@Admiral_Peck7, some straight 6’s could. But back then the gearing was also crazy low and not a whole lot of top speed or quickness off the line. But that’s also how I want a 4WD truck to behave. Lots of ground clearance, geared low to crawl up a hill and/or tow and/or haul whatever I need it to do.
@J. R. You'll find a straight 6 can do the job just as well when done right, I mean shit look at all the truck from the 60s-80s, straight 6's galore. Plus straight 6's cool better than their V cousins.
@Admiral_Peck7, the day they stop putting V-8’s in full size trucks is the day that I stop buying new, full size trucks! I’ll be 48 at the end of this month and live in a small, rural town in Northeast Colorado. I only drive about 4,000 miles a year to maybe 6,000 at the most if I want to travel. I’m sure that I could buy a few used trucks in good condition to last me several decades. Especially out here where it’s predominantly all trucks that have V-8’s and there are lots of farms!
Something else to keep in mind is that naturally aspirated engines suffer more at high elevations. I would expect the v8 to be more efficient at lower elevations.
@Gary Sorensen you're right in that, proportionally, 1 mpg is a valid number to consider at such low overall mpg numbers... but at the end of the day, we're talking about $10 in gas savings on a fill up. You're more likely to swing a bigger difference across varying gas station prices. $124 vs $114 is basically irrelevant for most people.
One thing I believe one needs to remember when comparing MPG is 1 MPG difference is a lot more relivant when compt single digit MPG results. Example going fry 9 MPG to 10 MPG is about a 10% improvement which would be significantly improved. But to contrast going from 30 MPG to 31 MPG would yield only about a 3% improvement. So a 1 MPG in the single digit area I would say is definitely a significant difference being a.10 % or more difference.
I for one thoroughly enjoy watching all of your videos. Super intuitive and fun to see y’all working together on this kind of work. By far TFL is one of my favorite channels.
The turbos in the Tundra definitely help at altitude. Slowing down by 5mph would likely yield significantly better fuel mileage. Fun video, thanks guys!
@D S $3800 in cam phasers at least every 60k miles is STILL a thing with that motor. That’s a crap load of gas in repair money. I’ll never own another EcoBoost and that’s a bummer because it hauls well.
I would love to see the manufactures come out with turbo V8's! I also love that they finally put small diesel in the 1/2 tons a few years back. If they really want good fuel economy and power they need to make the hybrids diesels!
You won’t see twin turbo V8s. You will see electric trucks. And hybrid trucks. And smaller turbo engine. Diesel will not be used long term for 1/2 ton trucks or passenger cars - they make too much soot and NOX - both bad for human health.
@Ed Shultz here’s how it works. The energy comes from the fuel. It doesn’t really care much if the fuel goes through 4, 6, or 8 cylinders. It takes a lot of energy to move a big truck and trailer. The smaller turbo motors use less fuel at low loads, but when they need to tow a trailer and move a truck at highway speeds they will all be using fuel. The difference between the Ram and Tundra probably has more to do with the gearing and tires and aerodynamics than the engine configuration.
Interesting test! Look forward to Mopar’s turbo inline 6 coming out even though will miss the sweet sound of the hemi. I thought the YOTA would be considerably more efficient than the Ram. The Rebel GT is sweet, but 71k is over the top. Thanks for sharing!
My concern with everything going forced indeuction is long term durability. The Hemi V8 has proven to be almost bullet proof! We'll see how these smaller power plants hold up as they rack up miles. Nothings worse than an expensive failure on a high mileage engine that forces a very difficult decision.
They are close enough on mpg that you need more samples to determine if the advantage Toyota exhibits towing will hold up under all conditions. Great video! Both trucks are gorgeous. $71,000 would make me run.
@Ken Sporalsky not sure. Not my truck. Surprised it needs a max towing package for a 3500 lb camper. I had a powerstroke f250 until last fall. It never overheated. Just broke down so often I sold it. In 2021 alone it needed two injectors in different break downs, and ebp, and a catalytic converter replaced. 3 times in one year it left me stranded waiting for a tow truck. So it's gone. It was a joy to drive when it was running but it's not worth the hassle.
Yes, the altitude was a definite advantage for the forced induction engine. But also, the cool air helped the turbo charged motor more. Heat causes forced induction motors to use more fuel to cool the turbo down, so a cold day not only makes a turbo more effective, it makes it more efficient.
@Populist gen x'er channel in-line 6 should be a smooth engine. One cylinder head should make manufacturing cheaper. An in line 6 will be less compact than a v6, but these trucks have plenty of room under the hood.
Less weight and an inline is an improvement over a V engine overall for sure. I'm doing an engine build , dual intake cams E85 and 14 PSI on my inline 27 year old LLO inline 4 cylinder and my engine only weighs 220 lbs, with the lost foam method..lol In theory one guy can pick the engine up...lol Love how effortless it is vs my old camaro that was close to 4000 Lbs with a cast iron V8...lol But the torque in the Tundra is pretty substantial on this video.
I also just wanted to say TFL truck is my absolute favorite channel for everything trucks. I love the depth you guys go into with each truck and your honesty with everything you guys put out. Keep the great content coming as always 💪
You know I have to disagree on this one. I did like the extra storage space I owned a 2016 and a 2019 ram. However I just didn't really get used to that dial
Great test! I guess my F150 Eccoboost, max tow with the 5-Star tune gets better towing mpg then I thought, it right inline with the Tundra. Towing a big tall box like a camper pushes a lot of air and really puts a load on these trucks! Much different then towing an open trailer.
Hated the gearshift knob on my ram. Ram hemi also always had to rev high for power so didn't like that either similar to the old (pre DI) ford 5.0 in the f150. My 5.7 tundra got about 10mpg, ford 3.5 eb got about 8.5mpg, and cummins ram got about 11mpg towing my 5k camp trailer near sea level. I never towed that trailer with my hemi ram, but would have expected the hemi to be reved quite high going up any grades and get eb type fuel mileage towing. New toyota turbo 6 in tundra is pretty impressive to me so far. Seems to be setup for low to mid rpm power.
@Rottingboards For towing, I've gotten 7.8-9.8 mpg average. That's with a 32' foot, 12 foot tall, 8500 lb toy hauler. I've never had a lack of power, but as Jay states, it is much hard to tow against a strong cold wind! Not towing my milage has varied at because I don't drive that much anymore. I've averaging 15 in the city to 19-20 on the highway. This is with 3.55 gears and stock tire size.
Its hard to tell what different trucks get towing. My 5Star tuned F150 Ecoboost max-tow got anywhere from 6.7 mpg to 10.8 mpg towing my 5500 lb travel trailer. Depended on the conditions I was towing in. A tail wind would get me over 10 and a headwind could push be down in the 7's. The 6.7 I got was an average over 9 hours towing from South Dakota to Utah as a winter storm was blowing into WY. 9 hours straight of fighting a 30+ mph headwind. In those conditions at that elevation I am not sure the Ram could have realistically held 65 mph. My Ecoboost was working very hard just to maintain speed on the flats and was WOT on the climbs.
I appreciate that you guys are being fairly scientific with your real world testing. I'm picking up my Tundra in a few days and can't wait to hitch up to the camper now!
I've had 3 Ram 1500's with the 5.7 Hemi and I really, REALLY love that engine. I hope Ram is smart enough to keep the Hemi available after they offer the turbo inline 6, like Ford did with the 5.0.
@needabettername I probably would not have had 3 and really, really loved them if I had any issues. Traded in the first one at 99k miles. Leased the second. And bought the 3rd after turning in the leased one. All 3 were Big Horn, 4x4, crew cabs, so no failures and no upgrades either. Just really, really loved them.
@Kooberto Humperdink Getting electric involved is a given for torque. I was referring to the average ICE PU. The availability of power without adding more complexity while aiming for better overall fuel economy is a smart platform. And why not, the average driver does not use the power band very often. I want to see how the same displacement for Chevy holds up with their 2.7 four cyl. If only I had that kind of power available in my simple '87 Dakota 4 cyl. that couldn't get out of its own way. lol
I think it is smart to naturally have the power as it is needed and then have the fuel economy during normal driving. There is no cylinder de-activation gimmicks and the like.
Nathan had mentioned that the Ecoboost’s rev higher when towing than the new Tundra was. In my experience with my F150 Ecoboost, it will cruise in 10th gear while towing my 25 foot camper. 10th gear at 100-110 kmh it rev’s at 1700-1800 rpms. It can hold 10th on flat ground. Head wind and hills it will down shift to 9th and sometimes 8th. But will almost always stay below 2500 rpms while cruising.
@Chris Kreple I put 190k on 2018 ecoboost... they put in the dual injection in 2017 I think? 2017 or 2018. No complaints with the engine- it ran great. Turbos failed around 140-150k... needed timing chain shortly after. Couple other things, I forget... the turbo failures are natural and will be part of owning this type of engine. We've already seen some issues with the new Tundra's turbos, but I agree, it's not going to be the same as it was in terms of reliability but will probably be "fine" for the long haul as well. I can't badmouth the ecoboost, at least since they added the direct and port... but I'd still stick with port only with larger displacement and no forced induction because I won't need to speed any time in the shop with that engine until 300k+ (or deal with any product growing pains/TSBs for the drivetrain for that matter)
@Sly I have and f150 with an ecoboost which has worked well for 120,000 miles. My last truck was an 09 Tacoma with the 4.0. The simpler Tacoma certainly felt more bullet proof. The F150 gets better mileage even in a much bigger truck.
@Chris Kreple it's not any different than any other modern 6 with dual direct and port. It's not oldschool reliable anymore bottom line. If you know how these engines work you know that
@Tristan Hipps these modern turbo engines have small turbos sized to make peak torque across a wide and relatively low rpm range. They are not revving high, but they are making peak torque at 1500 rpms up to maybe 3500/4000. Almost a diesel like torque band.
I have a 2020 rebel and love it, does everything, and goes anywhere I need. My last Toyota was a 2005 tundra, which was a real nice truck right up to when the transmission fell out.
What I'd like to see you two do as a comparison is a 2nd gen tundra vs the new 3rd gen tundra, for potential buyers like myself who own a 2nd gen tundra(2011 Tundra SR5 TRD) to see if it's worth the money to switch rides. If this is at all possible. I know the new tundra is more efficient but how much more in a apples to apples test.
As an owner of 2010 and 2016 Tundra that I use for work and tow often I'd like to see this as well but either way I won't be getting the new Tundra for at least 2-3 years to let them work out the bugs hopefully
Thanks for doing this comparison. I’ve always thought that all the trucks in today’s market are fairly equal. Just buy the one that has the features you like and the one that fits your butt. Being a guy that transitioned from F-150’s to a Tundra in 2004, I think over the long run “cost of ownership” is less with a Tundra than the other trucks. It will be interesting if the 3rd gen Tundra can maintain its reliability. The comments about street tires vs all terrain tires are very valid, but most of us understand that TFL can’t spend all their time swapping tires and gear ratios, in other words “run what you brung” or what the manufacturers give you. Like I’ve said before, I’d like to see TFL do your mileage test over a longer loop, take I-76 to Fort Morgan and return. That way you wouldn’t have to deal with the construction zone and would have less traffic. Can’t wait for the next comparison, Andre’s F-150 hybrid vs the Tundra.
I tried buying a Tundra this week, and I found every dealer (23 total) within a 100 mile radius marking up the Tundra well over MSRP. The cheapest markup was $8k on a SR5 with 2WD marketed as “off-road ready” due to upgraded tires. Toyota and Ram, can you please address dealer markups like Ford and GM recently have. At this point it’s impossible to find local Toyota dealers even willing to take a custom order.
I live near San Diego and bought a brand new Tundra SR5 4X4 Long Bed from a great dealer in North Platte Nebraska. It was at list price, zero markup. I then paid $2000 to have it delivered to my house. You can do the same.
The chip shortage is actually affecting Toyota now. Their build philosophy only built what they could get parts for vs Chevy who built a bunch of trucks are awaiting chips
The new tundra has issues the dealer here already had 2 returned blown motor is what they said. I'll wait for 23 24. Stick with my 14 tundra I'm fine. Mark ups what a rip off
Would love to see you test the most equivalent equipped packages/trucks if possible. Gear rations impact MPG as much or more than engine, tires (the Rebel is very aggressive A/T whereas Tundra is a street A/T), fuel (100% or 10% ethanol), etc. I assume it in not 100% gas since you are in CO, but I have noticed a big difference in some platforms. Anyway there are several variables impacting MPG, so it is an interesting test, but you can bias the data based on what 'other' variables from V8 vs turbo-V6. The YOTA TRD is more equivalent to a RAM Limited 4x4 with skid plates and those prices would be similar too. My experience is a Rebel verse any level 4x4 (Bighorn, Larame, Limited) is worse MPG, empty/towing. It is set up with features and tuned for 4x4 performance, not street performance.
@Eric Mackison mind you I went from stock All-Seasons up to the Duratracs. (2019 Ram Hemi 275/65/18.) Went from 9.5l/100km on the highway to 11l/100km.
@Christopher Richards that's pretty significant. I used to always run an aggressive all terrain but I stick to a more highway oriented tread nowadays. My truck is an 8,500# pavement princess and I'm not afraid to admit it.
Great video. I tow with a 2013 tundra sr5 2wd double cab 5.7 . Does decent on mileage considering my toy haulers pretty heavy. Thanks for the videos. Will definitely help me on my decision when I buy a new truck. Keep em coming.
Hi, I love your professionalism and accuracy. Great info AND entertainment. One thing though, if you tested a 73 G Toyota against a 73 G Ram., I think results would indicate a different result. I think a 15 G difference in trucks should be a BIG factor when testing. Keep up the awesome work.
One thing to keep in mind is that boosted gasoline engines require significant reduction in air/fuel ratio which inherently reduces fuel efficiency under load. However this is often balanced out by the reduction of engine friction (less cylinders) and RPM. Good test, gents. 👍🏻
@justin weaver the older one I believe it ... new one idk, lots of new tech with low quality parts and nearly zero under body coating same as the others soooo both might just end parked next to each other while your rethinking what just happened with that $60k ...
BL Dontmatter you obviously have no mechanical background, I remember when the GM 6.0 would just crap out, I've replaced so many of them. I remember doing tons of cylinder heads on Ford 5.4, have a friend at a Ford dealership that says he replaces coyote 5.0 NA V-8 3 to 1 over Ecoboost due to oil consumption. Do you want talk about how turbos are bad still or are you on your way to Jr high school? Oh ya, I must give you the point that turbos aren't in stuff with a lot of miles, oh wait EVERY BIG RIG SEMI, HEAVY DUTY OFF ROAD EQUIPMENT, TRACTORS, LOADERS, BULL DOZERS, CRANES, SNOWPLOWS, AND SHOULD I MENTION BOATS OR AIRCRAFT?? All of these manufacturers must be wrong for putting turbos on..they must not want these to last long so they put turbos on them....ya sure. BL, stop for a second and like what a turbo does, take in a little more oxygen (your brain obviously needs it) and realize turbos are here to stay because of the advantages they give. The reason you think turbo bad is because you have a very narrow mind because it's not yet learned, so before you get mad because you're reading this and you're just wrong, go drive a new Ecoboost 3.5 and tell me how it compares to the 5.0 or a Ram with the Hemi, (soon being replaced by turbo straight 6) and the GM with any V-8 they offer and tell me which one has the most torque. If you're actually able to read all of this also ask yourself when did Toyota build an unreliable truck??? Lol, I'm not a Toyota fan but if they put a turbo truck engine out, it's going to be more reliable.
I would like to see both truck do hard towing for 400k and then see which motor is still holding up. Durability over the long haul will always be more profitable
👍 great video, I have a 2022 ram 3500 with a 6.4 hemi and 373 gears and the 8-speed transmission. I have ran a 290 mile loop a few times and have come up with 17.8 MPG with the factory tires and wheels. I added the leveling kit and went up from the factory wheels which measure about 32.5 in up to tires that are about 34 in when they are a little low on air. After adding the aftermarket wheels and tires about a week ago I made that loop which is going down to the Minneapolis St Paul airport from where I live at about 290 miles it was snowy and I made the trip in four-wheel drive the entire way and ended up at about 12 miles per gallon there was a lot of stop and go traffic due to the bad weather I believe I could have pulled 13 miles per gallon except I got stuck driving about 15 to 20 miles at about 15 miles per hour stuck behind plow trucks. My brother has a 2019 half ton ram warlock that gets a little bit better MPG than that one does and it has the hemi also. I would bet my 3500 ram would get better miles per gallon than both of those towing that trailer. And the price was between the two of them at around 61,000 MSRP . This is the first winter I have owned it and just around town in the snow with my snow plow on and snow plowing I get around 8.3 miles per gallon that is not strictly snow plowing that is a mix . And that is awesome miles per gallon... My 1999 1-ton single axle 454 truck probably gets up to 5 miles per gallon plowing. And my 2002 2500 HD 8.1 L with the Allison transmission gets up to 7 miles per gallon in two wheel drive on the highway in the summertime, and gets the same miles per gallon towing. Trucks have come a long way.
That's about equal to my gutless 3.55 v6 Dakota that weighs 2500lbs less. Not too bad. 13-14 city maybe 17 hwy on a good day with a tailwind. I don't like the truck but it has low miles no rust and it's paid for
The straight 6 turbo would strike the best compromise for me. The simplicity of having one head and set of cams intake etc, along with new hybrid electric-turbos will be potentially amazing engines! As long as they over build the internals like you would a turbo-diesel.
@Jerry Horn The 2JZ and RB30DETT, the engines in the Supra, and Skyline are probably the most famous online turbo I-6 engines. BMW and MB both have and continue to offer turbo variants of straight 6s too. Those lead me to think you might not be right. Can you point me to info that confirms your claim?
I really think these new transmissions are sweet for getting the best mpg. My 2018 f-150 consistently gets 21-22 on my commute in northern co. (It's a 3.5 eb)
@uli wehner Diesels are a completely different breed than turbo gas engines. There's a reason if nobody built turbo gas trucks, but only turbo diesels.
@ANDREA yes. And commercial trucks have had turbos since the 70s or longer.... cars since th 80s.... pickup diesels since the 90s... cars and trucks last 300k miles nowadays regardless of engines. Turbo or not.
@uli wehner The problem of a turbo engine is that you have all that more stuff and things that can brake. Also the have more Hp per liter ... so on so forth.
That’s not enough of a difference in fuel mileage to make me want to switch from a v8 to twin turbo for towing. Ask any mechanic what they think about the ecoboost motors. Great test. Very interesting!
Looks like I'll be keeping my 2020 Tundra. I get almost the same MPG without towing and get better towing MPG. I get close to 10 MPG towing a 7000lb 32' Travel Trailer. May consider getting the 2022 if the hybrid has way better MPG.
For all the new technology you can't break the laws of physics. My lifted gx470 also gets around 18mpg though with our 5k lb aerodynamic camping trailer i manage 15mpg.
@Ben Dino I would never buy a new tundra unless I won the lottery, I generally buy a truck/ car 5 years old. That why I was disappointed that they did not include a v8. Down the line will need a used 2022 tundra.
Guy's. I have a 2022 Rebel with 4300 miles on the clock. Using your method of fueling up after a 100 mile trip with 87 octane on the PA Turnpike, I got 17.9 MPG. The same trip with 89 octane, I got 20.1. It seems to like 89. I am going to try it with 91 octane next time.
Wow, I really thought they would get better mileage than that towing. I had a 1999 Chevy K3500 crew cab long bed with the 7.4 ltr and 4 speed auto. It got right around 8mpg when towing a similar trailer. The worst mileage I got was fighting a headwind in Wyoming, then I got only 6.6mpg. The 8mpg was consistent through Colorado, but not in the mountains. I really miss that truck, and 70k for a new truck would really talk me into an old truck with an LS swap. I love that you guys test in Colorado altitude, keep up the great content!
That’s what they get Towing ,That trailer is a brick and they aren’t using Diesel’s so that’s what you get doesn’t matter whatever you have. My 8.1 big block engine in my 2001 GMC got the same miles per gallon towing as my 3.5 eco-boost F150 the only thing I will say is the F150 has more pulling power that little 3.5 outpulls the 8.1 even though the 8.1 is tuned and not stock .This is the same situation that Toyota will out pull that hemi all day long,All these guys saying I’ll take the V8 Haven’t towed with a tundra or an F150 eco-boost if they did they would never be saying I’ll take the V8 again,After driving the. Eco boost. The V8s feel weak,who cares how it sounds it’s getting it’s doors blown off towing at twice the rpms to keep up .
For comparison on the RAM I had a 2014 1500 HEMI with a 3.21 Differential short bed, 8-speed transmission and coil spring suspension with aftermarket air bags on the rear axle. I also had an aftermarket hard bed cover. On one outing I pulled a 7000+ pound trailer for 8083 miles according to the trailer miles recorded by the truck. I went from Las Vegas to the East coast passing through 29 states. Overall, I averaged 10 to 11 MPG for the whole trip. At one point on the trip pulling the trailer we could not get regular gas and had to take premium. No difference in performance or MPG was noticed. During the separate trip from Las Vegas to Washington, D. C. and back without a trailer I saw average MPG readings of up to 25 MPG on the long flat stretches using cruise control at 75 MPH. Overall, I saw about 20-21 MPG for the entire trip.
@jeff ford I ordered the truck with 3.21 gears because I did not expect to travel a lot and not pull a trailer. I did tow a 26' RV 8002 miles around the U. S. with little trouble.
Tbh that's pretty good in my opinion for a 1500 v8 gasser, granted the 3.21 gears probably helped with that, I have an 03 1500 5.7 with the 3.92 and 17-18 is the highest I can get (according to computer) while babying it around with cruise control on the highway lol. Otherwise I normally get around 13-15 mixed.
If I were wanting to tow, and was overly concerned about MPG or range between fill ups, I would buy a diesel and be done with it. Between these 2 vehicles however, having that GT sound is so phenomenal, I would not care about the 1 MPG difference(rounded) that the Tundra had over me. LOL
@Jay yes, I do it with a v8 truck with a louder muffler on it, louder than this, and I don’t hear anything on the highway when it’s cruising lol. Normal v8 with stock muffler shouldn’t be louder then the v6 while cruising, Or even if u floor it you don’t really hear much it just sounds good
@Grant Fuller Have you ever towed a trailer for hours on end? It can be tiring in good conditions never mind when you are having to fight crosswinds and traffic and crap like that. I'll be buying the truck that does it as quietly and effortlessly as reasonably possible, and that is a TTV6 or, to a lesser extent, the 3.0 Duramax. With the exception of the 7.3L Godzilla, I have zero desire to own a V8 at this point.
@Jason O Crap? Try math. Diesels usually use more oil for each servicing. And the DEF as you mention, which a gas engine never requires. Ask your brother how many quarts of oil he needs for that engine. Then compare that to a similar truck with a gas engine. Some of the mechanical parts cost more compared to a gas engine. If purchasing new, you will spend thousands more for a diesel. TFL even did a video on how many years it would take to recoup the cost - to break even. It was several years. I don't care what MPG your brother gets, because he never tows. This is a video and a discussion about TOWING.
These TT V6s are keeping me busy. For the last few months I've only been working on repairs of these engines even though they represent a small portion of our fleet. $1000s of dollars in parts every time.
I have no interest in picking up some of the vehicles you guys review and share but I always love listening to you guys except Tommy most of the time. I can honestly say i just down right enjoy you guys period reviewing and looking at cars like a car guy really does. Thanks guys.
Today's 1/2 ton truck segment, regardless of brand are very capable with towing, and very comfortable for everything else you want to use them for. With a properly sized TT, they really are the most versatile vehicles in today's market.
Happy with my Rebel, purchased $3300 below sticker last month. Much nicer interior and ride than anything else, comparable performance, simpler technology to maintain.
Should've towed at the same time and dry run at the same time due to the windy conditions, there may be some variance in wind speeds that make the tests invalid. It would explain why the tundra didn't hit 18 or 19 on the dry run and also why the ram didn't hit 10 on the towing
Just curious guys what was the rpm's at, say 70 mph on both vehicles based on rear end ratios and transmission gears , not a big difference I'm sure based on mpgs not towing. Nice job, thanks for sharing and stay safe.
I have tried many times to get rpm's on trucks from youtube comments and have never gotten a response. I know this isn't the truck in video but my 2019 tundra 4x4 limited with 5.7l and 6 speed transmission is just a hair above 2k (say 2050) rpms at 80mph. I would love to hear this info from other truck owners.
Agreed and the reason the Ram was off was they let it idle while they shot the trader hookup scenes. They went from 17.5 to 17.1 MPG before resetting for the trip gage.
You guys needed to use the bighorn back county. While the rebel did pretty good, that is just much more comparable to the trd off-road when it comes to tires, aerodynamics and off-road stuff that does affect efficiency. We all know the rebel is the least efficient besides the trx in rams lineup
First off great video!! I was shopping new tundras since before they came out but no dealer here in fl would allow me to put a deposit with Guaranteed MSRP. Ended up with a fully loaded rebel with sunroof with 18k miles for 49k. I did the math and it would take a long time to make up the mpg savings between the two… now watching this maybe it’s closer then I thought
I’ll keep my 2004 E350 with the V10. Bought it used with 47k miles in 2016 for $7500. Tows my Jeep trailer (~8k) no problem up and over the SoCal mountains and I have plenty of room to camp out in the back. On a typical trip over the mountains to the desert and back I get 8-9 mph towing. Empty I get 13-14 mpg. Regular gas. Regular maintenance. These new trucks are $60k plus. Just buy a used N/A v8 or v10 with a 4-5 speed auto. Forget all that turbo and super charging and 8 to 10 speed autos. Maintenance and repair costs will kill you.
You mean a turbo-charged V-6 got more fuel economy than an N/A V-8 towing at a mile above sea level? Not much of a shocker there but a Ram being $15,000 dollars more is just frightening.
Yeah, I agree. At sea level they likely would have been closer loaded. Plus the ram has tires not at all suited for fuel efficiency... which it should anyway, because unlike the Toyota, the Ram is really a truck.
I have towed for Years. The glaring difference I see between the v8 and the v6 is that the larger displacement v8 provides a level of downhill engine braking that the v6 cannot give. Coming down out of a steep mountain downgrade in a lower gear is impossible with a turbo V6. You have to use brakes to slow down. I have towed heavy campers behind 350 and up v8 s and was able to start down the mountain in 2 ND gear and idle all the way to the bottom with very few brake applications of the trlr brakes
@Brendan Morreale Many times you will start to experience brake fade. The rotors heat up and it heats up your brake fluid and glazes your brake pads. Ceramic high performance brake systems help with this but new brake components are made out of compressed granular metal alloys. I have had massive damage to brake rotors in the past and have even had the brake material or pad come right off of the backing plate. The dealership said well that happens sometimes and we will fix it but you have to pay labor. The parts are under warranty though. Little good that does when you start down wolf creek pass with a heavy trailer and the first cutback you hit the brakes and it craps out the pad on the passenger side front wheel and you got metal on metal grinding the rotor and you are hoping and praying that the trailer brakes are up to snuff and can take the brunt of the abuse. I ended up getting the truck stopped. Thank god it was 4 wheel drive with a low range transfer case. I put the truck in low range and let the engine rev up and hold me back with a few trailer brake applications a few times to keep the rpms down. I did not touch the truck brakes but it took me forever to get down off of the mountain. Live and learn.
@Terry Newell I did not mention that my big truck is a 1 ton Ram with a 6.4l hemi. It is a beast with a 50 gallon gas tank. It has the 8 foot box so that I could get the big tank and heavy tow rating. Hit the cruise and drag 14,000 lbs down the interstate like it was nothing all day long. It is way better at engine braking downhill and you aren't riding the brakes.
@Terry Newell I own a 2021 Silverado with the big 4 cylinder turbo. It is my runner truck and light to medium towing vehicle. It will tow 8 to 10,000 lbs quite comfortably down the interstate and through the hills. It won't hold back the load at all down a even moderate grade but it will snort right up that same grade realy well. It has more torque than my older v8 engines did. It will use more gas than they did pulling the same weight. Running empty it gets better gas milage than many cars. To drive a half ton truck down the highway and get 25 to 32 mpg is like driving a small diesel but in a gas burner. It drops clear down to 11mpg towing around 9,000 lbs though.
Personally, I think the prices are insane. I'm just gonna keep upgrading my old 02 Silverado. It's an unusual configuration in that it is an extended cab long bed Z71 4x4. You don't see many ext cabs with a full 8 foot bed in the 1/2 ton. Not even sure if you can order one any more. You see lots of work trucks with the regular cab, but not the ext cab. It's completely rust free and in great shape inside and out. No the interior won't be as modern, but I'm pretty sure I can add whatever modern technology that I want and as far as I'm concerned, it's a lot cooler than the new ones. It has 350k miles on it and runs perfect, but I can put in a re-manufactured motor and trans installed probably $10-12k. Yes, I know a bunch of mechanics. LOL
The truck that was following benefitted from draft from the trailer so the mpg was somewhat fair for the test bit not real world everyday. My concern about trucks, and most other vehicles widely going to twin turbo power plants is durability, longevity and cost of maintenance and repairs. It's absolutely correct in thinking that these engines have more moving parts and in towing vehicles more this translates to higher probability of failure and wear. In these newer vehicles one part failing cascades to systemic failures or system shut downs forcing repair. V8s have been around for a century are many are loved because of durability, longevity, ease of repair and moderate low cost to maintain. Throw in turbos, intercoolers and all the electronics to run them and nightmare repair scenarios come to mind. Just my two cents worth of today automotive trend to kill v8s in trucks and large SUVs.
I agree with the comment about aspirated engines requires more higher PPO2 to be efficient which suffers at that altitude. Plus you have wind variable, so there's that.
You should have used an older tundra 4.7 and 5.7 compared against the twin turbo v -6 tundra. That would show how much of a mistake corporate made or didn't make in switching formats.
Higher octane fuel does not increase available power. This has been disproved several times. The BTU per volume energy content doesn’t change with octane. You can even look up Engine Masters on Motor Trend TV. Season 6, Episode 2. They tested 87, 91, 110, 116 octane fuel and also E85. Between each fuel they optimized the engine timing in an attempt to maximize HP. Each fuel made the same power within 1 to 1.5 HP. Higher octane only increases resistance to knock/pre detonation. If your engine isn’t in pre detonation at 87 octane, higher octane fuel will do absolutely nothing but separate you from more of your dollars.
The biggest difference between the 2 is the tires. The tundra in its "off-road" package still has street tires, where as the ram has an actual off-road worthy tread that's going to equate to a lot more rolling resistance.
@67 C10 yeah there's sidewall flex, but we aren't talking trucks with 3500+ lbs in tongue weight. The amount of sidewall flex is still minimal, and the rolling resistance and weight of said tire is still likely several times lower than that of the tires on the ram. You're right, they do run the ribs for longevity. But, why is that they last longer than an all terrain in the same size and compound? Ohhhh, it's because of the reduced rolling resistance. Reduced rolling resistance=lower heat, better wear, better mpg's. And yes, air resistance does play a part in mileage on tires. For all this experience, you're really showing who the noob is. These aren't 1 ton or bigger trucks pulling massive loads and needing air pressures in the 65+ psi range to support their loads. Wait, let me guess, you're one of those guys who tells people to run whatever psi is on the side of the tire, right?
@Dan S - you are not aware that more flex in a sidewall can increase rolling resistance. You are unaware that more air pressure in a tire can improve fuel economy. You are wasting my time. Trucks run ribs vs grips because ribs can last up to 60% longer noob.
@67 C10 what physics of a p-rated tire vs a 6, 8 or 10 lt rated? An lt tire in an aggressive tread is going to be heavier and have higher rolling resistance. There's a reason trucks hauling all the time run highway ribs instead of all terrains in the same load carrying capacity. Tread pattern 100% does affect mileage, empty or loaded. Rolling resistance and air resistance through the tread are factors. Regardless of tire type, the lightest weight tire with the lowest rolling resistance and air resistance is going to offer the best mileage in all conditions. Your "40+ years of experience" must have been under a rock because you clearly do not understand how rolling resistance and tread pattern corresponds to fuel mileage. Now, if you're trying to imply that because the ram had an lt tire, and the pressure was higher than the p rated tundra tires, made the difference between tread patterns null, you're still wrong. The increased resistance from the aggressive tread pattern is still higher than any added resistance to a p rated tire under load at its correct air pressure for said load. Now, when towing, tire tread pattern might not make as noticeable of a difference in terms of numbers, but when you do a percentage, a small .5 to 1 mpg difference could be as much as 10-15%. In terms of fuel mileage, a 10-15% difference is significant. Tread pattern matters when it comes to fuel economy, whether you're towing or not.
I tow all over New England in a similar size and weight camper (2021 keystone bullet 243bhs) with my 2020 Ram 1500 Laramie hemi - 3.92 rear, air suspension - and regularly get between 9 and 10 mpg, but I keep my speed to 65mph, which I’ve noticed makes a huge difference too. Interesting test - I suspect electric and V6 is the future.
7,000 lbs, wow. Our 23' Rockwood Roo has an empty weight of ~4,300 lbs. I know the Black Series is much more heavy duty, but more than a ton of extra weight is remarkable.
It takes a given amount of energy to move a load for a certain distance and speed. Given the same energy source it’s not surprising that the fuel consumption is nearly the same. The Ram will be more efficient at sea level as it is naturally aspirated.
@David J. wrong, the turbo will make EVEN MORE power at sea level (just like the NA engine)... the turbo doesn't magically stop working because there's more air at sea level. ...and if there's more air, the turbo engine will also not have to run as hard. The only time a turbocharged will struggle is when the air temp is high (and the intercooler can't reject heat as quickly as with cool air).
Interesting test. Anyhow, I would say that a windy day is hardly “consistent”, there can be significant differences in the space of a very short time. They could tend to even out in the distance, but also the wind level can change significantly in places just a few miles apart, let alone fifty. And the wind effect is almost always the biggest influence on the mileage when I’m towing, almost on pair with change in elevation because that does tent to even out more homogeneously. That isn’t to say that the Tundra is not more efficient, just that the actual numbers could have a tolerance much larger than your normal tests.
Great video. I have had many issues with the 2014 Toyota I bought windows, cab trim, transmission. I would go with the Ram. It cost more but it’s better.
I had a 2016 tundra, a lot more issues then I was expecting, given the fact every fan boy force feeds the reliability factor..... It was in the shop within the first month!🤣
Even though I like Tundras I would have to wait on the longevity of it's new v6. As we all know ram has it's issues itself but I think the 5.7 wins for durability as of now.
As far as I see it is the same as the F150. Turbos give a more premium experience and make it easy to drive and tow but you will never save on gas. Only way to do that is detune it, or overgear it, or stop/start, or hybrid it. But roi is still not huge. The roi on Toyota's hybrid truck doesn't even work which I find weird since they are the leader in hybrids.
I know 2wd trucks are not very common these days but myself I drive the 2wd ram and have for years never needed the 4wd and have noticed they get a lot better mpg than the 4wd models. Would it be possible for you guys to test the 2wd models of 1/2 tons
In older tundras, in my experience, you do NOT want to tow with cruise control. It always drops to lower gears on hills than necessary and kills gas mileage. You are better off using your foot. I don't know if this is the same in the 3rd gen, but it is certainly true in the 1st!
TFL thank you for the towing test with a trailer that has a drag co efficient to it (height). Close to the same MPG (8) averagei get with the 7.3 godzilla (4.30 gearing) towing a 10k travel trailer at 75 mpg. which is a couple hairs better than the 8.1 with a 5 speed Allison. Aerodynamic factors.
I would of been curious what the mpg would be with say 1/2 tank of gas that's closer to a older tundra gas tank size. Weight savings on 16+ gallons when towing would be interesting numbers.
this was quite interesting as this is just about all i use our 99 F250 Superduty for. dragging our 28 foot trailer to nascar races all across the south. we tow at 70-75 traffic permitting, and we average about 9-10 mpg over the last 15 years or so. some good hills going to bristol and martinsville, too. 5-6000 miles of towing per year. What is funny about that is when gas trucks, like f150 or silverados tell me they tow at 15mpgs or better with a 30 foot bumper pull. oh, yeah and it does fine... doesn't like the hills, though....
Another impressive video. You pack a lot of good info in this video. I appreciate your test of vehicles I have never owned. ( I’m a Ford F-150 3.? Tc driver)
I would highly suspect the second run was worse conditions, both vehs did worse then expected the second run. You need to do these 2-3 times. I would actually day run the loop 2 to 3 times before filling up. The longer before the fill up the more accurate. I mean try a 5-10 mi loop I bet it would be crazy in consistent. More miles before fill ups please!
Ok, I get the comparison you are after here, but a comparison I wish you guys would do is within a brand of vehicle and the performances of the different levels and set ups one can chose from at the dealer. For example, the base model Ram 2500, vs the Ram 2500 Larimie, vs the Ram 2500 Power Wagon, showing how each comes set up in their perspective level of vehicle, and then how they each handle the various situations, like mud, snow, sand, rocks, trail, and so on. The overall goal being to assist those interested in the brands already to understand what to expect when they buy the various models and not get a truck that wont perform as they wanted. Just an idea.
I’ve had a f150 3.5 eco twin turbo and a f150 5.0l v8. Towing a 7400# trailer I find the 3.5l does a better job in the hills & mountain passes. Turbos creates torque. I’d go back to the 3.5l next time. Mpgs were about the same, but up a long hill the 3.5 was a lot better.
Thanks for another great video. I have one suggestion. If possible, a 200 mile round trip could give you more real world results. 49 miles is a very short test and may magnify slight differences in towing mpg.
Are you also resetting the MPG meter when doing the Trip meter? A difference in MPG between the dash and your calculations could be because of that. Just a thought
Curious to see the burn out rates of the turbos in the future. You wouldn't have that problem with the V-8's w/o turbo. I was expecting better from the 2022 Tundra and have been disappointed with all the reviews.
My only real concern with running a small turbocharged engine, is the stress when they are working under a heavy load. Larger engine can make that without a lot of work, small turbo engine has to work harder cuz the turbo kicks in and that increases cylinder pressure and Temps. Just my thought, but they do make amazing power though
What speed are the tires on the trailer rated for? My trailer tires are 65mph, and that is my preferred towing speed. I would love to see the figures at 65mph.
Okay I have a 2021 Ford F150 with the max tow package and the 5.0 V8 and the 3.73 rear end. I pulled around 8000 pounds of small square bales with the truck maxed at its 1805 payload and driving through hills. I was doing 60 to 65. I got 9.9 mpg on about 50 miles. I really thought the Toyota would have been around 10 mpg.
My 2016 F150 with a 2.7L ecoboost gets between 11 and 13 mpg towing our 7200lbs 27 ft travel trailer. Anecdotally my setup (2.7L , 6 speed auto, 3.55 gear ratio) can out accelerate a Nissan Kicks while towing 7200lbs 😁
@FISH ON!! Alberta Outdoors I believe gm uses the same trans,forums say it has issues. Toyota doesn't use the same one. Hope your happy with Ford, but it's the reason I drive Tundra. On my second one, 16DC,145,000kloms no issues. 03 Tundra over 400k no issues, not even a minor one.All 3 Ford trucks had many issues, even leaving me stranded twice. Could never go back.
@Stefanovich Michael never hear much other than how everyone with them just love them. In the mustangs and f150s anyway. Gm even went in with ford on them and have them aswell. Watch some newer drag racing videos on 1320 etc and watch those 10 spd trannies take a beating and they are deinately better for towing and mileage than the old tried and true 6sp. Either one paired with the coyote or ecoboosts are awesome love what ford is doing👍 By the looks of what toyota tundra and other vehicles are doing now with twin turbos and 10spds looks like they're not alone in their innovative thinking. I just think ford does better job usually. Especially when they are the ones that do it first while everyone else just copies them and tries to improve on their idea. Anyway for the most part most are happy as hell with the new 10 spd but sure there are some that have trouble just like the new tundra. Nothing is perfect.
Great video guys Love watching your channel But 392 Gears Compared to 331 gears The Toyota's gearing is set for mostly highway Have friends that have both of those trucks And they got about the same as you guys
Get your exclusive NordVPN deal here: ( nordvpn.com/thefastlanetruck ). Try it risk-free thanks to Nord’s 30-day money-back guarantee!
Street tires on Tundra vs more offroad on Ram. You should put street tires on Ram.
Ya know 🙄
@Admiral_Peck7, some straight 6’s could. But back then the gearing was also crazy low and not a whole lot of top speed or quickness off the line. But that’s also how I want a 4WD truck to behave. Lots of ground clearance, geared low to crawl up a hill and/or tow and/or haul whatever I need it to do.
@J. R. You'll find a straight 6 can do the job just as well when done right, I mean shit look at all the truck from the 60s-80s, straight 6's galore. Plus straight 6's cool better than their V cousins.
@Admiral_Peck7, the day they stop putting V-8’s in full size trucks is the day that I stop buying new, full size trucks! I’ll be 48 at the end of this month and live in a small, rural town in Northeast Colorado. I only drive about 4,000 miles a year to maybe 6,000 at the most if I want to travel. I’m sure that I could buy a few used trucks in good condition to last me several decades. Especially out here where it’s predominantly all trucks that have V-8’s and there are lots of farms!
Something else to keep in mind is that naturally aspirated engines suffer more at high elevations. I would expect the v8 to be more efficient at lower elevations.
@Gary Sorensen you're right in that, proportionally, 1 mpg is a valid number to consider at such low overall mpg numbers... but at the end of the day, we're talking about $10 in gas savings on a fill up. You're more likely to swing a bigger difference across varying gas station prices. $124 vs $114 is basically irrelevant for most people.
One thing I believe one needs to remember when comparing MPG is 1 MPG difference is a lot more relivant when compt single digit MPG results. Example going fry 9 MPG to 10 MPG is about a 10% improvement which would be significantly improved. But to contrast going from 30 MPG to 31 MPG would yield only about a 3% improvement. So a 1 MPG in the single digit area I would say is definitely a significant difference being a.10 % or more difference.
I’m guess the v8 Toyota v6 numbers suck mpg still near 20 without towing now if this was a Ford would be different story lol
@Lawrence Redden I am aware- I already said in this thread port or dual direct and port is the way.
@Sly the Toyota has D4-S which is port and direct injection. This system is solid!!
I for one thoroughly enjoy watching all of your videos. Super intuitive and fun to see y’all working together on this kind of work. By far TFL is one of my favorite channels.
The turbos in the Tundra definitely help at altitude. Slowing down by 5mph would likely yield significantly better fuel mileage. Fun video, thanks guys!
@D S That's my main worry with buying the new Tundra.
@Marc Ferrara that sucks, sorry to hear that. Can you imagine buying a new tundra and needing to pull the cab because the turbo went out
@D S $3800 in cam phasers at least every 60k miles is STILL a thing with that motor. That’s a crap load of gas in repair money. I’ll never own another EcoBoost and that’s a bummer because it hauls well.
@Greg not since the big three surpassed them anyway
@D S Toyota trucks are definitely not known for their fuel economy
I would love to see the manufactures come out with turbo V8's! I also love that they finally put small diesel in the 1/2 tons a few years back. If they really want good fuel economy and power they need to make the hybrids diesels!
Any form of direct injection will benefit any engine, gas or diesel.
@Chris Kreple 😐
9 months ago. I would have to go back and see what was the topic
You won’t see twin turbo V8s. You will see electric trucks. And hybrid trucks. And smaller turbo engine.
Diesel will not be used long term for 1/2 ton trucks or passenger cars - they make too much soot and NOX - both bad for human health.
@Ed Shultz here’s how it works. The energy comes from the fuel. It doesn’t really care much if the fuel goes through 4, 6, or 8 cylinders. It takes a lot of energy to move a big truck and trailer.
The smaller turbo motors use less fuel at low loads, but when they need to tow a trailer and move a truck at highway speeds they will all be using fuel.
The difference between the Ram and Tundra probably has more to do with the gearing and tires and aerodynamics than the engine configuration.
@Jim McKnight right there with you, and now why are we in a delivery crunch…….oh wait, semi truck and trains run on diesel …….
Interesting test! Look forward to Mopar’s turbo inline 6 coming out even though will miss the sweet sound of the hemi. I thought the YOTA would be considerably more efficient than the Ram. The Rebel GT is sweet, but 71k is over the top. Thanks for sharing!
@Jordan Scheurer man that would be a beast but we can only dream
I hope it's a 4.0L lol. Bring back the 4.0L as a DOHC turbo!
$71K is over the top.
My concern with everything going forced indeuction is long term durability. The Hemi V8 has proven to be almost bullet proof! We'll see how these smaller power plants hold up as they rack up miles. Nothings worse than an expensive failure on a high mileage engine that forces a very difficult decision.
I thought low oil pressure at idle was plaguing the Hemi’s
They are close enough on mpg that you need more samples to determine if the advantage Toyota exhibits towing will hold up under all conditions. Great video! Both trucks are gorgeous. $71,000 would make me run.
the Ram has what used to be considered mud terrain tires for the significantly hurts the mileage. this test is pathetic.
I agree I would call it a draw.
@H N yes. It's the ram rebel. The tundra is mid $50s I think.
Which of the two truck is 71k? The Ram Rebel?
@Ken Sporalsky not sure. Not my truck. Surprised it needs a max towing package for a 3500 lb camper. I had a powerstroke f250 until last fall. It never overheated. Just broke down so often I sold it. In 2021 alone it needed two injectors in different break downs, and ebp, and a catalytic converter replaced. 3 times in one year it left me stranded waiting for a tow truck. So it's gone. It was a joy to drive when it was running but it's not worth the hassle.
Yes, the altitude was a definite advantage for the forced induction engine. But also, the cool air helped the turbo charged motor more. Heat causes forced induction motors to use more fuel to cool the turbo down, so a cold day not only makes a turbo more effective, it makes it more efficient.
I'm liking the direction that Dodge is going with reviving the old school straight six and adding turbos. This should be good!
@Populist gen x'er channel in-line 6 should be a smooth engine. One cylinder head should make manufacturing cheaper. An in line 6 will be less compact than a v6, but these trucks have plenty of room under the hood.
In-line will have more torque they should have never quit making them
Less weight and an inline is an improvement over a V engine overall for sure. I'm doing an engine build , dual intake cams E85 and 14 PSI on my inline 27 year old LLO inline 4 cylinder and my engine only weighs 220 lbs, with the lost foam method..lol In theory one guy can pick the engine up...lol Love how effortless it is vs my old camaro that was close to 4000 Lbs with a cast iron V8...lol But the torque in the Tundra is pretty substantial on this video.
I also just wanted to say TFL truck is my absolute favorite channel for everything trucks. I love the depth you guys go into with each truck and your honesty with everything you guys put out. Keep the great content coming as always 💪
Love the rotary dial because it frees up space for the class leading sliding console.
You know I have to disagree on this one. I did like the extra storage space I owned a 2016 and a 2019 ram. However I just didn't really get used to that dial
Great test! I guess my F150 Eccoboost, max tow with the 5-Star tune gets better towing mpg then I thought, it right inline with the Tundra. Towing a big tall box like a camper pushes a lot of air and really puts a load on these trucks! Much different then towing an open trailer.
Hated the gearshift knob on my ram. Ram hemi also always had to rev high for power so didn't like that either similar to the old (pre DI) ford 5.0 in the f150.
My 5.7 tundra got about 10mpg, ford 3.5 eb got about 8.5mpg, and cummins ram got about 11mpg towing my 5k camp trailer near sea level. I never towed that trailer with my hemi ram, but would have expected the hemi to be reved quite high going up any grades and get eb type fuel mileage towing.
New toyota turbo 6 in tundra is pretty impressive to me so far. Seems to be setup for low to mid rpm power.
@Jay thanks for your real world numbers.
@Jason Lakomiak Thanks so much, I have been going back and forth on these trucks. You gave me real numbers...appreciated.
@Rottingboards For towing, I've gotten 7.8-9.8 mpg average. That's with a 32' foot, 12 foot tall, 8500 lb toy hauler. I've never had a lack of power, but as Jay states, it is much hard to tow against a strong cold wind! Not towing my milage has varied at because I don't drive that much anymore. I've averaging 15 in the city to 19-20 on the highway. This is with 3.55 gears and stock tire size.
Its hard to tell what different trucks get towing. My 5Star tuned F150 Ecoboost max-tow got anywhere from 6.7 mpg to 10.8 mpg towing my 5500 lb travel trailer. Depended on the conditions I was towing in. A tail wind would get me over 10 and a headwind could push be down in the 7's. The 6.7 I got was an average over 9 hours towing from South Dakota to Utah as a winter storm was blowing into WY. 9 hours straight of fighting a 30+ mph headwind.
In those conditions at that elevation I am not sure the Ram could have realistically held 65 mph. My Ecoboost was working very hard just to maintain speed on the flats and was WOT on the climbs.
I appreciate that you guys are being fairly scientific with your real world testing. I'm picking up my Tundra in a few days and can't wait to hitch up to the camper now!
How have you enjoyed it so far?
I've had 3 Ram 1500's with the 5.7 Hemi and I really, REALLY love that engine. I hope Ram is smart enough to keep the Hemi available after they offer the turbo inline 6, like Ford did with the 5.0.
@Eric Neal I'm confused. Do you really, really like the Ram or not?
@needabettername I probably would not have had 3 and really, really loved them if I had any issues. Traded in the first one at 99k miles. Leased the second. And bought the 3rd after turning in the leased one. All 3 were Big Horn, 4x4, crew cabs, so no failures and no upgrades either. Just really, really loved them.
Why 3? Failures or just like upgrading?
This gets brought up. What failed? At how many miles. How was the oil pump how did the oil look
@blacka dax I had that problem on my 2011 but had almost 200000 on it.
Very interesting how all the new turbo v6 engines are working out. Everyone seems to be optimizing for different things
@Kooberto Humperdink
Getting electric involved is a given for torque. I was referring to the average ICE PU. The availability of power without adding more complexity while aiming for better overall fuel economy is a smart platform. And why not, the average driver does not use the power band very often. I want to see how the same displacement for Chevy holds up with their 2.7 four cyl. If only I had that kind of power available in my simple '87 Dakota 4 cyl. that couldn't get out of its own way. lol
@Larry Be I mean... if you want torque for towing and fuel economy... The F150 Lightning is your truck.
I think it is smart to naturally have the power as it is needed and then have the fuel economy during normal driving. There is no cylinder de-activation gimmicks and the like.
Always watch you guys when deciding on which truck I want! Very informative and entertaining! Keep it up guys! 👍🏽
Nathan had mentioned that the Ecoboost’s rev higher when towing than the new Tundra was. In my experience with my F150 Ecoboost, it will cruise in 10th gear while towing my 25 foot camper. 10th gear at 100-110 kmh it rev’s at 1700-1800 rpms. It can hold 10th on flat ground. Head wind and hills it will down shift to 9th and sometimes 8th. But will almost always stay below 2500 rpms while cruising.
@Chris Kreple I put 190k on 2018 ecoboost... they put in the dual injection in 2017 I think? 2017 or 2018. No complaints with the engine- it ran great. Turbos failed around 140-150k... needed timing chain shortly after. Couple other things, I forget... the turbo failures are natural and will be part of owning this type of engine. We've already seen some issues with the new Tundra's turbos, but I agree, it's not going to be the same as it was in terms of reliability but will probably be "fine" for the long haul as well. I can't badmouth the ecoboost, at least since they added the direct and port... but I'd still stick with port only with larger displacement and no forced induction because I won't need to speed any time in the shop with that engine until 300k+ (or deal with any product growing pains/TSBs for the drivetrain for that matter)
@Sly I have and f150 with an ecoboost which has worked well for 120,000 miles. My last truck was an 09 Tacoma with the 4.0. The simpler Tacoma certainly felt more bullet proof. The F150 gets better mileage even in a much bigger truck.
@Chris Kreple it's not any different than any other modern 6 with dual direct and port. It's not oldschool reliable anymore bottom line. If you know how these engines work you know that
@Tristan Hipps these modern turbo engines have small turbos sized to make peak torque across a wide and relatively low rpm range. They are not revving high, but they are making peak torque at 1500 rpms up to maybe 3500/4000. Almost a diesel like torque band.
@Sly Toyota trucks have always been simpler, proven tech. I’m sure they did their homework on this new turbo engine.
I have a 2020 rebel and love it, does everything, and goes anywhere I need. My last Toyota was a 2005 tundra, which was a real nice truck right up to when the transmission fell out.
Oof
What I'd like to see you two do as a comparison is a 2nd gen tundra vs the new 3rd gen tundra, for potential buyers like myself who own a 2nd gen tundra(2011 Tundra SR5 TRD) to see if it's worth the money to switch rides. If this is at all possible. I know the new tundra is more efficient but how much more in a apples to apples test.
As an owner of 2010 and 2016 Tundra that I use for work and tow often I'd like to see this as well but either way I won't be getting the new Tundra for at least 2-3 years to let them work out the bugs hopefully
Would that matter since TFL owns the Tundra?
Not sure, Toyota would support that
Thanks for doing this comparison. I’ve always thought that all the trucks in today’s market are fairly equal. Just buy the one that has the features you like and the one that fits your butt. Being a guy that transitioned from F-150’s to a Tundra in 2004, I think over the long run “cost of ownership” is less with a Tundra than the other trucks. It will be interesting if the 3rd gen Tundra can maintain its reliability.
The comments about street tires vs all terrain tires are very valid, but most of us understand that TFL can’t spend all their time swapping tires and gear ratios, in other words “run what you brung” or what the manufacturers give you.
Like I’ve said before, I’d like to see TFL do your mileage test over a longer loop, take I-76 to Fort Morgan and return. That way you wouldn’t have to deal with the construction zone and would have less traffic.
Can’t wait for the next comparison, Andre’s F-150 hybrid vs the Tundra.
So the Tundra is
$13,800 Cheaper
1.3 MPGS MORE WHILE TOWING
0.4 MPGS MORE ON REGULAR DRIVING
HAS A LOWER MAINTENANCE COST?
I tried buying a Tundra this week, and I found every dealer (23 total) within a 100 mile radius marking up the Tundra well over MSRP. The cheapest markup was $8k on a SR5 with 2WD marketed as “off-road ready” due to upgraded tires.
Toyota and Ram, can you please address dealer markups like Ford and GM recently have. At this point it’s impossible to find local Toyota dealers even willing to take a custom order.
@Stephen Witte thank Stephen!
The dealer's name was Premier Toyota of North Platte
I live near San Diego and bought a brand new Tundra SR5 4X4 Long Bed from a great dealer in North Platte Nebraska. It was at list price, zero markup. I then paid $2000 to have it delivered to my house. You can do the same.
The chip shortage is actually affecting Toyota now. Their build philosophy only built what they could get parts for vs Chevy who built a bunch of trucks are awaiting chips
The new tundra has issues the dealer here already had 2 returned blown motor is what they said. I'll wait for 23 24. Stick with my 14 tundra I'm fine. Mark ups what a rip off
Another great video by Nathan and Andre. Great way to test the Ram and Toyota mpgs. That 70k price tag is crazy tho.
Would love to see you test the most equivalent equipped packages/trucks if possible. Gear rations impact MPG as much or more than engine, tires (the Rebel is very aggressive A/T whereas Tundra is a street A/T), fuel (100% or 10% ethanol), etc. I assume it in not 100% gas since you are in CO, but I have noticed a big difference in some platforms. Anyway there are several variables impacting MPG, so it is an interesting test, but you can bias the data based on what 'other' variables from V8 vs turbo-V6. The YOTA TRD is more equivalent to a RAM Limited 4x4 with skid plates and those prices would be similar too. My experience is a Rebel verse any level 4x4 (Bighorn, Larame, Limited) is worse MPG, empty/towing. It is set up with features and tuned for 4x4 performance, not street performance.
Would like to see more GMC AT4 3.0 diesel comparisons. It is a great engine and offroad package with great fuel economy.
Diesels are the best engines ,always said it.
Obviously gvt wanted them to die, too efficent.
Nice! I'd love to see what the 3.0l Duramax would be with that trailer. The RAM did have more aggressive tires which hurts economy.
@Eric Mackison mind you I went from stock All-Seasons up to the Duratracs. (2019 Ram Hemi 275/65/18.) Went from 9.5l/100km on the highway to 11l/100km.
@Christopher Richards that's pretty significant. I used to always run an aggressive all terrain but I stick to a more highway oriented tread nowadays. My truck is an 8,500# pavement princess and I'm not afraid to admit it.
Swap the Duratrac tires for All-Seasons and gain at least 1 Litre per 100 km from my real world experience.
Duramax will destroy them mpg wise
@OFFRD don't let people just wonder if you're dumb, open your mouth and erase all doubt.
Great video. I tow with a 2013 tundra sr5 2wd double cab 5.7 . Does decent on mileage considering my toy haulers pretty heavy. Thanks for the videos. Will definitely help me on my decision when I buy a new truck. Keep em coming.
Hi, I love your professionalism and accuracy. Great info AND entertainment. One thing though, if you tested a 73 G Toyota against a 73 G Ram., I think results would indicate a different result. I think a 15 G difference in trucks should be a BIG factor when testing.
Keep up the awesome work.
One thing to keep in mind is that boosted gasoline engines require significant reduction in air/fuel ratio which inherently reduces fuel efficiency under load. However this is often balanced out by the reduction of engine friction (less cylinders) and RPM.
Good test, gents. 👍🏻
Seeing how close they are whether towing or unladen I’ll stick with the Hemi V8 and it’s fiery engine noises thank you
My first gen nisssn tows anything I need to for work. No turbos or direct injection to learn to maintain it
sound wise Hemi hands down ... but living with that stupid e-torque is a buzz kill and potential huge $$$ mx repair ...
@justin weaver the older one I believe it ... new one idk, lots of new tech with low quality parts and nearly zero under body coating same as the others soooo both might just end parked next to each other while your rethinking what just happened with that $60k ...
$13,800 more then that Tundra Limited?
BL Dontmatter you obviously have no mechanical background, I remember when the GM 6.0 would just crap out, I've replaced so many of them. I remember doing tons of cylinder heads on Ford 5.4, have a friend at a Ford dealership that says he replaces coyote 5.0 NA V-8 3 to 1 over Ecoboost due to oil consumption. Do you want talk about how turbos are bad still or are you on your way to Jr high school? Oh ya, I must give you the point that turbos aren't in stuff with a lot of miles, oh wait EVERY BIG RIG SEMI, HEAVY DUTY OFF ROAD EQUIPMENT, TRACTORS, LOADERS, BULL DOZERS, CRANES, SNOWPLOWS, AND SHOULD I MENTION BOATS OR AIRCRAFT?? All of these manufacturers must be wrong for putting turbos on..they must not want these to last long so they put turbos on them....ya sure. BL, stop for a second and like what a turbo does, take in a little more oxygen (your brain obviously needs it) and realize turbos are here to stay because of the advantages they give. The reason you think turbo bad is because you have a very narrow mind because it's not yet learned, so before you get mad because you're reading this and you're just wrong, go drive a new Ecoboost 3.5 and tell me how it compares to the 5.0 or a Ram with the Hemi, (soon being replaced by turbo straight 6) and the GM with any V-8 they offer and tell me which one has the most torque. If you're actually able to read all of this also ask yourself when did Toyota build an unreliable truck??? Lol, I'm not a Toyota fan but if they put a turbo truck engine out, it's going to be more reliable.
I would like to see both truck do hard towing for 400k and then see which motor is still holding up. Durability over the long haul will always be more profitable
Turbos help a lot at higher elevations. Ram would have been way more efficient at sea level.
@Ben Lzicar agreed
3.92 gear rato of ram gt
More than double as efficient though? You're being pretty optimistic.
👍 great video, I have a 2022 ram 3500 with a 6.4 hemi and 373 gears and the 8-speed transmission. I have ran a 290 mile loop a few times and have come up with 17.8 MPG with the factory tires and wheels. I added the leveling kit and went up from the factory wheels which measure about 32.5 in up to tires that are about 34 in when they are a little low on air. After adding the aftermarket wheels and tires about a week ago I made that loop which is going down to the Minneapolis St Paul airport from where I live at about 290 miles it was snowy and I made the trip in four-wheel drive the entire way and ended up at about 12 miles per gallon there was a lot of stop and go traffic due to the bad weather I believe I could have pulled 13 miles per gallon except I got stuck driving about 15 to 20 miles at about 15 miles per hour stuck behind plow trucks. My brother has a 2019 half ton ram warlock that gets a little bit better MPG than that one does and it has the hemi also. I would bet my 3500 ram would get better miles per gallon than both of those towing that trailer. And the price was between the two of them at around 61,000 MSRP . This is the first winter I have owned it and just around town in the snow with my snow plow on and snow plowing I get around 8.3 miles per gallon that is not strictly snow plowing that is a mix . And that is awesome miles per gallon... My 1999 1-ton single axle 454 truck probably gets up to 5 miles per gallon plowing. And my 2002 2500 HD 8.1 L with the Allison transmission gets up to 7 miles per gallon in two wheel drive on the highway in the summertime, and gets the same miles per gallon towing. Trucks have come a long way.
That's about equal to my gutless 3.55 v6 Dakota that weighs 2500lbs less. Not too bad. 13-14 city maybe 17 hwy on a good day with a tailwind. I don't like the truck but it has low miles no rust and it's paid for
And my summertime loop with the factory tires was at 70 to 80 mph
The straight 6 turbo would strike the best compromise for me. The simplicity of having one head and set of cams intake etc, along with new hybrid electric-turbos will be potentially amazing engines! As long as they over build the internals like you would a turbo-diesel.
@Jerry Horn The 2JZ and RB30DETT, the engines in the Supra, and Skyline are probably the most famous online turbo I-6 engines. BMW and MB both have and continue to offer turbo variants of straight 6s too. Those lead me to think you might not be right. Can you point me to info that confirms your claim?
inline six's don't turbo as well as V type engines.
I really think these new transmissions are sweet for getting the best mpg. My 2018 f-150 consistently gets 21-22 on my commute in northern co.
(It's a 3.5 eb)
I'll take the V8, and even more so with how similar the mpg's are to the V6 of the Tundra.
@ANDREA i would never own a full size truck with a gas engine.
@uli wehner Diesels are a completely different breed than turbo gas engines.
There's a reason if nobody built turbo gas trucks, but only turbo diesels.
@ANDREA yes. And commercial trucks have had turbos since the 70s or longer.... cars since th 80s.... pickup diesels since the 90s... cars and trucks last 300k miles nowadays regardless of engines. Turbo or not.
@uli wehner The problem of a turbo engine is that you have all that more stuff and things that can brake.
Also the have more Hp per liter ... so on so forth.
That’s not enough of a difference in fuel mileage to make me want to switch from a v8 to twin turbo for towing. Ask any mechanic what they think about the ecoboost motors.
Great test. Very interesting!
Love these videos. Such real world comparison here and in the other videos I have seen. Keep up the great content.
Looks like I'll be keeping my 2020 Tundra. I get almost the same MPG without towing and get better towing MPG. I get close to 10 MPG towing a 7000lb 32' Travel Trailer. May consider getting the 2022 if the hybrid has way better MPG.
For all the new technology you can't break the laws of physics. My lifted gx470 also gets around 18mpg though with our 5k lb aerodynamic camping trailer i manage 15mpg.
@Ben Dino I would never buy a new tundra unless I won the lottery, I generally buy a truck/ car 5 years old. That why I was disappointed that they did not include a v8. Down the line will need a used 2022 tundra.
how much do you drive? the money you will lose buying new will never be offset by a few mpg's unless you are driving 70k miles a year.
I think the tundra will get better mileage when it has 10,000 mile
Can't wait for the hybrid version, I think it will blow these both out of the water!
Ehh... Depends on the hybrid drivetrain. I'd think your typically planetary hybrid setup would be terrible for towing, but better in city driving.
Guy's. I have a 2022 Rebel with 4300 miles on the clock. Using your method of fueling up after a 100 mile trip with 87 octane on the PA Turnpike, I got 17.9 MPG. The same trip with 89 octane, I got 20.1. It seems to like 89. I am going to try it with 91 octane next time.
Wow, I really thought they would get better mileage than that towing. I had a 1999 Chevy K3500 crew cab long bed with the 7.4 ltr and 4 speed auto. It got right around 8mpg when towing a similar trailer. The worst mileage I got was fighting a headwind in Wyoming, then I got only 6.6mpg. The 8mpg was consistent through Colorado, but not in the mountains. I really miss that truck, and 70k for a new truck would really talk me into an old truck with an LS swap. I love that you guys test in Colorado altitude, keep up the great content!
@John DiMartino I'll be the first to call bullshit on that...and not the last.
That’s what they get Towing ,That trailer is a brick and they aren’t using Diesel’s so that’s what you get doesn’t matter whatever you have. My 8.1 big block engine in my 2001 GMC got the same miles per gallon towing as my 3.5 eco-boost F150 the only thing I will say is the F150 has more pulling power that little 3.5 outpulls the 8.1 even though the 8.1 is tuned and not stock .This is the same situation that Toyota will out pull that hemi all day long,All these guys saying I’ll take the V8 Haven’t towed with a tundra or an F150 eco-boost if they did they would never be saying I’ll take the V8 again,After driving the. Eco boost. The V8s feel weak,who cares how it sounds it’s getting it’s doors blown off towing at twice the rpms to keep up .
For comparison on the RAM I had a 2014 1500 HEMI with a 3.21 Differential short bed, 8-speed transmission and coil spring suspension with aftermarket air bags on the rear axle. I also had an aftermarket hard bed cover. On one outing I pulled a 7000+ pound trailer for 8083 miles according to the trailer miles recorded by the truck. I went from Las Vegas to the East coast passing through 29 states. Overall, I averaged 10 to 11 MPG for the whole trip. At one point on the trip pulling the trailer we could not get regular gas and had to take premium. No difference in performance or MPG was noticed.
During the separate trip from Las Vegas to Washington, D. C. and back without a trailer I saw average MPG readings of up to 25 MPG on the long flat stretches using cruise control at 75 MPH. Overall, I saw about 20-21 MPG for the entire trip.
Seems to me tow mpg generally work out about to about half of hwy mpg.
@jeff ford I ordered the truck with 3.21 gears because I did not expect to travel a lot and not pull a trailer. I did tow a 26' RV 8002 miles around the U. S. with little trouble.
Interesting info, I have the 3.92s and have never seen higher than mid 18s. I had figured that it was the gearing.
Tbh that's pretty good in my opinion for a 1500 v8 gasser, granted the 3.21 gears probably helped with that, I have an 03 1500 5.7 with the 3.92 and 17-18 is the highest I can get (according to computer) while babying it around with cruise control on the highway lol. Otherwise I normally get around 13-15 mixed.
Interesting, and good truck.
If I were wanting to tow, and was overly concerned about MPG or range between fill ups, I would buy a diesel and be done with it. Between these 2 vehicles however, having that GT sound is so phenomenal, I would not care about the 1 MPG difference(rounded) that the Tundra had over me. LOL
@Jay yes, I do it with a v8 truck with a louder muffler on it, louder than this, and I don’t hear anything on the highway when it’s cruising lol. Normal v8 with stock muffler shouldn’t be louder then the v6 while cruising, Or even if u floor it you don’t really hear much it just sounds good
@Grant Fuller Have you ever towed a trailer for hours on end? It can be tiring in good conditions never mind when you are having to fight crosswinds and traffic and crap like that.
I'll be buying the truck that does it as quietly and effortlessly as reasonably possible, and that is a TTV6 or, to a lesser extent, the 3.0 Duramax. With the exception of the 7.3L Godzilla, I have zero desire to own a V8 at this point.
@Jay you wouldn’t? Then don’t get the gt, get the regular and you probably won’t hear it lol
@Jason O Crap? Try math. Diesels usually use more oil for each servicing. And the DEF as you mention, which a gas engine never requires. Ask your brother how many quarts of oil he needs for that engine. Then compare that to a similar truck with a gas engine. Some of the mechanical parts cost more compared to a gas engine. If purchasing new, you will spend thousands more for a diesel. TFL even did a video on how many years it would take to recoup the cost - to break even. It was several years. I don't care what MPG your brother gets, because he never tows. This is a video and a discussion about TOWING.
These TT V6s are keeping me busy.
For the last few months I've only been working on repairs of these engines even though they represent a small portion of our fleet. $1000s of dollars in parts every time.
I have no interest in picking up some of the vehicles you guys review and share but I always love listening to you guys except Tommy most of the time. I can honestly say i just down right enjoy you guys period reviewing and looking at cars like a car guy really does. Thanks guys.
Today's 1/2 ton truck segment, regardless of brand are very capable with towing, and very comfortable for everything else you want to use them for. With a properly sized TT, they really are the most versatile vehicles in today's market.
Happy with my Rebel, purchased $3300 below sticker last month. Much nicer interior and ride than anything else, comparable performance, simpler technology to maintain.
Should've towed at the same time and dry run at the same time due to the windy conditions, there may be some variance in wind speeds that make the tests invalid. It would explain why the tundra didn't hit 18 or 19 on the dry run and also why the ram didn't hit 10 on the towing
Just curious guys what was the rpm's at, say 70 mph on both vehicles based on rear end ratios and transmission gears , not a big difference I'm sure based on mpgs not towing. Nice job, thanks for sharing and stay safe.
I have tried many times to get rpm's on trucks from youtube comments and have never gotten a response. I know this isn't the truck in video but my 2019 tundra 4x4 limited with 5.7l and 6 speed transmission is just a hair above 2k (say 2050) rpms at 80mph. I would love to hear this info from other truck owners.
Agreed and the reason the Ram was off was they let it idle while they shot the trader hookup scenes. They went from 17.5 to 17.1 MPG before resetting for the trip gage.
You guys needed to use the bighorn back county. While the rebel did pretty good, that is just much more comparable to the trd off-road when it comes to tires, aerodynamics and off-road stuff that does affect efficiency. We all know the rebel is the least efficient besides the trx in rams lineup
First off great video!! I was shopping new tundras since before they came out but no dealer here in fl would allow me to put a deposit with Guaranteed MSRP. Ended up with a fully loaded rebel with sunroof with 18k miles for 49k. I did the math and it would take a long time to make up the mpg savings between the two… now watching this maybe it’s closer then I thought
I'm just curious to see the long term reliability of the twin turbo V6.
The cold air adds a lot of drag and significantly reduces MPGs, as well as the elevation.
Cold air also helps the turbo push denser air in the motor
I’ll keep my 2004 E350 with the V10. Bought it used with 47k miles in 2016 for $7500. Tows my Jeep trailer (~8k) no problem up and over the SoCal mountains and I have plenty of room to camp out in the back.
On a typical trip over the mountains to the desert and back I get 8-9 mph towing. Empty I get 13-14 mpg. Regular gas. Regular maintenance.
These new trucks are $60k plus. Just buy a used N/A v8 or v10 with a 4-5 speed auto. Forget all that turbo and super charging and 8 to 10 speed autos. Maintenance and repair costs will kill you.
Fuel economy 😵💫
You mean a turbo-charged V-6 got more fuel economy than an N/A V-8 towing at a mile above sea level? Not much of a shocker there but a Ram being $15,000 dollars more is just frightening.
Yeah, I agree. At sea level they likely would have been closer loaded. Plus the ram has tires not at all suited for fuel efficiency... which it should anyway, because unlike the Toyota, the Ram is really a truck.
You could have used regular (85) with that cold weather.
Also make sure your tires are inflated well. Even 5psi under the maximum can eat up to 5 mpg.
I have towed for Years. The glaring difference I see between the v8 and the v6 is that the larger displacement v8 provides a level of downhill engine braking that the v6 cannot give. Coming down out of a steep mountain downgrade in a lower gear is impossible with a turbo V6. You have to use brakes to slow down. I have towed heavy campers behind 350 and up v8 s and was able to start down the mountain in 2 ND gear and idle all the way to the bottom with very few brake applications of the trlr brakes
@Brendan Morreale Many times you will start to experience brake fade. The rotors heat up and it heats up your brake fluid and glazes your brake pads. Ceramic high performance brake systems help with this but new brake components are made out of compressed granular metal alloys. I have had massive damage to brake rotors in the past and have even had the brake material or pad come right off of the backing plate. The dealership said well that happens sometimes and we will fix it but you have to pay labor. The parts are under warranty though. Little good that does when you start down wolf creek pass with a heavy trailer and the first cutback you hit the brakes and it craps out the pad on the passenger side front wheel and you got metal on metal grinding the rotor and you are hoping and praying that the trailer brakes are up to snuff and can take the brunt of the abuse. I ended up getting the truck stopped. Thank god it was 4 wheel drive with a low range transfer case. I put the truck in low range and let the engine rev up and hold me back with a few trailer brake applications a few times to keep the rpms down. I did not touch the truck brakes but it took me forever to get down off of the mountain. Live and learn.
Do you think a brake application every few minutes is going to overheat your brakes? I'm not so sure.
@Terry Newell I did not mention that my big truck is a 1 ton Ram with a 6.4l hemi. It is a beast with a 50 gallon gas tank. It has the 8 foot box so that I could get the big tank and heavy tow rating. Hit the cruise and drag 14,000 lbs down the interstate like it was nothing all day long. It is way better at engine braking downhill and you aren't riding the brakes.
@Terry Newell I own a 2021 Silverado with the big 4 cylinder turbo. It is my runner truck and light to medium towing vehicle. It will tow 8 to 10,000 lbs quite comfortably down the interstate and through the hills. It won't hold back the load at all down a even moderate grade but it will snort right up that same grade realy well. It has more torque than my older v8 engines did. It will use more gas than they did pulling the same weight. Running empty it gets better gas milage than many cars. To drive a half ton truck down the highway and get 25 to 32 mpg is like driving a small diesel but in a gas burner. It drops clear down to 11mpg towing around 9,000 lbs though.
That’s is correct, I have noticed the same. But love passing the V8’s going up Hill.
Personally, I think the prices are insane. I'm just gonna keep upgrading my old 02 Silverado. It's an unusual configuration in that it is an extended cab long bed Z71 4x4. You don't see many ext cabs with a full 8 foot bed in the 1/2 ton. Not even sure if you can order one any more. You see lots of work trucks with the regular cab, but not the ext cab. It's completely rust free and in great shape inside and out. No the interior won't be as modern, but I'm pretty sure I can add whatever modern technology that I want and as far as I'm concerned, it's a lot cooler than the new ones. It has 350k miles on it and runs perfect, but I can put in a re-manufactured motor and trans installed probably $10-12k. Yes, I know a bunch of mechanics. LOL
Right on brother.
You can get a new f150 with extended cab long bed
More people will be keeping their trucks like this..
New and used are no longer affordable to most
Thanks for doing real world testing like this!
If you're towing a lot year round, the tundra will save you money in the long run. But longevity with towing will matter most on the engines.
Still rather have a v8 with a full size. The 5.7 will be missed
Same here brother.
The truck that was following benefitted from draft from the trailer so the mpg was somewhat fair for the test bit not real world everyday.
My concern about trucks, and most other vehicles widely going to twin turbo power plants is durability, longevity and cost of maintenance and repairs.
It's absolutely correct in thinking that these engines have more moving parts and in towing vehicles more this translates to higher probability of failure and wear. In these newer vehicles one part failing cascades to systemic failures or system shut downs forcing repair. V8s have been around for a century are many are loved because of durability, longevity, ease of repair and moderate low cost to maintain.
Throw in turbos, intercoolers and all the electronics to run them and nightmare repair scenarios come to mind.
Just my two cents worth of today automotive trend to kill v8s in trucks and large SUVs.
Yep you got it brother.
I agree with the comment about aspirated engines requires more higher PPO2 to be efficient which suffers at that altitude. Plus you have wind variable, so there's that.
I would like to see this done with an F150 with ecoboost and an F150 with the 5.0. See what that difference is.
You should have used an
older tundra 4.7 and 5.7 compared against the twin turbo v -6 tundra.
That would show how much of a mistake corporate made or didn't make in switching formats.
Being the tundra is turbo charged I wonder how it could benefit from 93 octane fuel...definetly pick up some power
Higher octane fuel does not increase available power. This has been disproved several times. The BTU per volume energy content doesn’t change with octane. You can even look up Engine Masters on Motor Trend TV. Season 6, Episode 2. They tested 87, 91, 110, 116 octane fuel and also E85. Between each fuel they optimized the engine timing in an attempt to maximize HP. Each fuel made the same power within 1 to 1.5 HP. Higher octane only increases resistance to knock/pre detonation. If your engine isn’t in pre detonation at 87 octane, higher octane fuel will do absolutely nothing but separate you from more of your dollars.
The biggest difference between the 2 is the tires. The tundra in its "off-road" package still has street tires, where as the ram has an actual off-road worthy tread that's going to equate to a lot more rolling resistance.
@67 C10 yeah there's sidewall flex, but we aren't talking trucks with 3500+ lbs in tongue weight. The amount of sidewall flex is still minimal, and the rolling resistance and weight of said tire is still likely several times lower than that of the tires on the ram. You're right, they do run the ribs for longevity. But, why is that they last longer than an all terrain in the same size and compound? Ohhhh, it's because of the reduced rolling resistance. Reduced rolling resistance=lower heat, better wear, better mpg's. And yes, air resistance does play a part in mileage on tires. For all this experience, you're really showing who the noob is.
These aren't 1 ton or bigger trucks pulling massive loads and needing air pressures in the 65+ psi range to support their loads.
Wait, let me guess, you're one of those guys who tells people to run whatever psi is on the side of the tire, right?
@Dan S - you are not aware that more flex in a sidewall can increase rolling resistance. You are unaware that more air pressure in a tire can improve fuel economy. You are wasting my time.
Trucks run ribs vs grips because ribs can last up to 60% longer noob.
@67 C10 what physics of a p-rated tire vs a 6, 8 or 10 lt rated? An lt tire in an aggressive tread is going to be heavier and have higher rolling resistance. There's a reason trucks hauling all the time run highway ribs instead of all terrains in the same load carrying capacity. Tread pattern 100% does affect mileage, empty or loaded. Rolling resistance and air resistance through the tread are factors. Regardless of tire type, the lightest weight tire with the lowest rolling resistance and air resistance is going to offer the best mileage in all conditions. Your "40+ years of experience" must have been under a rock because you clearly do not understand how rolling resistance and tread pattern corresponds to fuel mileage. Now, if you're trying to imply that because the ram had an lt tire, and the pressure was higher than the p rated tundra tires, made the difference between tread patterns null, you're still wrong. The increased resistance from the aggressive tread pattern is still higher than any added resistance to a p rated tire under load at its correct air pressure for said load.
Now, when towing, tire tread pattern might not make as noticeable of a difference in terms of numbers, but when you do a percentage, a small .5 to 1 mpg difference could be as much as 10-15%. In terms of fuel mileage, a 10-15% difference is significant. Tread pattern matters when it comes to fuel economy, whether you're towing or not.
I tow all over New England in a similar size and weight camper (2021 keystone bullet 243bhs) with my 2020 Ram 1500 Laramie hemi - 3.92 rear, air suspension - and regularly get between 9 and 10 mpg, but I keep my speed to 65mph, which I’ve noticed makes a huge difference too.
Interesting test - I suspect electric and V6 is the future.
And yes, I wish I had the bigger tank, too 😂
7,000 lbs, wow. Our 23' Rockwood Roo has an empty weight of ~4,300 lbs. I know the Black Series is much more heavy duty, but more than a ton of extra weight is remarkable.
That weight is pretty normal in Australia , a 4300lb trailer would not last long here
It takes a given amount of energy to move a load for a certain distance and speed. Given the same energy source it’s not surprising that the fuel consumption is nearly the same. The Ram will be more efficient at sea level as it is naturally aspirated.
@David J. wrong, the turbo will make EVEN MORE power at sea level (just like the NA engine)... the turbo doesn't magically stop working because there's more air at sea level.
...and if there's more air, the turbo engine will also not have to run as hard.
The only time a turbocharged will struggle is when the air temp is high (and the intercooler can't reject heat as quickly as with cool air).
The NA engine suffers a lot more at altitude then the turbo. The turbos performance won't change much, but the NAs will.
... and at sea level, so will the turbo V6... What's your point?
The 3R's in order (1) Reliability (2) Range (3) Ride are what interest me.
Interesting test. Anyhow, I would say that a windy day is hardly “consistent”, there can be significant differences in the space of a very short time. They could tend to even out in the distance, but also the wind level can change significantly in places just a few miles apart, let alone fifty. And the wind effect is almost always the biggest influence on the mileage when I’m towing, almost on pair with change in elevation because that does tent to even out more homogeneously.
That isn’t to say that the Tundra is not more efficient, just that the actual numbers could have a tolerance much larger than your normal tests.
Great video love the sound of the V8
Great video. I have had many issues with the 2014 Toyota I bought windows, cab trim, transmission. I would go with the Ram. It cost more but it’s better.
I had a 2016 tundra, a lot more issues then I was expecting, given the fact every fan boy force feeds the reliability factor..... It was in the shop within the first month!🤣
I found the trip meter in my Tacoma to be pretty accurate as well.
I definitely thought the Hemi would get more MPG on the highway, but I’m not surprised. Given that bit of information I’d still pick it over the TTV6
The 5.7 is notoriously thirsty.
This was the best real world towing mpg you guys have done because campers have more wind drag than flat trailers hauling a pickup
Even though I like Tundras I would have to wait on the longevity of it's new v6. As we all know ram has it's issues itself but I think the 5.7 wins for durability as of now.
As far as I see it is the same as the F150. Turbos give a more premium experience and make it easy to drive and tow but you will never save on gas. Only way to do that is detune it, or overgear it, or stop/start, or hybrid it. But roi is still not huge. The roi on Toyota's hybrid truck doesn't even work which I find weird since they are the leader in hybrids.
I know 2wd trucks are not very common these days but myself I drive the 2wd ram and have for years never needed the 4wd and have noticed they get a lot better mpg than the 4wd models. Would it be possible for you guys to test the 2wd models of 1/2 tons
In older tundras, in my experience, you do NOT want to tow with cruise control. It always drops to lower gears on hills than necessary and kills gas mileage. You are better off using your foot. I don't know if this is the same in the 3rd gen, but it is certainly true in the 1st!
TFL thank you for the towing test with a trailer that has a drag co efficient to it (height). Close to the same MPG (8) averagei get with the 7.3 godzilla (4.30 gearing) towing a 10k travel trailer at 75 mpg. which is a couple hairs better than the 8.1 with a 5 speed Allison. Aerodynamic factors.
I would of been curious what the mpg would be with say 1/2 tank of gas that's closer to a older tundra gas tank size. Weight savings on 16+ gallons when towing would be interesting numbers.
this was quite interesting as this is just about all i use our 99 F250 Superduty for. dragging our 28 foot trailer to nascar races all across the south. we tow at 70-75 traffic permitting, and we average about 9-10 mpg over the last 15 years or so. some good hills going to bristol and martinsville, too. 5-6000 miles of towing per year. What is funny about that is when gas trucks, like f150 or silverados tell me they tow at 15mpgs or better with a 30 foot bumper pull. oh, yeah and it does fine... doesn't like the hills, though....
If the Tundra had the same tires as the Ram it would be the same or worse. P.S. Next video compare how tires affect the mpg.
This. The Rebel is equipped with a true A/T tire, lifted suspension, and 3.92 gear. This is not exactly apples to apples.
Another impressive video. You pack a lot of good info in this video. I appreciate your test of vehicles I have never owned. ( I’m a Ford F-150 3.? Tc driver)
I would highly suspect the second run was worse conditions, both vehs did worse then expected the second run. You need to do these 2-3 times. I would actually day run the loop 2 to 3 times before filling up. The longer before the fill up the more accurate. I mean try a 5-10 mi loop I bet it would be crazy in consistent. More miles before fill ups please!
Ok, I get the comparison you are after here, but a comparison I wish you guys would do is within a brand of vehicle and the performances of the different levels and set ups one can chose from at the dealer. For example, the base model Ram 2500, vs the Ram 2500 Larimie, vs the Ram 2500 Power Wagon, showing how each comes set up in their perspective level of vehicle, and then how they each handle the various situations, like mud, snow, sand, rocks, trail, and so on. The overall goal being to assist those interested in the brands already to understand what to expect when they buy the various models and not get a truck that wont perform as they wanted. Just an idea.
I’ve had a f150 3.5 eco twin turbo and a f150 5.0l v8. Towing a 7400# trailer I find the 3.5l does a better job in the hills & mountain passes. Turbos creates torque. I’d go back to the 3.5l next time. Mpgs were about the same, but up a long hill the 3.5 was a lot better.
Thanks for another great video. I have one suggestion. If possible, a 200 mile round trip could give you more real world results. 49 miles is a very short test and may magnify slight differences in towing mpg.
Are you also resetting the MPG meter when doing the Trip meter? A difference in MPG between the dash and your calculations could be because of that. Just a thought
Curious to see the burn out rates of the turbos in the future. You wouldn't have that problem with the V-8's w/o turbo. I was expecting better from the 2022 Tundra and have been disappointed with all the reviews.
My only real concern with running a small turbocharged engine, is the stress when they are working under a heavy load. Larger engine can make that without a lot of work, small turbo engine has to work harder cuz the turbo kicks in and that increases cylinder pressure and Temps. Just my thought, but they do make amazing power though
I find it to be hilarious but tundra really proved itself when towing like 1 mpg better then a V8 8 speed
Out of fairness, they are still getting over making floor mats after actually measuring the floor pan in their cars.
What speed are the tires on the trailer rated for? My trailer tires are 65mph, and that is my preferred towing speed. I would love to see the figures at 65mph.
Okay I have a 2021 Ford F150 with the max tow package and the 5.0 V8 and the 3.73 rear end. I pulled around 8000 pounds of small square bales with the truck maxed at its 1805 payload and driving through hills. I was doing 60 to 65. I got 9.9 mpg on about 50 miles. I really thought the Toyota would have been around 10 mpg.
My 2016 F150 with a 2.7L ecoboost gets between 11 and 13 mpg towing our 7200lbs 27 ft travel trailer.
Anecdotally my setup (2.7L , 6 speed auto, 3.55 gear ratio) can out accelerate a Nissan Kicks while towing 7200lbs 😁
Yeah but it won't outlast the Toyota Tundra with the legendary 5.7L I-Force V8 nor the Nissan Titan with its legendary 5.6L VQ series V8.
@Quest Jones Whatever the number might be, I'd bet big money that it would be far better than Ford.
@Stefanovich Michael I would be absolutely shocked if one of these turbo Tundras ever see 300,000 miles.
@FISH ON!! Alberta Outdoors I believe gm uses the same trans,forums say it has issues. Toyota doesn't use the same one. Hope your happy with Ford, but it's the reason I drive Tundra. On my second one, 16DC,145,000kloms no issues. 03 Tundra over 400k no issues, not even a minor one.All 3 Ford trucks had many issues, even leaving me stranded twice. Could never go back.
@Stefanovich Michael never hear much other than how everyone with them just love them. In the mustangs and f150s anyway. Gm even went in with ford on them and have them aswell. Watch some newer drag racing videos on 1320 etc and watch those 10 spd trannies take a beating and they are deinately better for towing and mileage than the old tried and true 6sp. Either one paired with the coyote or ecoboosts are awesome love what ford is doing👍 By the looks of what toyota tundra and other vehicles are doing now with twin turbos and 10spds looks like they're not alone in their innovative thinking. I just think ford does better job usually. Especially when they are the ones that do it first while everyone else just copies them and tries to improve on their idea. Anyway for the most part most are happy as hell with the new 10 spd but sure there are some that have trouble just like the new tundra. Nothing is perfect.
Hey guys, huge fan. Would love to hear more about this rumor for the twin turbo engine in the Armada/Titan. Me and my family have owned many Titans!
Tundra is 1% of the truck Market or less. Why would they even bother running comparisons with that truck
Great video guys Love watching your channel But 392 Gears Compared to 331 gears The Toyota's gearing is set for mostly highway Have friends that have both of those trucks And they got about the same as you guys