Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion Automotive news and discussion about upcoming vehicles

New Tundra 5.7L = 401 lb-ft

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 06:24 PM
  #16  
99SilverSS's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,463
From: SoCal
Nice engine and it seems to make great power but it does nothing for the Tundras ugly looks!
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 06:39 PM
  #17  
bossco's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
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.
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 07:04 PM
  #18  
Threxx's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 1998
Posts: 4,320
From: Memphis
Originally Posted by bossco
Funny thing is they had a 5.4 in 2000 that laid down 385 hp/385tq with 4 valves and no VVT.
In the Cobra R? Wasn't it also physically large, heavy, and very rough around the edges (acceptable in a race car like the Cobra R, not in a truck, though)

As a bonus feature I'd guess it was probably pretty expensive to build.
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 07:08 PM
  #19  
bossco's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
Originally Posted by Threxx
In the Cobra R? Wasn't it also physically large, heavy, and very rough around the edges (acceptable in a race car like the Cobra R, not in a truck, though)

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.
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 07:46 PM
  #20  
OutsiderIROC-Z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,688
From: Middle of Kansas
Originally Posted by 94LightningGal
It sounds like a nice engine.

Can anyone here just swallow their pride and admit that???
Some will, some won't.
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 07:59 PM
  #21  
Andrew R's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 319
From: Ottawa, KS
Originally Posted by OutsiderIROC-Z
Some will, some won't.
I one who will....great numbers out of that V8
Im not to big on the looks, but a new design tends to grow on me with time..
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 08:13 PM
  #22  
OutsiderIROC-Z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,688
From: Middle of Kansas
Originally Posted by Andrew Rhines
I one who will....great numbers out of that V8
I agree.
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 08:56 PM
  #23  
94LightningGal's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,178
From: Payson, AZ USA
Originally Posted by 96_Camaro_B4C
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).
First off, where in hell did I say ANYTHING about Ford here??? I think we all know the engines that Ford has available to it at this time.

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..............
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 09:15 PM
  #24  
Slappy3243's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,398
From: Fairfax Station, VA. Formally Long Island :(
A truck with as much torque as my GTO
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 10:06 PM
  #25  
number77's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,428
The new Tundra will outperform everything. I just hope GM doesn't rely on customer loyalty to keep bringing in their sales.
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 10:25 PM
  #26  
number77's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,428
Originally Posted by Slappy3243
A truck with as much torque as my GTO
Makes ya wonder what they have cooking up in the sports car melting pot?
Old Jan 7, 2007 | 10:30 PM
  #27  
bossco's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
Originally Posted by number77
Makes ya wonder what they have cooking up in the sports car melting pot?
probably something about as visually exciting as a camry coupe, then again if it was fitted with that 5.7 truck engine and was RWD, one might be able to stomach the inevitable blandness.
Old Jan 8, 2007 | 12:08 AM
  #28  
Slappy3243's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,398
From: Fairfax Station, VA. Formally Long Island :(


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.
Old Jan 8, 2007 | 12:52 AM
  #29  
Compstall's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,442
From: Tacoma, WA, USA
Imports have always made great power with their V6's in recent years. All they had to do is slap on 2 more cylinders and step right in the middle of the pickup wars, and did.
Old Jan 8, 2007 | 01:26 AM
  #30  
SSbaby's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
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?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:45 AM.