Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

The new tundra comes out swinging with 381 horses

scotthendersonfan

By scotthendersonfan
in Toyota

 Share

Recommended Posts

scotthendersonfan Newbie

scotthendersonfan

Posted
Posted

Toyota opens new front in truck war

With new Texas factory, Japanese maker takes aim at Ford and Chevy

Indeed, the new 2007 Tundra is much larger and more powerful than its predecessor, with a 5.7-liter, 381-horsepower V-8 engine, compared with the old 271 horses. Trucks start rolling off the San Antonio assembly line next month and hit the showrooms early next year.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15319160/from/RS.5/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Newbiewar Newbie

Newbiewar

Posted
Posted

Toyota opens new front in truck war

With new Texas factory, Japanese maker takes aim at Ford and Chevy

Indeed, the new 2007 Tundra is much larger and more powerful than its predecessor, with a 5.7-liter, 381-horsepower V-8 engine, compared with the old 271 horses. Trucks start rolling off the San Antonio assembly line next month and hit the showrooms early next year.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15319160/from/RS.5/

208661[/snapback]

its not about power... its about power & efficency...

Dodge has the SRT8 or the SRT10 even... that outpower the vortecMax...

the whats the fuel ecconomy?

the chevy has 367 hp... and 15-19 fuel ecconomy...

the 5.3 has 315 hp/338 tq with 16/22 (1 mpg worse then the 5cyl colorodo of 17/23)

the 4.8 has 16/20 mpg at 290hp...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scotthendersonfan Newbie

scotthendersonfan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I'm not a truck guy so I don't know what's considered great in trucks.

But talking about efficiency, the 4.6-liter V8 in the Lexus LS460 puts out 380 HP and 370 lb-ft of torque. (also gets 19mpg city and 27mpg highway)

So I don't know if that would be indicative of what we can expect in terms of torque and mileage for the 2007 Tundra

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigPontiac Newbie

BigPontiac

Posted
Posted

I'm not a truck guy so I don't know what's considered great in trucks.

But talking about efficiency, the 4.6-liter V8 in the Lexus LS460 puts out 380 HP and 370 lb-ft of torque. (also gets 19mpg city and 27mpg highway)

So I don't know if that would be indicative of what we can expect in terms of torque and mileage for the 2007 Tundra

208666[/snapback]

The 2006 Tundra 4wd is rated at 15 city, 18 highway with the 4.7 liter V-8 and 5 speed automatic transmission. The 4.7 is rated at 271-hp.

[sources: fueleconomy.gov and toyota.com]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigPontiac Newbie

BigPontiac

Posted
Posted

True, but then again, Toyota has demonstrated how fast they can progress in engineering from one generation to the next.

Consider the Lexus LS430 and the LS460.

LS430

4.3 Liter V8

290 HP

320 lb-ft

18/25

LS460

4.6 Liter V8

380 HP

370 lb-ft

19/27

Or consider Camry

2006 Camry

3.3 Liter V6

210 HP

220 lb-ft

21/29

2007 Camry

3.5-liter V6

268 HP

248 lb-ft

22/31

208674[/snapback]

The upcoming Tundra is a much larger truck than the current model. The new model is slightly larger than the current generation GM fullsize pickups if you review the dimensions. Also the payload and towing capacity are increasing as well. With all that new weight and size, I wouldn't expect better mileage in the new model...I'd expect the MPG to be in the same range as the current truck as that's where most of the competitors trucks are.

For comparison, my 2000 Sierra x-cab 4x4 with the 5.3 V-8 is rated at 15/18 with 285hp. It's a larger and heavier vehicle than the current Tundra, only has a 4 speed automatic vs. the Tundra's 5 speed, and lacks the DOHC and VVTi features the Tundra has...yet they're rated the same for MPG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
loki

loki

Posted
Posted

True, but then again, Toyota has demonstrated how fast they can progress in engineering from one generation to the next.

Consider the Lexus LS430 and the LS460.

LS430

4.3 Liter V8

290 HP

320 lb-ft

18/25

LS460

4.6 Liter V8

380 HP

370 lb-ft

19/27

Or consider Camry

2006 Camry

3.3 Liter V6

210 HP

220 lb-ft

21/29

2007 Camry

3.5-liter V6

268 HP

248 lb-ft

22/31

208674[/snapback]

some weights and transmissions used would help a lot too...

nice they only give a HP number! HAH! i bet the torque will be substantial...but how will the curve look compared to the hemis and MAXs and fords.... uh....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Intrepidation

Intrepidation

Posted
Posted

Here's another thing, this will likely be the top model, right?

Wake me up when Toyota gives the details on its midline V8(s) that will directly compete with GM's 5.3L, Ford's 5.4L and Dodge's 5.7L?

That's where the money will be made.

208697[/snapback]

The 5.7 is the top engine on the 1500 model save the SRT, but that's not a work truck. same with the 5.4...the 5.3 i dunno about, haven't looked closely at the new Sliverado's specs.

If those numbers are true, I will admit it's impressive...but still the last truck I'd ever consider. (well maybe above the Titan, but the Titan at least is innovative).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
toyoguy Newbie

toyoguy

Posted
Posted (edited)

Posted Imagehttp://www.tundrasolutions.com/photopost/s...00/ppuser/43503

http://www.tundrasolutions.com/photopost/d...00/IMG_0628.jpg

http://www.tundrasolutions.com/photopost/d...00/IMG_0640.jpg

http://www.tundrasolutions.com/photopost/d...00/IMG_0637.jpg

http://www.tundrasolutions.com/photopost/d...00/IMG_0636.jpg

http://www.tundrasolutions.com/photopost/d...00/IMG_0632.jpg

http://www.tundrasolutions.com/photopost/d...00/IMG_0633.jpg

http://www.tundrasolutions.com/photopost/d...00/IMG_0614.jpg

http://www.tundrasolutions.com/photopost/d...00/IMG_0609.jpg

Edited by toyoguy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CARBIZ Newbie

CARBIZ

Posted
Posted

Now are we talking REAL, SAE horsepower numbers, or Toyota's horsepower numbers? You know, the ones that have a padded 20 or 30 horsepower?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CARBIZ Newbie

CARBIZ

Posted
Posted

Ridiculous in what way? That Toyota and Honda didn't mislead the crap out of us last year with their published horsepower numbers?

Nothing to do with paranoia. Every time Toyota hauls out another vehicle, the media lines up to praise it and sing doom and gloom for Detroit.

But remember this: in 1995 when the T-100 came out (and it was the end of Detroit), the Big Three had 87% of the truck market. Last year, after an onslaught of models and redesigns from Japan and elsewhere, the Big 2.5 still have 85% of the market.

I have no doubt that Japan Inc will eventually figure it out, but not today. Just look at the Titan's sales and quality rankings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
andy82471 Newbie

andy82471

Posted
Posted

Ridiculous in what way?  That Toyota and Honda didn't mislead the crap out of us last year with their published horsepower numbers?

  Nothing to do with paranoia.  Every time Toyota hauls out another vehicle, the media lines up to praise it and sing doom and gloom for Detroit.

  But remember this: in 1995 when the T-100 came out (and it was the end of Detroit), the Big Three had 87% of the truck market.  Last year, after an onslaught of models and redesigns from Japan and elsewhere, the Big 2.5 still have 85% of the market.

  I have no doubt that Japan Inc will eventually figure it out, but not today.  Just look at the Titan's sales and quality rankings.

209015[/snapback]

I believe all manufacturers are using SAE figure since MY 2006. I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
91z4me Newbie

91z4me

Posted
Posted

Do you have even the faintest clue about what happened there? If Toyota had actually misled people, don't you think they'd have a million lawsuits on their hands by now?

209023[/snapback]

What happened is that the new ratings are using a different standard rather than manufacturers using their own standard. It made it easier to compare engines. Their ratings went down and GMs engines went up which means that GM's standards for testing output numbers were closer to that of the new SAE standard than that of Toyota.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Northstar Newbie

Northstar

Posted
Posted

Do you have even the faintest clue about what happened there? If Toyota had actually misled people, don't you think they'd have a million lawsuits on their hands by now?

209023[/snapback]

They don't have a million law suits because Toyota could have said "we rated it by using this method" and their number would have been perfectly justifiable under than method, even if it's not the correct way of doing it.

What ridiculous responses.

209012[/snapback]

Speak for yourself...

But talking about efficiency, the 4.6-liter V8 in the Lexus LS460 puts out 380 HP and 370 lb-ft of torque. (also gets 19mpg city and 27mpg highway)

So I don't know if that would be indicative of what we can expect in terms of torque and mileage for the 2007 Tundra

208666[/snapback]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
regfootball Community Regular

regfootball

Posted
Posted (edited)

haha, looks like toyota has joined the 'cheap plastic' ranks now!

my GOD that is some cheap plastic and buttons! This might turn out worse than the FJ cruiser's interior!

Edited by regfootball
Link to comment
Share on other sites
caddycruiser Newbie

caddycruiser

Posted
Posted

the seat bottom is very short too.

209060[/snapback]

Let's remember, this is just the extended cab with the small back doors. Looks pretty comparable to others of the same--and the real crew should be a lot larger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigPontiac Newbie

BigPontiac

Posted
Posted

Let's remember, this is just the extended cab with the small back doors.  Looks pretty comparable to others of the same--and the real crew should be a lot larger.

209064[/snapback]

It's too bad they copied the x-cab door design from Dodge and not the GM, Ford, Nissan version. I really like the rear-hinged design on my Sierra a lot better. That one feature has huge dealbreaker potential for me when I shop for my next truck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Northstar Newbie

Northstar

Posted
Posted

Don't be silly and argue just for the sake of arguing. What part of that is ridiculous? I claimed that I didn't know much about trucks already and that I didn't know if a car's evolution in engine design would be representative. For crying out loud, I'm claiming ignorance there.

209062[/snapback]

You said "I don't know if that is indicative of what we can expect in terms of torque and mileage for the 2007 Tundra."

Surely you do not know so little about trucks to not know that no truck gets gas mileage as good as a similarly powered car. That's what is ridiculous. If you don't know much about trucks, then that's fine, but if that's the case then you also shouldn't be guesstimating the mileage of the Tundra based on the LS460. The only thing they have in common is a V8. The LS has more gears, a lot less weight, better aerodynamics, and no doubt the engine is tuned differently for a car vs. truck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FUTURE_OF_GM Newbie

FUTURE_OF_GM

Posted
Posted

haha, looks like toyota has joined the 'cheap plastic' ranks now!

my GOD that is some cheap plastic and buttons!  This might turn out worse than the FJ cruiser's interior!

209057[/snapback]

Nah.... The media will gloss the new Tundras interior over just like they glossed the CRAP-tastic interior of the Ridgeline over.

Remember: It's a Toyota and it'll get treated as such.... Oh, and remember too, it's the end of the world for Detroit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Slideways Newbie

Slideways

Posted
Posted

From what I heard from a Toyota Engineer, those horsepower ratings are including optional TRD parts. Your going to have to buy all of the options to get that power.

210102[/snapback]

I don't know what engineer you talked to, but he was wrong. I don't know why the number got leaked, the embargo is still on for another month and a half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GMman Newbie

GMman

Posted
Posted

So toyota went back to the drawing board on that interior? Why does it still look so cheap and ugly? All those different colors make the overdone shapes on the console and instrument panel look goofy too. And is that a GAP on the center stack??? Oh my!! I didn't think japanese vehicles had GAPs between any panels... That must mean the build quality is bad!

The crossover exhaust pipe looks like it's going to hit the drive shaft..but maybe it's just the angle the photo was taken from. The differential looks backwards too, with all the bolts on the front of it. With that design, I guess owners won't be able to install an aftermarket aluminum differential cover that keeps the axle cool during heavy towing, etc... I bet all that superior japanese engineering came up with something better.

As for MPG. I noticed the little ridgeline that is supposed to be so great is averaging 16 mpg in real world driving. 16 mpg in a honda or toyota is better somehow than 16 mpg in a Domestic vehicle. :rolleyes: This tundra isn't going to set any standards with it's mpg and certainly not it's styling. I'm sure they'll be a hybrid version pretty soon... So what's up with toyota releying on rebates to sell that thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
toyoguy Newbie

toyoguy

Posted
Posted (edited)

The differential looks backwards too, with all the bolts on the front of it.  With that design, I guess owners won't be able to install an aftermarket aluminum differential cover that keeps the axle cool during heavy towing, etc...

Posted Image

That is a different design.

As for MPG.  I noticed the little ridgeline that is supposed to be so great is averaging 16 mpg in real world driving.  16 mpg in a honda or toyota is better somehow than 16 mpg in a Domestic vehicle. :rolleyes:  This tundra isn't going to set any standards with it's mpg and certainly not it's styling.  I'm sure they'll be a hybrid version pretty soon...   So what's up with toyota releying on rebates to sell that thing?

217077[/snapback]

Ever heard of the Tacoma?

Edited by toyoguy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
toyoguy Newbie

toyoguy

Posted
Posted (edited)

You showed the back, he said the front.

217079[/snapback]

huh?

He was referign to this pic.

Posted Image

He said the bolts were on the front which is odd considering they are usually screwed into the differential cover at the rear. The Tundra's design is unique in that regard.

So now Toyota can use the excuse that the Tacoma gets respectable mileage to overlook the fact that the Tundra might get poor mileage? Riiiiight.

217079[/snapback]

He mentioned the Ridgeline's poor mileage which has nothing to do with Toyota.

Edited by toyoguy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slideways Newbie

Slideways

Posted
Posted

This idea is neither new, nor unique. My '67 C10 has a heavy-duty rear axle option and has both a removable ring and pinion and an inspection cover. Ever heard of the Ford 9-inch? It's the most popular rear-end housing for racing, hot rods, 4x4s, and just about every aftermarket application. The advantage is quick gear changes. You can carry ring and pinions already assembled in the carrier and change them as conditions warrant. I don't see how anyone could bash the Tundra based on this aspect, styling yes, but not the rear axle. It's got a huge ring gear, so unlike some trucks out there (Titan) it will likely hold up well to abuse. I think it's one of the truck's best features.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GMman Newbie

GMman

Posted
Posted

A lot of people who carefully maintain their trucks and use them for real work and heavy towing install aftermarket aluminum differential covers, like the mag-hytec. They not only allow the diff to run much cooler, but are capable of holding several quarts more fluid and have a dipstick to perform regular checks of the fluid. It's just something that really works at prolonging the life of the differential. I made the comment only because the picture of it was there. It struck me as odd, which is no suprise because it's a toyota.

About the MPG thing.....nobody says a friggin' word about the ridgeline getting 16 mpg. All they can talk about is that it's a honda and the fit and finish is so great.

Now when a Suburban gets 16 mpg, it's a monstorus, polluting, eviromentally unfriendly gas hog. It's the double standard thing....you know japanese=good, USA=bad. I'll bet you a nickel the tundra's mileage won't be anything to write home about....and it will be overlooked because......it's a toyota...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings