|
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | no need to be so snarky SLE … LOL
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 29
| Jonny, sorry for the snarkyness. I suppose I could've left out those last two or three sentences, lol. I drove the 6.2L GM today and will say it's got some snort when you put your foot into it and has a beautiful exhaust note! Almost music to ones ears. That's one thing I can't say about the Eco, the exhaust note is null, the turbos are audible but quite as is the blow off valve. I put to many miles on to have a loud exhaust however a quaint little V-8 burble has it's place. I suppose the V6 just doesn't have an attractive exhaust note so they chose to just snuff it out all together, oh well. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | great info on the eco-boost … i'm now thinking even more seriously about waiting for the aluminum body and pulling the trigger. i'm driving a 6.0 diesel now … 259,000 trouble-free miles LOL, well maybe a little trouble in the early days. no, a lot of trouble. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 202
Location: Angola, IN |
jonnysled - 4/14/2014 5:12 PM
great info on the eco-boost ...
Did you guys watch the whole video? I did last night and I finally got some time to respond to what I saw:
1.) They "simulated" 150k miles on a dyno. No way could this be even close to equivilent as being real road miles. They said they can "simulate" 150k miles in 200-300 hours!!!! REALLY? Even if you ran the motor at a "stimulated" 100 (beating the holy living snot out of it on a highway), in 300 hours, you'd only have gone 30,000 miles!!! 1/5th of the miles claimed (150,000). I don't buy their "simulated" model one bit.
2.) Did you see that engine when they tore apart in front of the live audience? You gotta be kidding me right? The entire internals of that engine were SPOTLESS. There wasn't even any varnish on the engine!! That's not real. That means two things: The Ford guys were changing the oil every 2500 miles with high end low NOACK oil (GTL stocks or Ester, Group V oil) or the engine NEVER really saw 160-180,000 claimed miles. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 202
Location: Angola, IN | crix - 4/12/2014 4:10 PM
Yes I do know a guy that has a 11 eco boost with just shy of 200k on it he uses it for pulling his boat, fairly big camper and a beast of a steel frame 24ft ice house I would never think about pulling with my old 5.4
his does have quite a lot of hi way miles on it from work but, he has had very good luck with it just the minor maintenance stuff and general maintenance oil and fluid changes etc... no turbos no motor issues and no tranny problems on his!!!
he did tell me he does full synthetic and 5k oil changes religiously
Will I have mine for 200k like him??? no but I will have it for 10+ years
That's averaging 70k miles a year!!! That's almost all highway use...has to be. And at highway cruising, the turbo's don't even spool. Driving your car/truck down the highway for long intervals (like this guys is doing) is easier on your engine than letting it sit in the garage.
Edited by SteveHulbert 4/24/2014 4:00 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 626
Location: Madison, WI | We get it Steve, your not a fan of the Eco-boost. Others are. Don't buy one |
|
| |
|
Posts: 165
Location: tHe LaKe Of PrIoR, mN | finally pulled the ranger home with my eco boost and well I am very impressed the few hills that my old 5.4 would have been screaming rape losing speed this thing didn't even drop a gear or a mile an hour |
|
| |
|
Posts: 38
| buy a tundra u wont be sorry |
|
| |
|
Posts: 122
| To those who have been running a Tundra for a while, how have they performed? I'm particularly interested in reliability. I currently have a Silverado but am considering a Tundra next. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 267
| A friend of mine pulled a tandem axle V-front covered trailer to North Dakota full of waterfowl gear with his Ecoboost. He got 6 mpg. Not good!
Course he was fighting a 50 mph headwind. Not sure what he got on the way home. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 89
| Dave8121 - 4/28/2014 6:06 PM
To those who have been running a Tundra for a while, how have they performed? I'm particularly interested in reliability. I currently have a Silverado but am considering a Tundra next.
I was in the same situation as you, I ended up buying the new Ram with the 8 speed tranny. It plays with the boat and empty I am gettin 22-23 mpg. I test drove the ecoboost first but I kept getting different reviews on them and My wife wouldn't even let me look at a Toyota, she said city boys drive them and country boys drive Chevy, Ford and Dodge
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Saw a PT Cruiser towing a ranger with a double axel trailer today. He laughs at you truck owners. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 38
| thats funny that u would let ur wife tell u what kind of truck to buy u supposedly being a country boy and all |
|
| |
|
Posts: 89
| she didn't, she just told anything but a foreign truck which I felt the same way
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32799
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | What's a foreign truck? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1660
Location: central Wisconsin | sworrall - 4/30/2014 7:44 PM
What's a foreign truck?
That is an oxymoron, just like jumbo shrimp. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32799
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Didn't answer the question. Although funny, I was looking for a definition, not an opinion...
 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 117
| sworrall - 4/30/2014 8:44 PM
What's a foreign truck?
You know...owned by a foreign company. Like Dodge.
(Toyota is made in the US)
I had a dandy photo of the manufacturers sticker inside the door of my truck that clearly says "toyota....Made in the USA", but I cant seem to post the image.
Edited by Macintosh 5/1/2014 7:37 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Clint … what reels does your wife tell you to buy to throw double 10's |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | Dave8121 - 4/28/2014 6:06 PM
To those who have been running a Tundra for a while, how have they performed? I'm particularly interested in reliability. I currently have a Silverado but am considering a Tundra next.
I have a 2008 Tundra with the 5.7. My previous 3 vehicles were 1994 gmc sierra single cab 5.7, 2001 gmc sierra single cab 5.3, 2004 gmc ext cab 5.3. I loved the 1994... My dad runs Suburbans, couple buddies run 2006-2008 F150's. My pickup is noticeably the more powerful of the towing rigs above that I drive/drove on a regular basis. I haven't driven the new line-up in any make. At the time I wanted something faster, quieter in cab(with rear doors that open) and more powerful than my GMC 5.3 and didn't want to get into the 6+litre or a diesel. The Tundra was totalled in a flood incident when it was a year old but I kept and repaired it. Other than a small exhaust leak that Toyota took care on in 2010, it's been very solid at 83k miles. Fuel mileage is a bit less than sticker no matter how I drive, but I get better mileage while towing than any of my 3 previous vehicles. I plan to keep it to see just how many miles I can put on the thing without breaking the bank.
Edited by Reef Hawg 5/1/2014 8:06 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32799
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I was looking for a definition of 'foreign vehicle', and the 'oxymoron' quote was funny, but not what I was asking the OP of that comment to define. Hey, if asking a question and looking for the actual answer is hard on you, please....use your mouse.
We drive three brands in the Worrall/OFM household. I have 2 older Fords that have treated me extremely well, and there are quite a few foreign made parts in them. Keith has a brand new Dodge 1500 with the 5.7 Bighorn package.
OFM has two 2007 Toyota Tundra we have put up to 160K on with very few issues, and the mileage is acceptable and better by a measure than the older Fords. The new Dodge does quite a bit better without a trailer, we'll see what it does when a boat is hooked up the the hitch in a week or so.
By the definition as I understand it, none of the above are 'foreign' brands, so what's your definition?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1660
Location: central Wisconsin | By my thinking a foreign truck is one that is not built by GM, Ford, or Dodge. Old fashioned I realize in this world of global economies but that is my opinion. I currently drive a 2013 F150 with the 5.0 engine. Great truck at a very fair price. Prior to this I drove a 1997 Suburban for 15 years. Great luck with that vehicle also. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 117
| Heres one measure that could answer the question.
http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=top&subject=ami&sto... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32799
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Macintosh, that's the answers I was looking for. Thanks. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 273
| I drive a 2010 tundra for work. I have 68k on it and so far it has been a very good truck. Fuel economy seems a little low (15 mpg), but I do spend most of my time driving on field roads with a lot of that in 4wd. I recently bought a 2012 suburban, but if I was in the market for a new truck for my personal use I would give the tundra a serious look. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 29
| I see a lot of previous discussion talking about trucks anywhere from 2000' to 2010' models. Comparing a 2010 model to a 2014 or 2015 really isn't a comparison. I don't' have any strong feelings about the tundra other than the truck, chassis, and drivetrain are largely the same as when they debuted more than a 1/2 dozen years ago. This years refresh only freshened up the interior and added some gadgetry that the other makers had already incorporated and Toyota was lacking. Their V8 is a strong runner even today however it's fallen behind in terms of fuel economy and there trans simply doesn't compare to those of the new trucks from the other makers. I believe they are very reliable and they should be as they haven't pushed any envelopes and are essentially running 2006 technology. To me, if I'm paying for new, give me something new, Give me something innovative, not something that's already long in the tooth. This is also my problem with the GM redesign. It was a very conservative approach that only got them close to what Dodge and Ford are already doing. This puts them in constant catch up mode. The real question is do you want to be a leader or a follower. The sales numbers are telling that story and what current buyers are looking for. The GM twins have struggled since their debut, the Tundra has never really became a contender, Ram is seeing sales increases every month in leaps an bounds, and ford continues to march on with solid sales and monthly increases for the most part. Frankly, I look for Fords numbers to go a little stagnate until the 2015s hit the lots unless the start laying a boat load of cash on the hoods. with that said I expect dodge will continue to march forward increasing sales, the GM will continue to struggle with out additional incentive packages, and the Tundra will continue as many of there buyers are not cross shopping and know what there buying before they head to the lot. I could be totally off, however this has been my observation of the truck market which I've watched pretty close over the past few years. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 180
Location: Elgin, IL | I'm keeping this short. My new Ford F150 V6 Ecoboost pulled my 18' Tracker Tundra and my partners Ranger 620. Was worried on how it would handle the towing but once I was on the road I was impressed. Gas mileage read 13.3mpg.
Felt smooth to me. I'm satisfied with it so far. |
|
| |
