- Joined
- May 28, 2014
- Messages
- 2,264
The 2.3 Ford Ecoboost engine in the new Ford Ranger gets better gas mileage plus has better towing capabilities then Toyota's V-8 so it's time to upgrade.
Toyota V-8 going away
- Thread starter kstanf150
- Start date
- Status
Belt driven?
What V-8 are you talking about?
I thought we were talking about the 5.7 in the Tundra.
What V-8 are you talking about?
I thought we were talking about the 5.7 in the Tundra.
Originally Posted by tblt44
I dont like the idea of twin turbo.
More things to go wrong
Yes the FORD v6 turbo is more powerful than there V8 but will it go 250+ without turbo repairs ?
I guess you forgot this is Toyota we're talking about? The company that built probably one of the greatest twin turbo engines ever?
I dont like the idea of twin turbo.
More things to go wrong
Yes the FORD v6 turbo is more powerful than there V8 but will it go 250+ without turbo repairs ?
I guess you forgot this is Toyota we're talking about? The company that built probably one of the greatest twin turbo engines ever?
Previously used in Tundra. I believe they stopped in 2009-2010 in the Tundra....so, that belt-driven engine was already replaced by the UR series a decade ago.
This article was about the replacement of the UR series engine (including the current 5.7) series engine with a twin turbo V-6.
The UR series engine is a chain-driven DOHC.
This article was about the replacement of the UR series engine (including the current 5.7) series engine with a twin turbo V-6.
The UR series engine is a chain-driven DOHC.
Our trusty '01 Tundra is frealin' thirsty, but it doesn't bother me much.
My neighbors borrow it from time to time and bring it back full.
Sometimes they run it through the car warsh; not a bad deal.
My neighbors borrow it from time to time and bring it back full.
Sometimes they run it through the car warsh; not a bad deal.
Originally Posted by RazorsEdge
The 2.3 Ford Ecoboost engine in the new Ford Ranger gets better gas mileage plus has better towing capabilities then Toyota's V-8 so it's time to upgrade.
Looks to me like the Ranger's max towing is up to 7,500 pounds where as the Tundra will tow up to 10,200 pounds. If I were going to tow over 5k on a regular basis I sure as heck would not use a Ranger.
The 2.3 Ford Ecoboost engine in the new Ford Ranger gets better gas mileage plus has better towing capabilities then Toyota's V-8 so it's time to upgrade.
Looks to me like the Ranger's max towing is up to 7,500 pounds where as the Tundra will tow up to 10,200 pounds. If I were going to tow over 5k on a regular basis I sure as heck would not use a Ranger.
Kinda of a no-brainer. The F-150 with the 3.5 EcoBoost makes much more torque than the V8 Tundra, is rated 5 MPG higher in the EPA combined cycle and is rated to tow an extra 3,000 lbs.
Personally, I couldn't imagine buying another naturally aspirated engine again.
Personally, I couldn't imagine buying another naturally aspirated engine again.
Originally Posted by AZjeff
Originally Posted by GMBoy
Titan V8 and RAM Hemi still old school non turbo and non DI.
Nissan 5.6 V8 has been GDI since the 2016 redesign.
Thank you for the correction, I did not know that! I had just did a spark plug replacement on a 2012 that was regular PFI.
Originally Posted by GMBoy
Titan V8 and RAM Hemi still old school non turbo and non DI.
Nissan 5.6 V8 has been GDI since the 2016 redesign.
Thank you for the correction, I did not know that! I had just did a spark plug replacement on a 2012 that was regular PFI.
Originally Posted by E365
Kinda of a no-brainer. The F-150 with the 3.5 EcoBoost makes much more torque than the V8 Tundra, is rated 5 MPG higher in the EPA combined cycle and is rated to tow an extra 3,000 lbs.
Personally, I couldn't imagine buying another naturally aspirated engine again.
And Ford has lemon-lawed a bunch of trucks with that engine.
Kinda of a no-brainer. The F-150 with the 3.5 EcoBoost makes much more torque than the V8 Tundra, is rated 5 MPG higher in the EPA combined cycle and is rated to tow an extra 3,000 lbs.
Personally, I couldn't imagine buying another naturally aspirated engine again.
And Ford has lemon-lawed a bunch of trucks with that engine.
Originally Posted by E365
Kinda of a no-brainer. The F-150 with the 3.5 EcoBoost makes much more torque than the V8 Tundra, is rated 5 MPG higher in the EPA combined cycle and is rated to tow an extra 3,000 lbs.
Personally, I couldn't imagine buying another naturally aspirated engine again.
I love turbo engines. I own four cars with turbos.
But I prefer a naturally aspirated V-8 for my truck.
The reasons for the Tundra's poor MPG v. The F-150 are many, but they include weight, transmission speeds, gearing, and aerodynamic tricks.
The turbo engines get excellent MPG under light loads, but when towing, get the same, or worse than a NA engine, as the ECU has to keep it rich under heavy boost to prevent detonation.
The 420 lbft of torque for the 3.5 EB vs the 400 for the 5.7 Tundra isn't a huge difference but where the EB shines is the ability to tune for more HP and Torque, for example, in the Raptor.
Where the EB loses is reliability in service.
And reliability was at the top of my criteria in selecting a truck.
Kinda of a no-brainer. The F-150 with the 3.5 EcoBoost makes much more torque than the V8 Tundra, is rated 5 MPG higher in the EPA combined cycle and is rated to tow an extra 3,000 lbs.
Personally, I couldn't imagine buying another naturally aspirated engine again.
I love turbo engines. I own four cars with turbos.
But I prefer a naturally aspirated V-8 for my truck.
The reasons for the Tundra's poor MPG v. The F-150 are many, but they include weight, transmission speeds, gearing, and aerodynamic tricks.
The turbo engines get excellent MPG under light loads, but when towing, get the same, or worse than a NA engine, as the ECU has to keep it rich under heavy boost to prevent detonation.
The 420 lbft of torque for the 3.5 EB vs the 400 for the 5.7 Tundra isn't a huge difference but where the EB shines is the ability to tune for more HP and Torque, for example, in the Raptor.
Where the EB loses is reliability in service.
And reliability was at the top of my criteria in selecting a truck.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
10-4 … a full size truck has room for a decent displacement engine and nothing wrong with modern V8's. Nothing wrong with either approach.
If you need more … go 2500 diesel.
I know two guys that had 3.5 EcoBoost F150's that found out there is more to towing than a motor.
One now has a Super Duty PSD and the other a GMC DMax … Lots safer for all
If you need more … go 2500 diesel.
I know two guys that had 3.5 EcoBoost F150's that found out there is more to towing than a motor.
One now has a Super Duty PSD and the other a GMC DMax … Lots safer for all
Last edited:
Originally Posted by glock19
I wish Ford would make a 5.0L Ecoboost. I think it could put down 450hp, 500lb/ft pretty easily. It would have the benefits of twin turbos with the V8 sound.
The 3,5 in a Raptor puts out that much HP . Lets be looking at 700+ possible HP. and tons of the most important number , torque.
I wish Ford would make a 5.0L Ecoboost. I think it could put down 450hp, 500lb/ft pretty easily. It would have the benefits of twin turbos with the V8 sound.
The 3,5 in a Raptor puts out that much HP . Lets be looking at 700+ possible HP. and tons of the most important number , torque.
Originally Posted by klt1986
Originally Posted by RazorsEdge
The 2.3 Ford Ecoboost engine in the new Ford Ranger gets better gas mileage plus has better towing capabilities then Toyota's V-8 so it's time to upgrade.
Looks to me like the Ranger's max towing is up to 7,500 pounds where as the Tundra will tow up to 10,200 pounds. If I were going to tow over 5k on a regular basis I sure as heck would not use a Ranger.
I just looked up the payload on the 2020 Tundra. Its' 1620 in the mid to upper trim levels. a 10,200 trailer will put your payload at 1530 (15% tongue weight-give or take)-so unless you are traveling alone with an empty bed)-you cant tow the max trailer weight and not be over payload.
With one or two exceptions-max towing is a joke on just about all half-tons, and even some three quarter tons.
I didn't look up the Ranger-but my guess is you can't (shouldn't) put more than a 4,000 pound trailer behind it.
As a side not-my 2018-Silverado (4WD) Crew Cab LTZ's payload is right around 1,500 pounds and a supposedly max towing of 9,600 pounds. My ultra light trailer is 4,400 pounds empty-ready to camp it doesn't exceed 5,000 pounds.
Originally Posted by RazorsEdge
The 2.3 Ford Ecoboost engine in the new Ford Ranger gets better gas mileage plus has better towing capabilities then Toyota's V-8 so it's time to upgrade.
Looks to me like the Ranger's max towing is up to 7,500 pounds where as the Tundra will tow up to 10,200 pounds. If I were going to tow over 5k on a regular basis I sure as heck would not use a Ranger.
I just looked up the payload on the 2020 Tundra. Its' 1620 in the mid to upper trim levels. a 10,200 trailer will put your payload at 1530 (15% tongue weight-give or take)-so unless you are traveling alone with an empty bed)-you cant tow the max trailer weight and not be over payload.
With one or two exceptions-max towing is a joke on just about all half-tons, and even some three quarter tons.
I didn't look up the Ranger-but my guess is you can't (shouldn't) put more than a 4,000 pound trailer behind it.
As a side not-my 2018-Silverado (4WD) Crew Cab LTZ's payload is right around 1,500 pounds and a supposedly max towing of 9,600 pounds. My ultra light trailer is 4,400 pounds empty-ready to camp it doesn't exceed 5,000 pounds.
Last edited:
Thinking of buying another Tundra and putting it in storage .
Guess ill keep my 17 in tip top shape so i can keep it for a long time
- Status
