User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 11:32:04 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @rabidus I've read those will be released 10/31 Kharn Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Still waiting on prices…. @rabidus I've read those will be released 10/31 Kharn Thanks Kharn! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 11:36:26 AM EDT
[#2]
19.87mpg over 150 mile road trip on the 4x4 Crewmax non-hybrid My 2014 F150 SCREW with the Ecoboost got better mileage than that 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 11:54:48 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My 2014 F150 SCREW with the Ecoboost got better mileage than that Quote HistoryQuoted: 19.87mpg over 150 mile road trip on the 4x4 Crewmax non-hybrid My 2014 F150 SCREW with the Ecoboost got better mileage than that And probably has better payload.  Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 11:55:50 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Toyota says the max payload is 1940, which is probably a double cab 2wd sr5 without the hybrid. The hybrid lowers payload by about 400 lbs from what I can tell. A crew cab short bed sr5 or limited with 4x4 and no hybrid should be somewhere between 16-1800. As for the stated MPGs, I'm only supposed to get 19 highway in my 4Runner, but I'm averaging 20.2 combined, calculated by hand, over 20k miles. I bet I could get 22 average out of the tundra. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkKHWFRJGDU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1GT2BQklvM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbwLqz8ocKsThe fuel economy rating is 17/22/19 for the 4x4. That's pretty much what I was expecting. Alex said he got ~17.5 MPG in mostly highway driving. That's also close to what I was expecting. The test truck Alex had was a crew cab 4x4 Limited with the air suspension, and he said the payload rating for that configuration was ~1,400 lbs. That's catastrophic.  Unless the SR5 with fewer features and smaller wheels picks up a good 200+ pounds, I think I'm out. Toyota says the max payload is 1940, which is probably a double cab 2wd sr5 without the hybrid. The hybrid lowers payload by about 400 lbs from what I can tell. A crew cab short bed sr5 or limited with 4x4 and no hybrid should be somewhere between 16-1800. As for the stated MPGs, I'm only supposed to get 19 highway in my 4Runner, but I'm averaging 20.2 combined, calculated by hand, over 20k miles. I bet I could get 22 average out of the tundra. Alex is driving a non-hybrid truck in that video, and it's marked for ~1,400 lbs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 1:09:16 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ram GT payload: 1324lbs sticker or if the Pro gets a boost. And a "belt driven mild hybrid" on the Ram?  Is that so when it shits the bed as a fine FCA product, you can just take the belt off? It's been out for 3 years, has that actually been happening? They also offer a diesel and a V8 without a hybrid system. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 1:22:00 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6O2vZR0QhQRam GT payload: 1324lbs  Tundra payload stated in this video, 4x4 Crewmax non-hybrid: 1400lbs The TRD Pro has a 1600lb capacity per Toyota, so not sure if they're reading a preproduction sticker or if the Pro gets a boost. And a "belt driven mild hybrid" on the Ram? Is that so when it shits the bed as a fine FCA product, you can just take the belt off? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT88pm_GSE47.02 second 0-60s and 19.87mpg over 150 mile road trip on the 4x4 Crewmax non-hybrid. ETA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJor46PBcfQ1794 Crewmax 4x4 6.5' bed hybrid: 1575lb payload CrewMax Limited with TRD Off-Road Package, non-hybrid: 1605lb payload (I assume TRD Offroad package is 4x4 only?) Kharn This payload situation is muddy as hell. I did some digging on tundras.com and found this: Those numbers are much more acceptable to me. As far as Ram's eTorque (the belt driven mild hybrid) goes, it doesn't seem to be that big of a deal. They introduced it with model year 2019 (so fall 2018 sales), and it hasn't created many issues. The system itself doesn't seem to be wildly complicated, either. There's a big motor unit thing in place of the alternator and a 40v battery in the back of the cab. The motor unit can provide a brief moment of torque off the line, it handles the automatic start/stop business, and it has an interesting system where it either spins up or pull regen to improve rev-matching. Perhaps most importantly, eTorque is optional. If you don't want it, it's easily avoided. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 3:14:47 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This payload situation is muddy as hell. I did some digging on tundras.com and found this: https://tnstatic.net/attachments/towing-payload-jpg.648599/ Those numbers are much more acceptable to me. As far as Ram's eTorque (the belt driven mild hybrid) goes, it doesn't seem to be that big of a deal. They introduced it with model year 2019 (so fall 2018 sales), and it hasn't created many issues. The system itself doesn't seem to be wildly complicated, either. There's a big motor unit thing in place of the alternator and a 40v battery in the back of the cab. The motor unit can provide a brief moment of torque off the line, it handles the automatic start/stop business, and it has an interesting system where it either spins up or pull regen to improve rev-matching. Perhaps most importantly, eTorque is optional. If you don't want it, it's easily avoided. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6O2vZR0QhQRam GT payload: 1324lbs Tundra payload stated in this video, 4x4 Crewmax non-hybrid: 1400lbs The TRD Pro has a 1600lb capacity per Toyota, so not sure if they're reading a preproduction sticker or if the Pro gets a boost. And a "belt driven mild hybrid" on the Ram? Is that so when it shits the bed as a fine FCA product, you can just take the belt off? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT88pm_GSE47.02 second 0-60s and 19.87mpg over 150 mile road trip on the 4x4 Crewmax non-hybrid. ETA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJor46PBcfQ1794 Crewmax 4x4 6.5' bed hybrid: 1575lb payload CrewMax Limited with TRD Off-Road Package, non-hybrid: 1605lb payload (I assume TRD Offroad package is 4x4 only?) Kharn This payload situation is muddy as hell. I did some digging on tundras.com and found this: https://tnstatic.net/attachments/towing-payload-jpg.648599/ Those numbers are much more acceptable to me. As far as Ram's eTorque (the belt driven mild hybrid) goes, it doesn't seem to be that big of a deal. They introduced it with model year 2019 (so fall 2018 sales), and it hasn't created many issues. The system itself doesn't seem to be wildly complicated, either. There's a big motor unit thing in place of the alternator and a 40v battery in the back of the cab. The motor unit can provide a brief moment of torque off the line, it handles the automatic start/stop business, and it has an interesting system where it either spins up or pull regen to improve rev-matching. Perhaps most importantly, eTorque is optional. If you don't want it, it's easily avoided. Problem with that 1117lb tongue weight is suddenly you're down to 500lbs in the cabin, fuel tank, and bed on some configurations. And a full fuel tank weighs around 250lbs. So you'll need to put the wife and kids in a chase car. Which might not be a bad thing for road trip sanity, but it's the principle of it. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 3:25:20 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Problem with that 1117lb tongue weight is suddenly you're down to 500lbs in the cabin, fuel tank, and bed on some configurations. And a full fuel tank weighs around 250lbs. So you'll need to put the wife and kids in a chase car. Which might not be a bad thing for road trip sanity, but it's the principle of it. Kharn Payload isn’t calculated after a full tank of gas? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 4:33:08 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Payload isn’t calculated after a full tank of gas? It is. Curb weight includes a full tank of fuel, and payload is gvwr-curb weight (and usually 150 lbs for a driver which will be in a disclaimer). |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 5:08:06 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It is. Curb weight includes a full tank of fuel, and payload is gvwr-curb weight (and usually 150 lbs for a driver which will be in a disclaimer). Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Payload isn’t calculated after a full tank of gas? It is. Curb weight includes a full tank of fuel, and payload is gvwr-curb weight (and usually 150 lbs for a driver which will be in a disclaimer). They have driver jockeys?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 5:17:20 PM EDT
[#11]
I swear Toyota could fuck your wife and shit on your carpet and some of you will still be in line at the dealer to buy one of these abortions.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 5:26:21 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My 2014 F150 SCREW with the Ecoboost got better mileage than that Quote HistoryQuoted: 19.87mpg over 150 mile road trip on the 4x4 Crewmax non-hybrid My 2014 F150 SCREW with the Ecoboost got better mileage than that I can't get better than 16-17 in my 2013. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 5:38:17 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I can't get better than 16-17 in my 2013. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 19.87mpg over 150 mile road trip on the 4x4 Crewmax non-hybrid My 2014 F150 SCREW with the Ecoboost got better mileage than that I can't get better than 16-17 in my 2013. You need to find a Dodge interstate that’s downhill in every direction with a 65 mph speed limit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 5:52:47 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You need to find a Dodge interstate that’s downhill in every direction with a 65 mph speed limit. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: 19.87mpg over 150 mile road trip on the 4x4 Crewmax non-hybrid My 2014 F150 SCREW with the Ecoboost got better mileage than that I can't get better than 16-17 in my 2013. You need to find a Dodge interstate that’s downhill in every direction with a 65 mph speed limit. Nah, mine would do 22-24mpg at 70mph pretty reliably. Between that and the 36gal tank the only limiting factor on road trips was my bladder. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 9:20:40 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nah, mine would do 22-24mpg at 70mph pretty reliably. Between that and the 36gal tank the only limiting factor on road trips was my bladder. So, a 65 mph speed limit. I drive 80+ on the interstates. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 10:39:37 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So, a 65 mph speed limit. I drive 80+ on the interstates. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Nah, mine would do 22-24mpg at 70mph pretty reliably. Between that and the 36gal tank the only limiting factor on road trips was my bladder. So, a 65 mph speed limit. I drive 80+ on the interstates. My 19 Ram 2500 gets better gas mileage at 79 than it does at 65 or 70. Gotta be the gearing because it's a friggin brick. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 10:42:05 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My 2014 F150 SCREW with the Ecoboost got better mileage than that Quote HistoryQuoted: 19.87mpg over 150 mile road trip on the 4x4 Crewmax non-hybrid My 2014 F150 SCREW with the Ecoboost got better mileage than that Lol indeed. My 2019 F150 with the 5.0 Coyote is has averaged 20.1mpg over last 4000mi of mostly highlyway driving. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 10:43:49 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's been out for 3 years, has that actually been happening? They also offer a diesel and a V8 without a hybrid system. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Ram GT payload: 1324lbs sticker or if the Pro gets a boost. And a "belt driven mild hybrid" on the Ram? Is that so when it shits the bed as a fine FCA product, you can just take the belt off? It's been out for 3 years, has that actually been happening? They also offer a diesel and a V8 without a hybrid system. The Dodge "mild hybrid" is a joke. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 10:53:17 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Alex is driving a non-hybrid truck in that video, and it's marked for ~1,400 lbs. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkKHWFRJGDU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1GT2BQklvM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbwLqz8ocKsThe fuel economy rating is 17/22/19 for the 4x4. That's pretty much what I was expecting. Alex said he got ~17.5 MPG in mostly highway driving. That's also close to what I was expecting. The test truck Alex had was a crew cab 4x4 Limited with the air suspension, and he said the payload rating for that configuration was ~1,400 lbs. That's catastrophic. Unless the SR5 with fewer features and smaller wheels picks up a good 200+ pounds, I think I'm out. Toyota says the max payload is 1940, which is probably a double cab 2wd sr5 without the hybrid. The hybrid lowers payload by about 400 lbs from what I can tell. A crew cab short bed sr5 or limited with 4x4 and no hybrid should be somewhere between 16-1800. As for the stated MPGs, I'm only supposed to get 19 highway in my 4Runner, but I'm averaging 20.2 combined, calculated by hand, over 20k miles. I bet I could get 22 average out of the tundra. Alex is driving a non-hybrid truck in that video, and it's marked for ~1,400 lbs. Toyota released a statement that those 14xx stickers were incorrect. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2021 11:02:05 PM EDT
[#20]
Hate the outside and grill. Interested in the backend/tailgate.
Love the inside. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 12:10:00 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: My 19 Ram 2500 gets better gas mileage at 79 than it does at 65 or 70. Gotta be the gearing because it's a friggin brick. Quoted: Lol indeed. My 2019 F150 with the 5.0 Coyote is has averaged 20.1mpg over last 4000mi of mostly highlyway driving.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 12:10:21 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Toyota released a statement that those 14xx stickers were incorrect. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkKHWFRJGDU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1GT2BQklvM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbwLqz8ocKsThe fuel economy rating is 17/22/19 for the 4x4. That's pretty much what I was expecting. Alex said he got ~17.5 MPG in mostly highway driving. That's also close to what I was expecting. The test truck Alex had was a crew cab 4x4 Limited with the air suspension, and he said the payload rating for that configuration was ~1,400 lbs. That's catastrophic. Unless the SR5 with fewer features and smaller wheels picks up a good 200+ pounds, I think I'm out. Toyota says the max payload is 1940, which is probably a double cab 2wd sr5 without the hybrid. The hybrid lowers payload by about 400 lbs from what I can tell. A crew cab short bed sr5 or limited with 4x4 and no hybrid should be somewhere between 16-1800. As for the stated MPGs, I'm only supposed to get 19 highway in my 4Runner, but I'm averaging 20.2 combined, calculated by hand, over 20k miles. I bet I could get 22 average out of the tundra. Alex is driving a non-hybrid truck in that video, and it's marked for ~1,400 lbs. Toyota released a statement that those 14xx stickers were incorrect. Link? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 6:04:22 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Dodge "mild hybrid" is a joke. Care to explain? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 9:27:56 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: My 19 Ram 2500 gets better gas mileage at 79 than it does at 65 or 70. Gotta be the gearing because it's a friggin brick. Quoted: Lol indeed. My 2019 F150 with the 5.0 Coyote is has averaged 20.1mpg over last 4000mi of mostly highlyway driving. I'll take a video of it next time I'm driving. Cylinder shutdown really helps the fuel economy while cruising. Having said all that my average is still around 13-14 lol. City driving kills it |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 9:33:44 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'll take a video of it next time I'm driving. Cylinder shutdown really helps the fuel economy while cruising. Having said all that my average is still around 13-14 lol. City driving kills it I daily a 2013 1500 Hemi and average 20-21 MPG hand calculated on my current commute. The dash gauge will usually say something between 22-24 MPG. I've also achieved 13.5 unloaded on the highway...at 95 MPH with a headwind. Just because it doesn't always doesn't mean it can't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 11:03:39 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I daily a 2013 1500 Hemi and average 20-21 MPG hand calculated on my current commute. The dash gauge will usually say something between 22-24 MPG. I've also achieved 13.5 unloaded on the highway...at 95 MPH with a headwind. Just because it doesn't always doesn't mean it can't. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'll take a video of it next time I'm driving. Cylinder shutdown really helps the fuel economy while cruising. Having said all that my average is still around 13-14 lol. City driving kills it I daily a 2013 1500 Hemi and average 20-21 MPG hand calculated on my current commute. The dash gauge will usually say something between 22-24 MPG. I've also achieved 13.5 unloaded on the highway...at 95 MPH with a headwind. Just because it doesn't always doesn't mean it can't. Your dash gauge isn’t accurate?  What about your odometer, have you calibrated that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 12:47:05 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Your dash gauge isn’t accurate? What about your odometer, have you calibrated that? Odometer is accurate. Fuel gauges are usually not spot on in any vehicle, but I'm still getting EPA highway mileage on my commute. I think the reason Toyota guys are having trouble believing this is that they know their Tundra can't get that, so they don't believe that anyone else can either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 12:59:31 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Care to explain? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The Dodge "mild hybrid" is a joke. Care to explain? He can't, because he doesn't know.I own one, and I love it My 21 ram etorqe is getting the best mileage I have ever have ever had in a pickup.This truck is the very first 4x4 pickup to ever get constantly 19+mpg.My 13 tacoma only averages 17. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 1:05:15 PM EDT
[#29]
Best I ever had with my '18 Tundra was 20.12 MPG on a near 500-mile trip. That was driving with fuel efficiency in mind. Second best was 19.86 MPG.
These numbers were not typical though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 5:54:46 PM EDT
[#30]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 6:55:08 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Odometer is accurate. Fuel gauges are usually not spot on in any vehicle, but I'm still getting EPA highway mileage on my commute. I think the reason Toyota guys are having trouble believing this is that they know their Tundra can't get that, so they don't believe that anyone else can either. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Your dash gauge isn’t accurate? What about your odometer, have you calibrated that? Odometer is accurate. Fuel gauges are usually not spot on in any vehicle, but I'm still getting EPA highway mileage on my commute. I think the reason Toyota guys are having trouble believing this is that they know their Tundra can't get that, so they don't believe that anyone else can either. I've never owned a Toyota. I just don't think there's a vehicle on the road that's more efficient at 80 MPH than it is at 65. Play with this calculator: http://www.apexgarage.com/tech/horsepower_calc.shtml The values I'm using are... Cd - .409 (this is really close) Frontal area - 44 sq-ft (this most likely isn't right) Weight - 6766 lbs (this is also really close) The horsepower values required to maintain speed are 45.2 hp at 65 MPH, 54.4 hp at 70 MPH, and 76.9 hp at 80 MPH. It takes about 70% more horsepower to maintain 80 MPH than it does to maintain 65 MPH. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 8:24:22 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I've never owned a Toyota. I just don't think there's a vehicle on the road that's more efficient at 80 MPH than it is at 65. Play with this calculator: http://www.apexgarage.com/tech/horsepower_calc.shtml The values I'm using are... Cd - .409 (this is really close) Frontal area - 44 sq-ft (this most likely isn't right) Weight - 6766 lbs (this is also really close) The horsepower values required to maintain speed are 45.2 hp at 65 MPH, 54.4 hp at 70 MPH, and 76.9 hp at 80 MPH. It takes about 70% more horsepower to maintain 80 MPH than it does to maintain 65 MPH. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Your dash gauge isn’t accurate? What about your odometer, have you calibrated that? Odometer is accurate. Fuel gauges are usually not spot on in any vehicle, but I'm still getting EPA highway mileage on my commute. I think the reason Toyota guys are having trouble believing this is that they know their Tundra can't get that, so they don't believe that anyone else can either. I've never owned a Toyota. I just don't think there's a vehicle on the road that's more efficient at 80 MPH than it is at 65. Play with this calculator: http://www.apexgarage.com/tech/horsepower_calc.shtml The values I'm using are... Cd - .409 (this is really close) Frontal area - 44 sq-ft (this most likely isn't right) Weight - 6766 lbs (this is also really close) The horsepower values required to maintain speed are 45.2 hp at 65 MPH, 54.4 hp at 70 MPH, and 76.9 hp at 80 MPH. It takes about 70% more horsepower to maintain 80 MPH than it does to maintain 65 MPH. It’s a Dodge thing. If it had one of them Cummings, it’d get 30 mpg pulling a loaded trailer up the Ike at 80 mph. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 8:32:22 PM EDT
[#33]
From my 4Runner on 285/70s.
Quoted: Mileage report after 2,667 miles. These were all hand-calculated. 1st fill: 17.9 mpg 2nd fill: 18.1 mpg 3rd fill: 18.4 mpg 4th fill: 14.6 mpg < spent most of this at 85 instead of 75 5th fill: 16.5 mpg < lots of "city" driving 6th fill: 19.0 mpg 8th fill: 18.5 mpg 9th fill: 16.6 mpg < lots of long uphill stretches Couldn't calculate the 7th fill, some little hippy girl was bumming gas so I filled her 5gal can up while I was filling my tank. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2021 8:53:26 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I've never owned a Toyota. I just don't think there's a vehicle on the road that's more efficient at 80 MPH than it is at 65. Play with this calculator: http://www.apexgarage.com/tech/horsepower_calc.shtml The values I'm using are... Cd - .409 (this is really close) Frontal area - 44 sq-ft (this most likely isn't right) Weight - 6766 lbs (this is also really close) The horsepower values required to maintain speed are 45.2 hp at 65 MPH, 54.4 hp at 70 MPH, and 76.9 hp at 80 MPH. It takes about 70% more horsepower to maintain 80 MPH than it does to maintain 65 MPH. I'm not sure what you're trying to comment on. Are you suggesting that I do not actually average 20-21 MPG? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2021 12:13:29 AM EDT
[#35]
I think the big thing is that "I get xx mpg" means jack shit, depending on the driver.
I can get 9 mpg or 17 mpg, same truck, depending on my driving that day. I guarantee anyone saying xx truck gets xx mpg wouldn't put their money on the line if they were held to it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2021 12:21:58 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not sure what you're trying to comment on. Are you suggesting that I do not actually average 20-21 MPG? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I've never owned a Toyota. I just don't think there's a vehicle on the road that's more efficient at 80 MPH than it is at 65. Play with this calculator: http://www.apexgarage.com/tech/horsepower_calc.shtml The values I'm using are... Cd - .409 (this is really close) Frontal area - 44 sq-ft (this most likely isn't right) Weight - 6766 lbs (this is also really close) The horsepower values required to maintain speed are 45.2 hp at 65 MPH, 54.4 hp at 70 MPH, and 76.9 hp at 80 MPH. It takes about 70% more horsepower to maintain 80 MPH than it does to maintain 65 MPH. I'm not sure what you're trying to comment on. Are you suggesting that I do not actually average 20-21 MPG? I was mostly referring to Rustler's magical 3/4 ton. Your numbers do seem a bit dubious, though. Fuelly data for 2013 Ram 1500 5.7s shows this: "Based on data from 198 vehicles, 21,060 fuel-ups and 6,639,981 miles of driving, the 2013 Ram 1500 gets a combined Avg MPG of 14.58 with a 0.04 MPG margin of error." Of those 198 trucks tracking data, only two are averaging 20 MPG. I'm assuming to hit the top 1% like that, you'd need to have 3.21s, highway tires, 2WD, an extremely light foot, and a commute with a lot of 55 MPH cruising. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2021 7:16:28 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was mostly referring to Rustler's magical 3/4 ton. Your numbers do seem a bit dubious, though. Fuelly data for 2013 Ram 1500 5.7s shows this: "Based on data from 198 vehicles, 21,060 fuel-ups and 6,639,981 miles of driving, the 2013 Ram 1500 gets a combined Avg MPG of 14.58 with a 0.04 MPG margin of error." Of those 198 trucks tracking data, only two are averaging 20 MPG. I'm assuming to hit the top 1% like that, you'd need to have 3.21s, highway tires, 2WD, an extremely light foot, and a commute with a lot of 55 MPH cruising. That's a pretty terrible average, I usually have to be towing to get in the 14s. 17 would be more realistic. And FWIW that's true for a 3.5 EB or 5.3 Ecot3c too |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2021 10:32:32 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was mostly referring to Rustler's magical 3/4 ton. Your numbers do seem a bit dubious, though. Fuelly data for 2013 Ram 1500 5.7s shows this: "Based on data from 198 vehicles, 21,060 fuel-ups and 6,639,981 miles of driving, the 2013 Ram 1500 gets a combined Avg MPG of 14.58 with a 0.04 MPG margin of error." Of those 198 trucks tracking data, only two are averaging 20 MPG. I'm assuming to hit the top 1% like that, you'd need to have 3.21s, highway tires, 2WD, an extremely light foot, and a commute with a lot of 55 MPH cruising. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I've never owned a Toyota. I just don't think there's a vehicle on the road that's more efficient at 80 MPH than it is at 65. Play with this calculator: http://www.apexgarage.com/tech/horsepower_calc.shtml The values I'm using are... Cd - .409 (this is really close) Frontal area - 44 sq-ft (this most likely isn't right) Weight - 6766 lbs (this is also really close) The horsepower values required to maintain speed are 45.2 hp at 65 MPH, 54.4 hp at 70 MPH, and 76.9 hp at 80 MPH. It takes about 70% more horsepower to maintain 80 MPH than it does to maintain 65 MPH. I'm not sure what you're trying to comment on. Are you suggesting that I do not actually average 20-21 MPG? I was mostly referring to Rustler's magical 3/4 ton. Your numbers do seem a bit dubious, though. Fuelly data for 2013 Ram 1500 5.7s shows this: "Based on data from 198 vehicles, 21,060 fuel-ups and 6,639,981 miles of driving, the 2013 Ram 1500 gets a combined Avg MPG of 14.58 with a 0.04 MPG margin of error." Of those 198 trucks tracking data, only two are averaging 20 MPG. I'm assuming to hit the top 1% like that, you'd need to have 3.21s, highway tires, 2WD, an extremely light foot, and a commute with a lot of 55 MPH cruising. Next time I'm on the interstate I'll record it for ya. I would have yesterday but I was pulling a trailer. I can't really believe it myself but that's what it does. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2021 6:08:08 PM EDT
[#39]
Can’t find prices. Can anybody else?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2021 10:09:39 AM EDT
[#40]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2021 10:14:45 AM EDT
[#41]
Does this make all the muh reliability comments null and void now?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2021 10:16:54 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Does this make all the muh reliability comments null and void now? Comments will now focus on how advanced it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2021 10:39:16 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Can’t find prices. Can anybody else? I thought pricing and additional details were supposed to be released last week. It should be very soon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2021 10:40:02 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryNot that this is surprising, but this should mean you're the first arfcommer to put ass in seat in one. What do you think? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2021 10:41:32 AM EDT
[#45]
Quoted: Does this make all the muh reliability comments null and void now? Right or wrong, Toyota's reputation isn't going anywhere yet. Quoted: Comments will now focus on how advanced it is. Sure... All they had to do was copy Ford's engine homework (from 10 years ago) and Ram's suspension homework (from 12 years ago).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2021 10:41:37 AM EDT
[#46]
I heard prices wont be out till December.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2021 10:52:06 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Does this make all the muh reliability comments null and void now? No, The ResaleTM on strength of brand perception is considered to be a single item checklist for reliability.  You can actually post articles and videos of current and former auto execs or industry experts talking about how things like leasing schemes, fleet sales, and a myriad of other things ALSO impact resale value, but nope. Get out of here with the facts and shit. And if you mention the Ford Raptor (gen1 once upon a time) or Jeep Wranglers or others had strong resale values? Oh Lawd the gnashing of teeth. "Akshullllllly that's different because-" The guys who drive toyotas and believe that (and that's not every toyota driver of course) basically view it as an identity trait. Their vehicle HAS to be more reliable than yours is, because that's part of their identity - in the same way that EV drivers HAVE to have something over "ICE-drivers" or it will cause an identity crisis. They can't just exist and be happy by themselves in a vacuum. If they're not "better" than you, they cannot be happy. Daring imply that they aren't? Fighting words. They will swing at you with one hand and cling to their erroneous worldview with the other. No no I'm not saying EVERY Tacoma driver and EVERY EV driver - you guys know exactly what the hell I'm talking about.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2021 10:54:32 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I swear Toyota could fuck your wife and shit on your carpet and some of you will still be in line at the dealer to buy one of these abortions. Same with any truck |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2021 11:02:15 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I thought pricing and additional details were supposed to be released last week. It should be very soon. No pricing has been released yet. We're being told the first Tundras will hit the lots this month. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2021 11:02:57 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not that this is surprising, but this should mean you're the first arfcommer to put ass in seat in one. What do you think? I've driven it. Thought it was a very nice truck. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File