Tundra gets a diesel option for 2015
03-07-2014, 07:51 PM
#61
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been reading over reviews on the new RAM diesel and the economy IS impressive! One guy, admittedly a RAM FREAK- so, grain of salt- said he averaged 33mpg... empty of course, but I do find it suspect because he said he's in the hills of VA and this happened to be a quad cab, loaded with everything but the Longhorn package... didn't have the moon roof or high mount camera.
The official rating is 29mpg, I think. 4more, in mountains, isn't easy to believe. He also claimed 7.7 seconds to 60mph and other tests I've read were no better than 8.9 seconds...
Anyway, I kinda don't think the Cummins powered Toyota or Nissan will b e as good as the Dodge in economy.
The official rating is 29mpg, I think. 4more, in mountains, isn't easy to believe. He also claimed 7.7 seconds to 60mph and other tests I've read were no better than 8.9 seconds...
Anyway, I kinda don't think the Cummins powered Toyota or Nissan will b e as good as the Dodge in economy.
03-22-2014, 07:32 AM
#62
Teching In
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I mean the same as big power and trq and yet the truck doesn't get as good mpg remember the new vette isn't as light as it used to be and and a half ton truck weighs 4460lbs
http://m.autos.aol.com/2013-chevrole...do+1500/specs/
I just don't see how 1k lbs extra would make that truck have shittier mpg. I know weight and gearing help mpg but if they can make a vette with 450hp n trq or more get 30mpg im sure they can make a truck to do the same with an NA gas engine
Edit: or even an FI engine
http://m.autos.aol.com/2013-chevrole...do+1500/specs/
I just don't see how 1k lbs extra would make that truck have shittier mpg. I know weight and gearing help mpg but if they can make a vette with 450hp n trq or more get 30mpg im sure they can make a truck to do the same with an NA gas engine
Edit: or even an FI engine
03-24-2014, 07:44 AM
#64
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Indianapolis Indiana
Posts: 1,299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes because the thing is always in boost and its a 6,000 pound 7 foot tall brick that you are trying to push down the road against air. Not to mention they stick 18-20 inch wheels with big tires on them which is even more rolling resistance.
My duramax comes in at around 20 MPG on the highway, and I've got damn near 500 RWHP and 1,000 ft pounds of torque.... I guess I should be getting 50 MPG.
My duramax comes in at around 20 MPG on the highway, and I've got damn near 500 RWHP and 1,000 ft pounds of torque.... I guess I should be getting 50 MPG.
03-24-2014, 07:49 AM
#65
Banned
iTrader: (1)
!["MAC"'s Avatar](data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg' viewBox='0 0 50 50'><circle class='avatar-circle-default' fill='%237f3b59' cx='25px' cy='25px' r='20px'></circle><text class='avatar-text-default' x='49%' y='53%' fill='white' text-anchor='middle' alignment-baseline='middle'>"</text></svg>)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chattanooga Tn
Posts: 1,352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your right lets not forget the new Jeep that has the new small diesel is getting close to 30mpg and the new dodge truck is getting very close to 30mpg as well with the same engine guess its not as hard as they wanted us to think
03-24-2014, 01:56 PM
#66
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes because the thing is always in boost and its a 6,000 pound 7 foot tall brick that you are trying to push down the road against air. Not to mention they stick 18-20 inch wheels with big tires on them which is even more rolling resistance.
My duramax comes in at around 20 MPG on the highway, and I've got damn near 500 RWHP and 1,000 ft pounds of torque.... I guess I should be getting 50 MPG.
My duramax comes in at around 20 MPG on the highway, and I've got damn near 500 RWHP and 1,000 ft pounds of torque.... I guess I should be getting 50 MPG.
Even the RAPTOR is less than 7' tall and the rest are notably shorter still. There's no chance it's always in boost either.
Your D-max has nothing to do with this because it isn't stock, nor anywhere near as low priced as a 1/2 ton. Seems that's why RAM went to the diesel and Toyota for sure, probably along with Nissan, will do the same next model yr. Fuel economy. The RAM torque matches that of the 3.5L Ford and that's what counts pulling a load. Better economy is an excellent bonus. The Toyota/Nissan version will likely get better torque and closer power, but won't likely see more than 25mpg.
03-24-2014, 02:45 PM
#67
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Indianapolis Indiana
Posts: 1,299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The heaviest Ecoboost powered F-150 is under 5750 lb and the standard is 5203... quite a bit less than 6k, either way.
Even the RAPTOR is less than 7' tall and the rest are notably shorter still. There's no chance it's always in boost either.
Your D-max has nothing to do with this because it isn't stock, nor anywhere near as low priced as a 1/2 ton. Seems that's why RAM went to the diesel and Toyota for sure, probably along with Nissan, will do the same next model yr. Fuel economy. The RAM torque matches that of the 3.5L Ford and that's what counts pulling a load. Better economy is an excellent bonus. The Toyota/Nissan version will likely get better torque and closer power, but won't likely see more than 25mpg.
Even the RAPTOR is less than 7' tall and the rest are notably shorter still. There's no chance it's always in boost either.
Your D-max has nothing to do with this because it isn't stock, nor anywhere near as low priced as a 1/2 ton. Seems that's why RAM went to the diesel and Toyota for sure, probably along with Nissan, will do the same next model yr. Fuel economy. The RAM torque matches that of the 3.5L Ford and that's what counts pulling a load. Better economy is an excellent bonus. The Toyota/Nissan version will likely get better torque and closer power, but won't likely see more than 25mpg.
My point was to "mac" thinking they should get upper 20's low 30's... which is not realistic as I said when you are trying to push a 2 and a half ton brick down the road.
And have you priced out new F150's fully loaded? They are in the mid 40's to high 40's... a couple year old duramax/cummins/powerstroke are the same price for much more of a truck...
03-24-2014, 11:52 PM
#68
TECH Addict
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May want to look at some of the ecoboost F150 forums then... they are in boost quite a bit especially when towing and don't get near the mileage that is advertised...
My point was to "mac" thinking they should get upper 20's low 30's... which is not realistic as I said when you are trying to push a 2 and a half ton brick down the road.
And have you priced out new F150's fully loaded? They are in the mid 40's to high 40's... a couple year old duramax/cummins/powerstroke are the same price for much more of a truck...
My point was to "mac" thinking they should get upper 20's low 30's... which is not realistic as I said when you are trying to push a 2 and a half ton brick down the road.
And have you priced out new F150's fully loaded? They are in the mid 40's to high 40's... a couple year old duramax/cummins/powerstroke are the same price for much more of a truck...
I priced them before I bought last August. The F-150 CC XLT I nearly bought had a sticker of 43k and they'd already put a red tag on it for $31,990... I nearly got it, but wanted more economy and knew I'd be playing way too much with a new 4X4 3.5L TT. A fully loaded F-150 Platinum will typically be over 56k... Same for the GM(over 58k) and RAM(over 57k) though, not to mention Tundra(over 53k for sure, but Idonno top price).
Personally, I have nothing against buying used. In fact, except my current "new" car, I haven't bought brand new(for myself) since 1992, except motorcycles. That said, it's apples to oranges to compare the new price to a used price... They're different. Besides, not everyone wants, let alone needs a 3/4 - 1 ton pickup. If not for the fact it's paid for and I already have a new payment, I'd probably scrap the F-350 for a new 1/2 diesel. I'd certainly consider it, because I almost never need the tow power of the dually. It sits much of the time anymore.
03-25-2014, 12:28 AM
#69
***Repost Police***
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I got my Frontier back in 2005, I could have easily gotten a V8 1/2 ton. In fact, a Titan King Cab (extended) base model was only about $1,000 more. But I didn't want or need that much truck, and I wanted a decent engine with a manual transmission. The Frontier just happened to be the only truck that fit the bill. 
