"B A R R Y" <beech23pilot (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote

Because they will pass anything but a gas station

Noon-Air wrote:

I have a pal with a pair of restored 'Cudas that says that all the time!

;^)

On Wed, 2 May 2007 07:21:47 -0500, "Noon-Air" <Noon-Air (AT) comcast (DOT) net>
wrote:

It is true about the gas station part but they are also not the best
engine fore a SUV (part of the reason MPG is bad) because in the real
world a engine with a 345 HP rating at 5400 RPM and 375 ft lbs of
torque @ 4200 RPM looks good on paper but lacks in the real world
application because it operates most of the time a a lower RPM and
well below its HP and torque peak so MPG suffers as does power output
too and when you put you foot in it to get it into ts 4000 RPM + sweet
spot to try to feel more HP from it you are dumping fuel fast. It
might be a good engine for a sports car but it is a poor choice for a
heavy truck that needs a torque peak at a lower RPM for better
efficency and overall responce.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com

"Noon-Air" <Noon-Air (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote

If you guys get a chance, find you an April copy of Car and Driver. They
compared the 5 big trucks in 4-door 4 wheel drive form. The Chevy and the
Toyota achieved 12 mpg. The Dodge, Ford, and Nissan all racked up 13 mpg.

I expected the Toyota to be terrible because it has the most horspower. The
Chevy, which is EPA Rated for 15 or 16, was a bit of a disappointment.

So while the Hemi didn't match its EPA rating of 14 city, it's still as good
as anything else.

"Joe" <Joe (AT) dontspam (DOT) net> wrote

Not surprised, I guess there was a reason my Tundra was ordered with reg
cab, 2wd, 4L V-6, and 6 spd manual trans. I like my 18 mpg on regular gas
when the truck is loaded, and 21 mpg when its empty.

Do you ever have to pull anything with that 4L V6?

It always disappoints me that they advertise how well their trucks pull a
heavy load, but only use their biggest engines to do it. The only time
they'll talk about their smaller engines is when they want to brag about
fuel economy.

"Noon-Air" wrote:

"jp2express" <jp2mail-tempforum (AT) noSpamyahoo (DOT) com> wrote

Actually I do, frequently. I use if for hauling new HVAC equipment to
install, taking the old stuff back to the shop, runs to the dump and scrap
yard, pallets of refrigerant, etc. I have never had a problem with not
enough power...I run fully loaded most all the time, and even even with
3000lbs of refrigerant on the trailer, no problem.
The only side effect of towing a heavy load, is that the fuel economy drops
to 15mpg.

jp2express wrote:
Yesterday, I pulled 44 boxes (880 sq/ft) of prefinished oak flooring,
several rolls of underlayment, and some other sundries, in a Haulmark
cargo trailer, with my 4.0L Tacoma.

Total trailer weight ~ 4200-4400 lbs.

What would you like to know?

Noon-Air and BARRY,

That *is* what I wanted to know!

I have a welding rig set up on an '86 Toyota 1-ton Flatbed. It works, but
that 22R certainly won't do any flips for me with all that load! I tip the
scale at the scrap yard at 4700 lbs with nothing but my rig.

It's all good, but I wouldn't want to pull a trailer. I fear the truck is
about at it's limits as it is.

How about this Tundra setup: 2WD, V6, manual transmission, and suspension
upgrade. How would this do with about 2,000 lbs in the bed and an occasional
trailer?

"B A R R Y" replied:

"jp2express" <jp2mail-tempforum (AT) noSpamyahoo (DOT) com> wrote

I routinely run with the camper shell, all the tools, parts and equipment on
board......normally around 1100 lbs in my '05 Tundra. Its rated for a gross
payload of 2000lbs, and net payload of 1500lbs(3/4 ton). Its used as an HVAC
service truck. Its almost 2 years old and has 60,000 miles on it, and has
far exceded all of my expectations. What you describe, is what I am running
right now(minus the suspension upgrade)