Ford, the torque is similar, and its towing capacity is higher, even if down on hp.

I doubt whatever tundra hp advantage will last for very long. All of the other manufacturer's have higher hp naturally aspirated variants of the engines in the work trucks that can quickly be added to the mix. The only exception is the Ford 5.4, soon to be replaced with the Boss engines anyway.

In fact, I doubt toyota will get much more out of 5.7 liters, the cylinder liners are already siamesed. Most likely, indicating there is not much room left to bore, so the size is limited. The other engines don't have this issue, except the better selling Ford, which will have the Boss.

The Tundra 5.7L is a variant of the 4.7L (both use the same bore and bore spacing); only a 1/2" of more stroke will yield an additional 40 cubic inches (.67 liter). I have no clue if that's in the works, but as with just about any engine, additional cubes are fairly easy to be had.

The issue with the Hemi 6.1L and GM 6.2L is that thought they crest well above the 400hp mark, they are both peaky engines,whose suitability in a truck would be dubious. Without real VVT/L valve technologies, their powerbands won't be nearly as meaty, either. When GM and Chrysler upgrade their truck engines, they won't be using these. If they insist on staying pushrod, they'll have to use something along the lines of the Viper's cam-in-a-cam VVT to fatten up the powerband.

Ford's modular V8s have been on the market for a decade, and have lagged the majority of the time, whereas they had the basic foundation to be way out in front. Ford fanboys have the rumor mill churning to the tune of 425hp for the new engine. My guess would be 375 - 400 hp, but I guess we'll see.

[TBR]

Of course if they would just get their act together and put the 6AT in the F-150 the current 300hp 5.4 would be plenty good enough and would have a chance at class leading fuel economy, something that is much more important than acceleration in this day and age.

[omicron]

I want to see more power out of the domestics as much as the next guy, but they need to start building them into 1/2 tons instead of just talking about it.  As is, the 317hp Titan will outrun the 360HP Silverado.  Edmunds did a comparo that included a dyno test, and found that GM's V8 was crippled by this stupid system that doesn't give you full power unless you keep it floored for more than a certain amount of time, (basically when your passing opportunity has passed).  And on the dyno, the Titan made more power all along the rev range except the very high range, and the Silverado only managed to exceed the Titan's output for a brief section. 



WTF were GM thinking when they mapped the Silverado's output.  Those 361 horses are a sham, they only come in the last 200rpm blast before redline.  Even my Z06's output graph isn't that peaky.  It's completely unsuited for a truck. No wonder the Titan beat the Silverado in acceleration, and the Tundra simply blew them both away.  The Ford wouldn't even be visible in the rear view.

What the hell is that Silverado's powerband doing? BoringboringboringboringboringboringPOWER.

[Catman]

The Chevrolet's power looks pretty flat and peaky.  Not the best spread for a truck.  Regardless, any of these engines would suffice for most people and the engine would be the last concern if I was shopping this segment.

[giant_mtb]

Just stick a 4.3L Vortec V-6 in all of 'em. 

[SJ_GTI]

Looking at that power graph, there really isn't much point to the 6.0L V8 when equipped with the 4-speed automatic. Just stick with the 5.3L (which has plenty of power IMHO) and save your gas.

Cadillacs and GMC's Sierra can be had with the 6.2L V8 and the 6-speed automatic. if you want real power from GM, those are your only real choice for now I guess.

[SVT32V]

The Tundra 5.7L is a variant of the 4.7L (both use the same bore and bore spacing); only a 1/2" of more stroke will yield an additional 40 cubic inches (.67 liter). I have no clue if that's in the works, but as with just about any engine, additional cubes are fairly easy to be had.

Not necessarily, there is only so much room to stroke an engine before the rods are too long for the area in which they can move.  Further, as stroke increases, so does piston speed and rotating mass.  Increased piston speed and rotating mass requires stronger rods and pistons, actually the entire bottom end needs to be strengthened, which in turns adds significant costs.  This is true for a small engine, but especially true for a large engine with its increased moving mass. 

Ford 150s are selling just fine with their low output engines.  It would not be difficult to add a 3-valve version of the 6.8 L V10, currently with an output is 362 hp (266 kW) and 457 ft?lbf (620 N?m).  It would be more than competitive, more hp and tq would also be had easily.

[SVT32V]

I want to see more power out of the domestics as much as the next guy, but they need to start building them into 1/2 tons instead of just talking about it.  As is, the 317hp Titan will outrun the 360HP Silverado.  Edmunds did a comparo that included a dyno test, and found that GM's V8 was crippled by this stupid system that doesn't give you full power unless you keep it floored for more than a certain amount of time, (basically when your passing opportunity has passed).  And on the dyno, the Titan made more power all along the rev range except the very high range, and the Silverado only managed to exceed the Titan's output for a brief section. 



WTF were GM thinking when they mapped the Silverado's output.  Those 361 horses are a sham, they only come in the last 200rpm blast before redline.  Even my Z06's output graph isn't that peaky.  It's completely unsuited for a truck. No wonder the Titan beat the Silverado in acceleration, and the Tundra simply blew them both away.  The Ford wouldn't even be visible in the rear view.

Acceleration for work trucks probably shouldn't be the primary metric for deciding what is best.

You don't really believe that the Titan only has 317 hp do you?  I am sure it is underrated, the 4 spd auto is not helping the acceleration of a silverado either.

Larger versions of the hemi should be more than suited for work truck use and can be cammed to give more power and more usable torque.

[GoCougs]

Not necessarily, there is only so much room to stroke an engine before the rods are too long for the area in which they can move.? Further, as stroke increases, so does piston speed and rotating mass.? Increased piston speed and rotating mass requires stronger rods and pistons, actually the entire bottom end needs to be strengthened, which in turns adds significant costs.? This is true for a small engine, but especially true for a large engine with its increased moving mass.?

Ford 150s are selling just fine with their low output engines.? It would not be difficult to add a 3-valve version of the 6.8 L V10, currently with an output is 362 hp (266 kW) and 457 ft?lbf (620 N?m).? It would be more than competitive, more hp and tq would also be had easily.

Deck height increases are used to accomodate more stroke. It has to be engineered correctly, but it is not impossible.

The Ford F-150 are not selling fine. The F-series is down the most of any full-size truck; it has lost quite a bit of market share in 2007.

The V10 is a dinosaur along with the modular V8s. It's a shame, really. They've abused these engines for 10 years.

[SVT32V]

Deck height increases are used to accomodate more stroke. It has to be engineered correctly, but it is not impossible.

The Ford F-150 are not selling fine. The F-series is down the most of any full-size truck; it has lost quite a bit of market share in 2007.

The V10 is a dinosaur along with the modular V8s. It's a shame, really. They've abused these engines for 10 years.

Increasing deck height requires new block molds, not impossible but not trivial by any stretch of the imagination.  Increasing deck height will not address the issues concerning piston speed.

The F-series is the oldest design of any of the competition so it is not surprising it has lost market share to several new designs.  In spite of that it is still putting up more than adequate sales numbers, numbers that the Tundra can only dream about.

Dinosaur, there is nothing more advanced about the toyota engine that the modular engine family cannot incorporate into its present design.  Direct injection, 4V, 4 cams and variable valve timing are simply bolt on. 

[CJ]

SVT32V, the dyno doesn't lie.

[GoCougs]

Increasing deck height requires new block molds, not impossible but not trivial by any stretch of the imagination.? Increasing deck height will not address the issues concerning piston speed.

The F-series is the oldest design of any of the competition so it is not surprising it has lost market share to several new designs.? In spite of that it is still putting up more than adequate sales numbers, numbers that the Tundra can only dream about.

Dinosaur, there is nothing more advanced about the toyota engine that the modular engine family cannot incorporate into its present design.? Direct injection, 4V, 4 cams and variable valve timing are simply bolt on.?

There are engines on the market that have far greater piston speeds (larger stroke/bore ratios, and higher redlines). Besides, the primary (stress) issue is piston acceleration, not piston speed; enter a discussion of rod length.

I'd bet that Ford would disagree that the F-series is selling "adequately". It has lost more market share than any other full-sizer (and is down more). And the Tundra's dream is 200,000 units/year, which it is on track to exceed.

When a SOHC 6.8L V10 is outpowered by a pushrod 6.0L V8, yep, it's a dinosaur. There have been too many manufacturing, design and electronic advances the last decade to bandaid the modular V8/V10, hence the new Boss V8 is an all-new design. LOL - and watch Ford go with two valve heads again in an OHC engine. But I doubt that...