New Tundra 5.7L = 401 lb-ft
hey there goes that whatever other than truck update as Ford scrambles to reinvent the next F series truck os they can try and compete. Funny thing is they had a 5.4 in 2000 that laid down 385 hp/385tq with 4 valves and no VVT.
Last edited by bossco; Jan 7, 2007 at 06:44 PM.
As a bonus feature I'd guess it was probably pretty expensive to build.
Okay, so its only peak numbers, but the heads are there and with some VVT luv you could take the edge off. Granted a good block can be worth some serious power (maybe on the order of 30 or so HP), but its all in the heads y'know. Hell I guess Ford could trump them all and just shove the GT500 motor in there, nobody batts an eye at 50k+ trucks anymore.
Yeah, we can "swallow our pride". I'm sure it is a nice engine. I'm glad to see that it's power and torque advantage is almost nil, however, and even with two more gears in the gear box, it has basically no fuel economy advantage (1 mpg better in 2wd, 1 mpg worse in 4x4) than the 6.0L small block with comparable output.
Just 'cause Ford doesn't currently have an engine that can stack up doesn't mean you should cave in and tell us GM fans to drink the Toyota Kool Aid...

By the way, per the press release I quoted above, the 5.7L is apparently going to be available in all cab configurations (though I bet it will be a lot easier to find 4.7L in the reg cab models on dealer lots).
Just 'cause Ford doesn't currently have an engine that can stack up doesn't mean you should cave in and tell us GM fans to drink the Toyota Kool Aid...

By the way, per the press release I quoted above, the 5.7L is apparently going to be available in all cab configurations (though I bet it will be a lot easier to find 4.7L in the reg cab models on dealer lots).
Next, I call a truck hideous............... but with a nice engine................. and I'm drinking the Toyota koolaid??? Allrightythen.
Just admit that the truck offers a few things that the GMT900's don't. It is also behind in a few areas. Its not that difficult.............. and noones manhood is threatened.
Maybe I missed this.............. but is the 6.0 with 380hp available on every configuration of Silverado??? Maybe its just me, but I thought it was only available on the Denali (someone please correct me if I am wrong............ so many engines, so many configurations).
PS, when everyone was debating the cylinder deactivation that was offered on the 5.3............... 1 mpg was a big deal.............. and now its not. Just one more of those things that make you go Hmmmmm..............

403 hp @ 5700 rpm 417 ft-lbs. @ 4300 rpm, 87 octane, six-speed transmission
Toyota did well but looks like GM already has an answer. That Tundra is ugly as hell though. I am at a loss of words about the interior.
GM V8s are in a class of their own. Now it seems, so are Toyota's...
the two 'classes' now go toe-to-toe. I still prefer the simplicity, power, lightness and fuel economy of the OHV V8 but you have to give Toyota credit for declaring their intentions with 5.7L of V8 muscle and 6 spd auto. It kinda puts Ford's 4.6, 5.4L efforts to shame, dunnit?
the two 'classes' now go toe-to-toe. I still prefer the simplicity, power, lightness and fuel economy of the OHV V8 but you have to give Toyota credit for declaring their intentions with 5.7L of V8 muscle and 6 spd auto. It kinda puts Ford's 4.6, 5.4L efforts to shame, dunnit?


