Y'all need to test a 250 6.2 versus a 350 6.2, as since the 7.3's introduction the 250 6.2 stayed paired with the 6 speed, but the 350 6.2 gets the 10 speed.
I love that its like summer Siberia. Ha lol your right except for last year last year hit recerd high 105f like many died and many more lost there home from it sinking into the melting permafrost.
Turbo charged V-6 engines in full size trucks are garbage. There’s no replacement for displacement! If you never use a truck like a truck then a turbo charged V-6 “may” provide decent results but certainly not as good long term reliability as a naturally aspirated V-8. But on a turbo charged V-6, the moment you tow and/or haul anything of a decent weight, drive up steep hills and actually work the truck like a truck, not only do you kill any kind of long term reliability even more but your performance of the truck turns to crap! Then add to that the cost of repairs as well. A turbo charged engine has a lot more moving parts, requires more hours for both maintenance and repairs and has more costly parts that need to be replaced. There is absolutely no way whatsoever that I will ever own anything but a V-8 in any of my full size trucks!
I for one thoroughly enjoy watching all of your videos. Super intuitive and fun to see y’all working together on this kind of work. By far TFL is one of my favorite channels.
Something else to keep in mind is that naturally aspirated engines suffer more at high elevations. I would expect the v8 to be more efficient at lower elevations.
@@willrector9716 well I’ve owned 3 Ford territory Inline 6 Petrols, 2 N/A , 1 turbo, the turbo engine is better on fuel, essentially on the open rd and towing, but if you hammer the throttle the turbo engine uses more fuel, but it goes a lot better to. My 2 bobs worth ....
I have a 2020 rebel and love it, does everything, and goes anywhere I need. My last Toyota was a 2005 tundra, which was a real nice truck right up to when the transmission fell out.
Awesome same here brother, I have a 2011 Ford F150 with a 5.0L Coyote V8 in it with 145,000 miles on it and still going strong and its a beast and it sounds like a beast with the Borla ATAK exhaust on it. Also I know for a fact that my 96 Ford F150 with a 5.0L (302) Windsor V8 will pretty much outlast any EcoBoost engine out there.
@@johnpence8529 In most cases I agree, but Toyota has built its name and reputation on making small engines do BIG things milage wise and longivity I would hold off awhile and see. Toyota has had some issues with the waste gates on the Turbos, but it has effected a tiny amount of trucks and Toyota is always quick to identify the problem and implementing a fix. One of the things I love about Toyota is they continue to improve their engines over time and they take care of their customers if something does arise. Back in the mid 2000's they had some oil consumption issues with a few engines, well they figured out the cause and corrected the problem all the while extending the warranties on the effected models. Hemi engines still have the lifte Camshaft failures and with the 6.4l engines it often trashes the engine because of its tolerances. The 5.7l has better chances of repair. Time will tell on this new Toyota engine because its a complete re-design. I can say this though unlike Ram Toyota will continue to improve this engine over the years to make it better and better. They only change engines when they no longer fit the current mandates. Ram on the other hand has done nothing to fix the lifter/cam shaft fiasco and they have never backed up their customers. If that happened to a Toyota engine and was common they would extend the warranty and fix it.
You mean a turbo-charged V-6 got more fuel economy than an N/A V-8 towing at a mile above sea level? Not much of a shocker there but a Ram being $15,000 dollars more is just frightening.
Yeah, I agree. At sea level they likely would have been closer loaded. Plus the ram has tires not at all suited for fuel efficiency... which it should anyway, because unlike the Toyota, the Ram is really a truck.
The turbos in the Tundra definitely help at altitude. Slowing down by 5mph would likely yield significantly better fuel mileage. Fun video, thanks guys!
They are close enough on mpg that you need more samples to determine if the advantage Toyota exhibits towing will hold up under all conditions. Great video! Both trucks are gorgeous. $71,000 would make me run.
Agreed! Difference over 100k miles at $3.50/gal is about $7k. Not a lot. Any major engine or trans repair will cost more than that. But it's a pretty interesting data point to see the comparison. I'm very curious to see how the hybrid tundra does. The turbo 6 gasser is getting close to my last powerstroke in mpg without the nightmare of constant maintenance and repairs. Edit: I should say hopefully less maintenance and repairs. It's still too early to tell on the Toyota turbo 6. I know there's some first run issues. It'll take a few years to know how well the truck holds up.
I've been a Toyota fan since 1988. I bought my first tundra in2004. This is the first time I have no desire to own a new tundra. The F250 is looking much better now.
I would love to see the manufactures come out with turbo V8's! I also love that they finally put small diesel in the 1/2 tons a few years back. If they really want good fuel economy and power they need to make the hybrids diesels!
why strap a turbo on a big gas V8? they already make 400 and 500hp. How much do you want? combining big weight with the complexities of adding turbos? turbos kill the sound of a naturally aspirated V8.
@@Ginger.K97 considering that you can buy a supercharged hemi v8 with 702hp in a RAM TRX, maybe it is not as obvious as you think. For many of us the need to spend 80 grand on a pickup truck is more of a "maybe not" kind of proposition. But hey whatever floats your boat, or pick-up truck.
Nathan had mentioned that the Ecoboost’s rev higher when towing than the new Tundra was. In my experience with my F150 Ecoboost, it will cruise in 10th gear while towing my 25 foot camper. 10th gear at 100-110 kmh it rev’s at 1700-1800 rpms. It can hold 10th on flat ground. Head wind and hills it will down shift to 9th and sometimes 8th. But will almost always stay below 2500 rpms while cruising.
I love my flat ground cruise in my 2020 super duty with the 6.7. 1400rpm at 105km/h. Pulls every hill in 9th while towing 8500lbs fifth wheel. Averages 17.2l/100km(13.6mpg)
Nothing against the Toyota but we all know Ford has far greater experience engineering these vehicles, especially for towing, and that's who I trust more. Toyota is just now implementing what Ford started over 10 years ago, which is a smart move, but they are more of a follower rather than an innovator in the truck market.
@@sly9263 Well, you are right, Toyota is a follower most of the time, but it is only to the advantage of the Toyota truck owner. They prefer perfecting their solution in house rather than at the expense of their customers. That gets my support.
@@marcraymond7741 eh, I don't really buy the whole perfecting thing. They have the same problems and failures as anyone else... the turbos are seizing the wastegates and blowing up right now. They just have longer periods between updates like that than most, which increases reliability but only because of that reason, IMO
First off great video!! I was shopping new tundras since before they came out but no dealer here in fl would allow me to put a deposit with Guaranteed MSRP. Ended up with a fully loaded rebel with sunroof with 18k miles for 49k. I did the math and it would take a long time to make up the mpg savings between the two… now watching this maybe it’s closer then I thought
Guy's. I have a 2022 Rebel with 4300 miles on the clock. Using your method of fueling up after a 100 mile trip with 87 octane on the PA Turnpike, I got 17.9 MPG. The same trip with 89 octane, I got 20.1. It seems to like 89. I am going to try it with 91 octane next time.
Wow, I really thought they would get better mileage than that towing. I had a 1999 Chevy K3500 crew cab long bed with the 7.4 ltr and 4 speed auto. It got right around 8mpg when towing a similar trailer. The worst mileage I got was fighting a headwind in Wyoming, then I got only 6.6mpg. The 8mpg was consistent through Colorado, but not in the mountains. I really miss that truck, and 70k for a new truck would really talk me into an old truck with an LS swap. I love that you guys test in Colorado altitude, keep up the great content!
That’s what they get Towing ,That trailer is a brick and they aren’t using Diesel’s so that’s what you get doesn’t matter whatever you have. My 8.1 big block engine in my 2001 GMC got the same miles per gallon towing as my 3.5 eco-boost F150 the only thing I will say is the F150 has more pulling power that little 3.5 outpulls the 8.1 even though the 8.1 is tuned and not stock .This is the same situation that Toyota will out pull that hemi all day long,All these guys saying I’ll take the V8 Haven’t towed with a tundra or an F150 eco-boost if they did they would never be saying I’ll take the V8 again,After driving the. Eco boost. The V8s feel weak,who cares how it sounds it’s getting it’s doors blown off towing at twice the rpms to keep up .
I tried buying a Tundra this week, and I found every dealer (23 total) within a 100 mile radius marking up the Tundra well over MSRP. The cheapest markup was $8k on a SR5 with 2WD marketed as “off-road ready” due to upgraded tires. Toyota and Ram, can you please address dealer markups like Ford and GM recently have. At this point it’s impossible to find local Toyota dealers even willing to take a custom order.
I noticed the same thing, the toyota dealers that actually had a tundra in stock were all marked up. I ended up picking up a rebel, the dodge dealership had no markup on the rebel or any lower mode trucks. It did have an insane markup on the trx tho.
The new tundra has issues the dealer here already had 2 returned blown motor is what they said. I'll wait for 23 24. Stick with my 14 tundra I'm fine. Mark ups what a rip off
The chip shortage is actually affecting Toyota now. Their build philosophy only built what they could get parts for vs Chevy who built a bunch of trucks are awaiting chips
I live near San Diego and bought a brand new Tundra SR5 4X4 Long Bed from a great dealer in North Platte Nebraska. It was at list price, zero markup. I then paid $2000 to have it delivered to my house. You can do the same.
Interesting test! Look forward to Mopar’s turbo inline 6 coming out even though will miss the sweet sound of the hemi. I thought the YOTA would be considerably more efficient than the Ram. The Rebel GT is sweet, but 71k is over the top. Thanks for sharing!
I've had 3 Ram 1500's with the 5.7 Hemi and I really, REALLY love that engine. I hope Ram is smart enough to keep the Hemi available after they offer the turbo inline 6, like Ford did with the 5.0.
The biggest difference between the 2 is the tires. The tundra in its "off-road" package still has street tires, where as the ram has an actual off-road worthy tread that's going to equate to a lot more rolling resistance.
@@shitloveaduck clearly physics is not your strong point. The Duratrak's are going to have a higher rolling resistance and more rotational mass. Takes more power to get them moving and more power to keep them moving. A fairer test would have been using a normal Ram, like a Bighorn, with the stock Wrangler SR-A's that come on most Ram's.
@@shitloveaduck should try it some time. Throw an aggressive all terrain tire on for a few hundred miles, then switch back to a street tire of the same size. Guaranteed you'll see a significant difference in mileage. Between the rolling resistance and the extra weight, the mileage difference is significant. 1-2 mpg minimum.
@@hunterdan2002 Correct. there is a guy on youtube with a 22 tundra and he put bigger geolander m/ts on, yeah even worse than a/t, and his tundra mileage dropped over 3mpg hwy.
If I were wanting to tow, and was overly concerned about MPG or range between fill ups, I would buy a diesel and be done with it. Between these 2 vehicles however, having that GT sound is so phenomenal, I would not care about the 1 MPG difference(rounded) that the Tundra had over me. LOL
The GT sounds good for sure, but I would not want to listen to it for 4 hours straight, downshifting and revving on every dumb little hill I encounter. That's the beauty of the TTV6. Very quiet and smooth under load like this. Even when they pulled the 8100 lb trailer up the IKE I don't think the Tundra went much over 3000 rpm. The Ram kept having to jump 4000+ rpm on the little rolling hills.
@BL Dontmatter Or, instead, I could just not buy an underpowered V8 that has to rev 4k on every dumb little hill. Plenty of options out there that tow better than that hemi.
Diesel introduces a hefty financial burden on top of already expensive trucks. It's thousands extra for the engine, thousands extra for the transmission, and thousands extra for the mechanical maintenance. If you're full-time towing long distances for the next 10+ years, then diesel makes sense. Otherwise, gasoline is the way to go (price wise).
You know I have to disagree on this one. I did like the extra storage space I owned a 2016 and a 2019 ram. However I just didn't really get used to that dial
@@BC08 I’m secure enough with my manhood to have a dial and sweet console, but you like to have your hand on a stick with a knob.. You realize that the stick gear selector has no manual linkage to the transmission- it’s all electric.
Are you also resetting the MPG meter when doing the Trip meter? A difference in MPG between the dash and your calculations could be because of that. Just a thought
Great video. I tow with a 2013 tundra sr5 2wd double cab 5.7 . Does decent on mileage considering my toy haulers pretty heavy. Thanks for the videos. Will definitely help me on my decision when I buy a new truck. Keep em coming.
Personally, I think the prices are insane. I'm just gonna keep upgrading my old 02 Silverado. It's an unusual configuration in that it is an extended cab long bed Z71 4x4. You don't see many ext cabs with a full 8 foot bed in the 1/2 ton. Not even sure if you can order one any more. You see lots of work trucks with the regular cab, but not the ext cab. It's completely rust free and in great shape inside and out. No the interior won't be as modern, but I'm pretty sure I can add whatever modern technology that I want and as far as I'm concerned, it's a lot cooler than the new ones. It has 350k miles on it and runs perfect, but I can put in a re-manufactured motor and trans installed probably $10-12k. Yes, I know a bunch of mechanics. LOL
Thanks for doing this comparison. I’ve always thought that all the trucks in today’s market are fairly equal. Just buy the one that has the features you like and the one that fits your butt. Being a guy that transitioned from F-150’s to a Tundra in 2004, I think over the long run “cost of ownership” is less with a Tundra than the other trucks. It will be interesting if the 3rd gen Tundra can maintain its reliability. The comments about street tires vs all terrain tires are very valid, but most of us understand that TFL can’t spend all their time swapping tires and gear ratios, in other words “run what you brung” or what the manufacturers give you. Like I’ve said before, I’d like to see TFL do your mileage test over a longer loop, take I-76 to Fort Morgan and return. That way you wouldn’t have to deal with the construction zone and would have less traffic. Can’t wait for the next comparison, Andre’s F-150 hybrid vs the Tundra.
Ram quit making the ecodiesel. GM is the only one making a diesel half ton now and they just beefed it up, did some improvements and upped the hp and torque.
I also just wanted to say TFL truck is my absolute favorite channel for everything trucks. I love the depth you guys go into with each truck and your honesty with everything you guys put out. Keep the great content coming as always 💪
I really do not know how this channel doesn’t have more than a million subscribers. I picture this channel being at least 5 million subscribers with info provided.
I have a 2022 Toyota Tundra SR5 4X4 that I use to pull a 2023 Airstream Bambi 19cb trailer. The Tundra has a tall shell on the back to carry a dualsport motorcycle. My gas mileage averaged 12.8 mpg on a trip from Poway California to Sedona AZ and back. Two differences between my rig and the test: my trailer weight was about 4,000 lbs and my cruise control speed was 63 mph. The Tundra (and probably the RAM as well) only uses the gas it needs. You can conserve fuel if you slow down even more. 👍. Thank you for a great review of these trucks!
My 2016 F150 with a 2.7L ecoboost gets between 11 and 13 mpg towing our 7200lbs 27 ft travel trailer. Anecdotally my setup (2.7L , 6 speed auto, 3.55 gear ratio) can out accelerate a Nissan Kicks while towing 7200lbs 😁
My 2.7 is about 15 to 16 l/100 km pulling 3000 lb boat but empty between 9 and 10 l/100km like 1400 to 1500km per tank with the 136l tank. Wouldn't trade it in for anything but a newer one with a 10spd or a powerboost
I think it is smart to naturally have the power as it is needed and then have the fuel economy during normal driving. There is no cylinder de-activation gimmicks and the like.
@@koobertohumperdink8702 Getting electric involved is a given for torque. I was referring to the average ICE PU. The availability of power without adding more complexity while aiming for better overall fuel economy is a smart platform. And why not, the average driver does not use the power band very often. I want to see how the same displacement for Chevy holds up with their 2.7 four cyl. If only I had that kind of power available in my simple '87 Dakota 4 cyl. that couldn't get out of its own way. lol
👍 great video, I have a 2022 ram 3500 with a 6.4 hemi and 373 gears and the 8-speed transmission. I have ran a 290 mile loop a few times and have come up with 17.8 MPG with the factory tires and wheels. I added the leveling kit and went up from the factory wheels which measure about 32.5 in up to tires that are about 34 in when they are a little low on air. After adding the aftermarket wheels and tires about a week ago I made that loop which is going down to the Minneapolis St Paul airport from where I live at about 290 miles it was snowy and I made the trip in four-wheel drive the entire way and ended up at about 12 miles per gallon there was a lot of stop and go traffic due to the bad weather I believe I could have pulled 13 miles per gallon except I got stuck driving about 15 to 20 miles at about 15 miles per hour stuck behind plow trucks. My brother has a 2019 half ton ram warlock that gets a little bit better MPG than that one does and it has the hemi also. I would bet my 3500 ram would get better miles per gallon than both of those towing that trailer. And the price was between the two of them at around 61,000 MSRP . This is the first winter I have owned it and just around town in the snow with my snow plow on and snow plowing I get around 8.3 miles per gallon that is not strictly snow plowing that is a mix . And that is awesome miles per gallon... My 1999 1-ton single axle 454 truck probably gets up to 5 miles per gallon plowing. And my 2002 2500 HD 8.1 L with the Allison transmission gets up to 7 miles per gallon in two wheel drive on the highway in the summertime, and gets the same miles per gallon towing. Trucks have come a long way.
That's about equal to my gutless 3.55 v6 Dakota that weighs 2500lbs less. Not too bad. 13-14 city maybe 17 hwy on a good day with a tailwind. I don't like the truck but it has low miles no rust and it's paid for
Less weight and an inline is an improvement over a V engine overall for sure. I'm doing an engine build , dual intake cams E85 and 14 PSI on my inline 27 year old LLO inline 4 cylinder and my engine only weighs 220 lbs, with the lost foam method..lol In theory one guy can pick the engine up...lol Love how effortless it is vs my old camaro that was close to 4000 Lbs with a cast iron V8...lol But the torque in the Tundra is pretty substantial on this video.
@@junechris in-line 6 should be a smooth engine. One cylinder head should make manufacturing cheaper. An in line 6 will be less compact than a v6, but these trucks have plenty of room under the hood.
Im glad I bought a brand new 2007 Tundra SR5 4x4 when they first came out. Has 282k runs great. No payments since 2012 :) I towed 15K with no problems.
Most are brand loyal, the comparisons like this are entertaining, but to compare the various models against and withing the brands could be a very helpful thing to have. It could be done with all the brands, chevy, ford, ram, toyota, and what ever other is available to cover the various models and levels to each other.
These twin turbo V6's are definitely compelling on paper.. But I simply don't have trust in their overall reliability over the years. Gas V8s and lower gearing is still the best for the affordable working truck
The look on Nathan’s face 23:40,when Andre keeps talking and trying to make eye contact while he’s driving and towing. Nathan’s face is like keep your eyes on the road putz.😒
For comparison on the RAM I had a 2014 1500 HEMI with a 3.21 Differential short bed, 8-speed transmission and coil spring suspension with aftermarket air bags on the rear axle. I also had an aftermarket hard bed cover. On one outing I pulled a 7000+ pound trailer for 8083 miles according to the trailer miles recorded by the truck. I went from Las Vegas to the East coast passing through 29 states. Overall, I averaged 10 to 11 MPG for the whole trip. At one point on the trip pulling the trailer we could not get regular gas and had to take premium. No difference in performance or MPG was noticed. During the separate trip from Las Vegas to Washington, D. C. and back without a trailer I saw average MPG readings of up to 25 MPG on the long flat stretches using cruise control at 75 MPH. Overall, I saw about 20-21 MPG for the entire trip.
Tbh that's pretty good in my opinion for a 1500 v8 gasser, granted the 3.21 gears probably helped with that, I have an 03 1500 5.7 with the 3.92 and 17-18 is the highest I can get (according to computer) while babying it around with cruise control on the highway lol. Otherwise I normally get around 13-15 mixed.
@@jeffforbes70 I ordered the truck with 3.21 gears because I did not expect to travel a lot and not pull a trailer. I did tow a 26' RV 8002 miles around the U. S. with little trouble.
Great test! I guess my F150 Eccoboost, max tow with the 5-Star tune gets better towing mpg then I thought, it right inline with the Tundra. Towing a big tall box like a camper pushes a lot of air and really puts a load on these trucks! Much different then towing an open trailer.
Its hard to tell what different trucks get towing. My 5Star tuned F150 Ecoboost max-tow got anywhere from 6.7 mpg to 10.8 mpg towing my 5500 lb travel trailer. Depended on the conditions I was towing in. A tail wind would get me over 10 and a headwind could push be down in the 7's. The 6.7 I got was an average over 9 hours towing from South Dakota to Utah as a winter storm was blowing into WY. 9 hours straight of fighting a 30+ mph headwind. In those conditions at that elevation I am not sure the Ram could have realistically held 65 mph. My Ecoboost was working very hard just to maintain speed on the flats and was WOT on the climbs.
@@Rottingboards For towing, I've gotten 7.8-9.8 mpg average. That's with a 32' foot, 12 foot tall, 8500 lb toy hauler. I've never had a lack of power, but as Jay states, it is much hard to tow against a strong cold wind! Not towing my milage has varied at because I don't drive that much anymore. I've averaging 15 in the city to 19-20 on the highway. This is with 3.55 gears and stock tire size.
Just curious guys what was the rpm's at, say 70 mph on both vehicles based on rear end ratios and transmission gears , not a big difference I'm sure based on mpgs not towing. Nice job, thanks for sharing and stay safe.
Agreed and the reason the Ram was off was they let it idle while they shot the trader hookup scenes. They went from 17.5 to 17.1 MPG before resetting for the trip gage.
I have tried many times to get rpm's on trucks from youtube comments and have never gotten a response. I know this isn't the truck in video but my 2019 tundra 4x4 limited with 5.7l and 6 speed transmission is just a hair above 2k (say 2050) rpms at 80mph. I would love to hear this info from other truck owners.
As far as I see it is the same as the F150. Turbos give a more premium experience and make it easy to drive and tow but you will never save on gas. Only way to do that is detune it, or overgear it, or stop/start, or hybrid it. But roi is still not huge. The roi on Toyota's hybrid truck doesn't even work which I find weird since they are the leader in hybrids.
These TT V6s are keeping me busy. For the last few months I've only been working on repairs of these engines even though they represent a small portion of our fleet. $1000s of dollars in parts every time.
If you care about fuel economy when towing a brick like that, there’s a really simple way to improve it: Just slow the heck down. Seriously, even 5 mph would make a big difference. 70mph is faster than most travel trailer tires are rated for anyway. Yes, the trailer in this video had light truck tires, but that is not very common.
Yeah, 65 is the max I tow at, especially with travel trailers. Anything more is just wasteful on fuel, not to mention unsafe. If you 'need' to go 70+ when towing, you've got the wrong priorities in life. I'd go a little slower and get to my destination safely and use less fuel rather than suffer a tire blowout and end up in a ditch or spend 50% more on fuel.
@@4-LOW I have two in the fleet now and other than one having it's def tank freezing, no issues. Both are two years now and have about 150-250 km put on them each day 6 days a week. Back when we got the first one I took if for a cruise up to the cottage and back, averaged 32 MPG over 600km of driving (mostly hwy). Now that they both have been basically city mules with probably a 65-35 city hwy split they sit around 25 MPG. Best little delivery trucks I've bought so far.
@@4-LOW I've heard a lot of good things... There's always going to be problematic engines and you don't always hear the whole story. You'd never buy an Ecoboost if you started to look up timing chain and cam phaser failures but they sell the crap outta them
@@ericmackison9517 the 3.5 is the shitty ecoboost. it is a duratec v6 with turbos strapped to it. still has the internal water pump too. people should only buy the 2.7 ecoboost or the 5.0
Noticed this at the first shot of the trucks. Plus them being a mile high. I take these guys with a grain of salt on everything. Especially living an hour from the Gulf of Mexico. 🤷🏻♂️
would have been better to compare a ram big horn with off road package. less aggressive tires than the duratracs, and a total different front end. Most all Ram 1500s come with a 321 gear ratio. The Price would have been nearly the same.
Rolling resistance is 5% of total fuel use. So the 20% difference in r.r. between tires would make (20% of 5%) 1% difference in mileage. And 20%-30% difference in rolling resistance is probably realistic according to tests on other types of tires here in Europe. I have never seen those tests in US car magazines (Car and Driver) so I might be wrong. But even if Duratracs have DOUBBLE the r.r. of other tyres that would only make less than 5% difference in mileage.
I have no interest in picking up some of the vehicles you guys review and share but I always love listening to you guys except Tommy most of the time. I can honestly say i just down right enjoy you guys period reviewing and looking at cars like a car guy really does. Thanks guys.
What I'd like to see you two do as a comparison is a 2nd gen tundra vs the new 3rd gen tundra, for potential buyers like myself who own a 2nd gen tundra(2011 Tundra SR5 TRD) to see if it's worth the money to switch rides. If this is at all possible. I know the new tundra is more efficient but how much more in a apples to apples test.
As an owner of 2010 and 2016 Tundra that I use for work and tow often I'd like to see this as well but either way I won't be getting the new Tundra for at least 2-3 years to let them work out the bugs hopefully
Ok....I picked up my new '22 Tundra 4x2 yesterday with just 4 miles on her. Took it for a 150 mile+ loop on secondary roads including I-5 and 101.....Depending on the speed and terrain, I was getting between 20 and 28 mpg.... I'm a happy person.
Looks like I'll be keeping my 2020 Tundra. I get almost the same MPG without towing and get better towing MPG. I get close to 10 MPG towing a 7000lb 32' Travel Trailer. May consider getting the 2022 if the hybrid has way better MPG.
@@bendino9016 I would never buy a new tundra unless I won the lottery, I generally buy a truck/ car 5 years old. That why I was disappointed that they did not include a v8. Down the line will need a used 2022 tundra.
For all the new technology you can't break the laws of physics. My lifted gx470 also gets around 18mpg though with our 5k lb aerodynamic camping trailer i manage 15mpg.
in fact with that info, the ram is actually more efficient if you think about it. put those tires and lift on the toyota with a 3.92 or 4.10. it will use more fuel for sure.
@@bendino9016 right! It also helps to explain why the Ram was turning engine speed far higher. But if this were a 3.21 Ram, it would've been a completely different outcome. Still, 1.5mpg hit aint so bad for a true offroader like the Rebel GT.
@@hellkitty1014 I'm not so sure. I haven't driven the Yota but owned several 3.5 EcoBoost and a 5.7 hemi Ram. The Ram does a lot more downshifting than the Fords. The older 6 speed Fords downshifted much less than the pseudo 6 speed Rams and the 8 speed Ram downshift a lot more than the 10 speed Fords. It's the same towing or empty. The Ford just makes a lot more torque at cruising RPM than the Rams and can hold a gear much longer. The hemi has to spin a lot faster RPM to make power.
Ok, I get the comparison you are after here, but a comparison I wish you guys would do is within a brand of vehicle and the performances of the different levels and set ups one can chose from at the dealer. For example, the base model Ram 2500, vs the Ram 2500 Larimie, vs the Ram 2500 Power Wagon, showing how each comes set up in their perspective level of vehicle, and then how they each handle the various situations, like mud, snow, sand, rocks, trail, and so on. The overall goal being to assist those interested in the brands already to understand what to expect when they buy the various models and not get a truck that wont perform as they wanted. Just an idea.
“Less parts” is factually incorrect. Unless you don’t consider pistons and associated equipment “mechanical”. You know those semi-trucks that haul everything and run for 1million miles plus? Turbocharged. The “lose a turbo” fear is a myth.
@@Cataclysm1 well a diesel burns at cooler temperatures can handle higher compression rations and build better torque at lower rpm’s with less wear and tear compared to a gas turbo engine. But hopefully in the long run and technology it works out in the end. I’ve just been seeing a lot of 3.5 eco boost at around 120k in miles starting to fail.
All im trying to get at is if you plan to use the truck as a daily driver back and forth to work and an occasional tow here and there it would probably be fine. But if you plan on using it as a truck and hauling a lot of items and towing a lot I’d rather have the V8. But that’s the good thing with options is you can choose what you like.
What I think is that if you pull the same power out of a smaller engine(especially if you use turbos) it is not going to live as long. It is just a fact of life - higher BMEP, and combustion chamber temperatures and smaller parts. Now if you rarely tow then the small engine might last a long time but if you tow and use that horsepower you are going to shorten the life of that small engine.
@Captain Obvious. Doesn't matter; we are talking about engineering principles here; yes there is better quality with a Toyota but what I said still applies.
@Captain Obvious.Wow, such ignorant brand loyalty. I am also a Toyota lover and have owned many but, you are still wrong; in fact NO engine will last as long in a life of frequent towing as one with little or no towing.
Im curious if the ram would get better MPG with tow/haul off, I know in the several I've driven it will keep it in higher gear when it really doesn't need to
My buddy's Ram ('19 or '20) is just like that. It puts it in tow haul pulling his boat and it won't up shift unless he let's off the throttle but after it shifts he goes back on the throttle and it's fine, doesn't try to down shift. Seems the tow haul needs some transmission tuning done
@@logut80 I totally understand in high grade areas or needing the truck to have a high gear that it makes sense, but just cruising down a highway you definitely want it to use the 8 speed to its fullest potential for fuel economy
seems weird to me that people don't learn how to shift with their right foot. If you want it to shift up you just take your foot of the pedal for a sec. then get back on. been doing that for decades. all while towing a 28 foot trailer with a superduty diesel. people are lazy and pay for it at the pump.
@@uliwehner well a properly running/tuned vehicle should take care of it on it's own. You'd have to drive one these 8spd dodges in tow haul to fully understand how bad it is.
I drove from Denver to Akron, OH a couple months ago while towing. Tow vehicle: 1995 Ford e350 EB 460 v8 3spd w/ OD (E4OD) 4.10 gear stock tire size, but lifted 4" because of the Dana 60 up front (yea she's been converted to 4wd!). About 2k lbs in the van, and towed my 95' 4Runner on tow dolly, with about 1k lbs in the back of that (roughly 5k-5.5k including 4Runner, dolly, and gear in the 4Runner). Cruised 55 mph pretty much all the way. Averaged between 10 and 11.5mpg depending on hills and such, running the lowest octane available at pumps. Granted, empty and no towing has been at best, 12.5mpg going 55-60 ( well aware they were doing 70 and I'd suffer significantly if I tried those speeds, but why's everyone in such a rush? Chill out and enjoy the ride.). But I'll still choose my 4x4 van all day every day going "slow" before buying one of these overpriced trucks. I can at least work on my van myself for the most part without crazy expensive specialized tools. I can also live out of it for extended periods of time once it's converted to a camper, so I won't need to tow a 7klbs camper behind me. Sure, it's a rough ride and sometimes loud, but I can mitigate some of those issues, it's 26.. they didn't do much for sound deadening and all the rubber seals on doors are shot. All that aside, I'm surprised these two trucks sucked as much fuel as they did towing. Unloaded, GREAT. And I'd pick the Dodge despite being a Toy fan because that V8 sounds awesome.
It takes a given amount of energy to move a load for a certain distance and speed. Given the same energy source it’s not surprising that the fuel consumption is nearly the same. The Ram will be more efficient at sea level as it is naturally aspirated.
@@davidj.3441 wrong, the turbo will make EVEN MORE power at sea level (just like the NA engine)... the turbo doesn't magically stop working because there's more air at sea level. ...and if there's more air, the turbo engine will also not have to run as hard. The only time a turbocharged will struggle is when the air temp is high (and the intercooler can't reject heat as quickly as with cool air).
I tow all over New England in a similar size and weight camper (2021 keystone bullet 243bhs) with my 2020 Ram 1500 Laramie hemi - 3.92 rear, air suspension - and regularly get between 9 and 10 mpg, but I keep my speed to 65mph, which I’ve noticed makes a huge difference too. Interesting test - I suspect electric and V6 is the future.
Can you compare a 2021 Tundra 5.7V8 vs and 2022 Tundra V6TT towing the same trailer the same day, the same route. Comparing to a Dodge tells me nothing. 8.8 MPG tells me my 2017 Tundra 5.7L does a better job than the new version. My Tundra gets 12 MPG towing my Escape 19 travel trailer (similar to Casita).
Not related to this test, but what I want to see is a test between a 6.2 GM and the 3.0 diesel. It's a real-world question for those of us buying a new GM truck. "Should I get the 6.2 or the diesel?"
As mucn as I want to like that 3.0 duramax, the belt driven oil pump, timing chain, tensioners etc, amd fuel pump drice gear are all on the back of the engine, and the cooling system is a technical nightmare. Its way too complex. I'd hate to own that engine when the warranty expires. I was actually considering trading my titan xd cummins for one till I saw how that engine is designed.
@@Jackmerius_Tacktheretrix every new engine is complex, it’s also beneficial to know that you get a longer warranty with gm diesels in comparison to the gas.
Did you use the same pump every time? The shut off valve on the pump for when it's "full" can shut off at different times depending on the pump you use. For the test to be accurate, I hope you took that into consideration and used the same pump every time.
@alan on my Super Duty diesel an all terrain to all season can make .5mpg difference depending on which variations of either are being compared. Only way to see for sure in this situation is to do test again with same tires on each. But i think the point of the vid is to compare as they are sold off the the lot.
@@SketchyXC I can see that. Do these trucks have P or LT rated tires? I think that too can make a difference in terms of miles per gallon. Definitely nice to have the stability and security of an LT tire but I think P rated tires are lighter and have lower rolling resistance as well.
In older tundras, in my experience, you do NOT want to tow with cruise control. It always drops to lower gears on hills than necessary and kills gas mileage. You are better off using your foot. I don't know if this is the same in the 3rd gen, but it is certainly true in the 1st!
I wonder how a twin turbo small displacement, 4.0 liter, V8 would do economy wise vs these twin turbo 3.5 V6s. The OEMs could do all new engines that are much smaller dimensionally. They would more easily make the power than the smaller V6s and still sound like a proper V8
Id say better. You'd need less boost to maintain speed compared to a smaller v6. Towing wise I wouldn't expect any better fuel economy but empty yes. Under boost turbo engines have to run rich so they use more fuel for the same horsepower than a naturally aspirated v8 that can run at stoich.
@@Jackmerius_Tacktheretrix see the "under post" part is what most people don't understand AND the EPA doesn't test under heavier load where the engine is under boost. This is why most For 3.5 Ecoboost owners report BELOW EPA fuel economy numbers. When you have boost,you use it. The feeling if power coming from a larger posted engine is addicting
this was quite interesting as this is just about all i use our 99 F250 Superduty for. dragging our 28 foot trailer to nascar races all across the south. we tow at 70-75 traffic permitting, and we average about 9-10 mpg over the last 15 years or so. some good hills going to bristol and martinsville, too. 5-6000 miles of towing per year. What is funny about that is when gas trucks, like f150 or silverados tell me they tow at 15mpgs or better with a 30 foot bumper pull. oh, yeah and it does fine... doesn't like the hills, though....
If the switch to turbo 6s was driven by consumers it would be more acceptable, its not, its being forced onto consumers. Same with the electrification. With such a small difference in mileage, Id be getting a V8.
MPG on any vehicle depends mostly upon 'the nut behind the wheel'. Driving my 2 wheel drive 2019 5.0 F-150 with empty bed I get 28+ MPG and when fully loaded with firewood I get 22 MPG and that is driving through PA mountains. My old Ramcharger with 318 V8 got 12 to 13 pulling a 2,400 pounds of boat and trailer with the A/C running. A steady foot on the gas is very important.
I have not watched to the end, but the idea of the video is what it is all about. A work truck must be used for work and that is how it should be tested for consumption. Eager to get to the end of video and the conclusion.
I have towed for Years. The glaring difference I see between the v8 and the v6 is that the larger displacement v8 provides a level of downhill engine braking that the v6 cannot give. Coming down out of a steep mountain downgrade in a lower gear is impossible with a turbo V6. You have to use brakes to slow down. I have towed heavy campers behind 350 and up v8 s and was able to start down the mountain in 2 ND gear and idle all the way to the bottom with very few brake applications of the trlr brakes
@@terrynewell4749 I own a 2021 Silverado with the big 4 cylinder turbo. It is my runner truck and light to medium towing vehicle. It will tow 8 to 10,000 lbs quite comfortably down the interstate and through the hills. It won't hold back the load at all down a even moderate grade but it will snort right up that same grade realy well. It has more torque than my older v8 engines did. It will use more gas than they did pulling the same weight. Running empty it gets better gas milage than many cars. To drive a half ton truck down the highway and get 25 to 32 mpg is like driving a small diesel but in a gas burner. It drops clear down to 11mpg towing around 9,000 lbs though.
@@terrynewell4749 I did not mention that my big truck is a 1 ton Ram with a 6.4l hemi. It is a beast with a 50 gallon gas tank. It has the 8 foot box so that I could get the big tank and heavy tow rating. Hit the cruise and drag 14,000 lbs down the interstate like it was nothing all day long. It is way better at engine braking downhill and you aren't riding the brakes.
@@andiamo66 Many times you will start to experience brake fade. The rotors heat up and it heats up your brake fluid and glazes your brake pads. Ceramic high performance brake systems help with this but new brake components are made out of compressed granular metal alloys. I have had massive damage to brake rotors in the past and have even had the brake material or pad come right off of the backing plate. The dealership said well that happens sometimes and we will fix it but you have to pay labor. The parts are under warranty though. Little good that does when you start down wolf creek pass with a heavy trailer and the first cutback you hit the brakes and it craps out the pad on the passenger side front wheel and you got metal on metal grinding the rotor and you are hoping and praying that the trailer brakes are up to snuff and can take the brunt of the abuse. I ended up getting the truck stopped. Thank god it was 4 wheel drive with a low range transfer case. I put the truck in low range and let the engine rev up and hold me back with a few trailer brake applications a few times to keep the rpms down. I did not touch the truck brakes but it took me forever to get down off of the mountain. Live and learn.
Higher octane fuel does not increase available power. This has been disproved several times. The BTU per volume energy content doesn’t change with octane. You can even look up Engine Masters on Motor Trend TV. Season 6, Episode 2. They tested 87, 91, 110, 116 octane fuel and also E85. Between each fuel they optimized the engine timing in an attempt to maximize HP. Each fuel made the same power within 1 to 1.5 HP. Higher octane only increases resistance to knock/pre detonation. If your engine isn’t in pre detonation at 87 octane, higher octane fuel will do absolutely nothing but separate you from more of your dollars.
Something never stated or that I missed - What are the rear axle ratios of each truck. Were they the same? A turbo "boosted" engine usually have a 90,000 mile or some Maintenace ( read rebuild) of the turbo itself. A vey EXPENSIVE repair which usually negates any fuel saving if there are any. The engine itself is under more "strain" from the boosted air flow into the engine. Also causing faster internal wear. None of this is effected when testing new trucks. I am an ASE certified tech since 1983, Turbos ARE not durable or at least not AS durable as Superchargers.
The non turbo engine benefits more, or should I say, relies more on that cooler more oxygen dense air... The turbo engines can pretty much spool up to their governed boost pressure in either condition. Retest in the warmer weather and the non turbo engine will be lacking compared to now. As for MPG, the dense winter air is likely harder to pull through for both trucks.
@@PsalmFourteenOne denser air=more fuel=more power. That's the biggest reason why fuel economy improves in the summer and decreases in the winter. The other thing too, is that the ram wasn't making full power due to the lower oxygen content, so it had to work harder to pull the same load. The tundra, was still able to make the same boost levels.
@@hunterdan2002 while you're correct that colder air requires more fuel and therefore worse gas mileage, the main reason gas mileage drops in the winter is actually the winter blend of gas they provide to reduce emissions. It has less energy in it so you use more of it.
Get your exclusive NordVPN deal here: ( nordvpn.com/thefastlanetruck ). Try it risk-free thanks to Nord’s 30-day money-back guarantee!
Got it, thanks.
Y'all need to test a 250 6.2 versus a 350 6.2, as since the 7.3's introduction the 250 6.2 stayed paired with the 6 speed, but the 350 6.2 gets the 10 speed.
I love that its like summer Siberia.
Ha lol your right except for last year last year hit recerd high 105f like many died and many more lost there home from it sinking into the melting permafrost.
@@thesilentone4024 damn
Turbo charged V-6 engines in full size trucks are garbage. There’s no replacement for displacement! If you never use a truck like a truck then a turbo charged V-6 “may” provide decent results but certainly not as good long term reliability as a naturally aspirated V-8. But on a turbo charged V-6, the moment you tow and/or haul anything of a decent weight, drive up steep hills and actually work the truck like a truck, not only do you kill any kind of long term reliability even more but your performance of the truck turns to crap! Then add to that the cost of repairs as well. A turbo charged engine has a lot more moving parts, requires more hours for both maintenance and repairs and has more costly parts that need to be replaced. There is absolutely no way whatsoever that I will ever own anything but a V-8 in any of my full size trucks!
I for one thoroughly enjoy watching all of your videos. Super intuitive and fun to see y’all working together on this kind of work. By far TFL is one of my favorite channels.
Thanks for the lift guys. Looking forward to hanging out with you guys soon.
Shorten these videos would be of benefit. Too much repeating information.
I agree Bill. It was hard to watch and I kept forwarding through it... kind of tedious chat.
@@Ram14250 I watch about 3 minutes of actual video, I forwarded to the the MPG results.
@@paladin11C40 me too
I prefer the longer version
Definitely
Something else to keep in mind is that naturally aspirated engines suffer more at high elevations. I would expect the v8 to be more efficient at lower elevations.
Ya it would have won no issues
Also, Ram is still port injected.
@@willrector9716 no chance, turbo efficiency at any level is better,
Now if the V8 had a turbo 😉
@@benlondon8467 every time I have put a supercharger or turbo on anything it gets waaay worse mileage............. so there's that.
@@willrector9716 well I’ve owned 3 Ford territory Inline 6 Petrols, 2 N/A , 1 turbo, the turbo engine is better on fuel, essentially on the open rd and towing, but if you hammer the throttle the turbo engine uses more fuel, but it goes a lot better to. My 2 bobs worth ....
I have a 2020 rebel and love it, does everything, and goes anywhere I need. My last Toyota was a 2005 tundra, which was a real nice truck right up to when the transmission fell out.
Oof
Seeing how close they are whether towing or unladen I’ll stick with the Hemi V8 and it’s fiery engine noises thank you
And I will bet that the V8 will outlast the twin-turbo engine. Every time.
@@johnpence8529 Exactly mate.
Awesome same here brother, I have a 2011 Ford F150 with a 5.0L Coyote V8 in it with 145,000 miles on it and still going strong and its a beast and it sounds like a beast with the Borla ATAK exhaust on it. Also I know for a fact that my 96 Ford F150 with a 5.0L (302) Windsor V8 will pretty much outlast any EcoBoost engine out there.
@@johnpence8529 In most cases I agree, but Toyota has built its name and reputation on making small engines do BIG things milage wise and longivity I would hold off awhile and see. Toyota has had some issues with the waste gates on the Turbos, but it has effected a tiny amount of trucks and Toyota is always quick to identify the problem and implementing a fix. One of the things I love about Toyota is they continue to improve their engines over time and they take care of their customers if something does arise. Back in the mid 2000's they had some oil consumption issues with a few engines, well they figured out the cause and corrected the problem all the while extending the warranties on the effected models. Hemi engines still have the lifte Camshaft failures and with the 6.4l engines it often trashes the engine because of its tolerances. The 5.7l has better chances of repair. Time will tell on this new Toyota engine because its a complete re-design. I can say this though unlike Ram Toyota will continue to improve this engine over the years to make it better and better. They only change engines when they no longer fit the current mandates. Ram on the other hand has done nothing to fix the lifter/cam shaft fiasco and they have never backed up their customers. If that happened to a Toyota engine and was common they would extend the warranty and fix it.
All this BS is being forced on us👎🏻
You mean a turbo-charged V-6 got more fuel economy than an N/A V-8 towing at a mile above sea level? Not much of a shocker there but a Ram being $15,000 dollars more is just frightening.
Yeah, I agree. At sea level they likely would have been closer loaded. Plus the ram has tires not at all suited for fuel efficiency... which it should anyway, because unlike the Toyota, the Ram is really a truck.
The turbos in the Tundra definitely help at altitude. Slowing down by 5mph would likely yield significantly better fuel mileage. Fun video, thanks guys!
If only the Tundra didn't look like some kind of psychotic inflatable life raft...
@@CKDz agreed. The f150 3.5 Ecoboost looks better and gets better fuel economy
@@CKDz love the new tundra
@@ds6872 Toyota trucks are definitely not known for their fuel economy
@@Ichibuns not since the big three surpassed them anyway
They are close enough on mpg that you need more samples to determine if the advantage Toyota exhibits towing will hold up under all conditions. Great video! Both trucks are gorgeous. $71,000 would make me run.
Agreed! Difference over 100k miles at $3.50/gal is about $7k. Not a lot. Any major engine or trans repair will cost more than that. But it's a pretty interesting data point to see the comparison.
I'm very curious to see how the hybrid tundra does. The turbo 6 gasser is getting close to my last powerstroke in mpg without the nightmare of constant maintenance and repairs.
Edit: I should say hopefully less maintenance and repairs. It's still too early to tell on the Toyota turbo 6. I know there's some first run issues. It'll take a few years to know how well the truck holds up.
The $71k price is becoming the norm. Sad that the affordable pickup is hard to come by these days.
@@caspforge it’s holding the price up big time on used trucks. I’ve seen Fords w 100,000 miles and they are asking nearly $60000
Couple the advantage that ford and Toyota turbos have pulling high altitude passes. The ram is the sure loser.
Yeah within margin of error
I've been a Toyota fan since 1988. I bought my first tundra in2004. This is the first time I have no desire to own a new tundra. The F250 is looking much better now.
I would love to see the manufactures come out with turbo V8's! I also love that they finally put small diesel in the 1/2 tons a few years back. If they really want good fuel economy and power they need to make the hybrids diesels!
It will not happen because of government. V8’s in half ton trucks will eventually be done in a couple of years at most.
why strap a turbo on a big gas V8? they already make 400 and 500hp. How much do you want? combining big weight with the complexities of adding turbos? turbos kill the sound of a naturally aspirated V8.
@@uliwehner To make more power? I feel like that is an obvious answer
@@Ginger.K97 considering that you can buy a supercharged hemi v8 with 702hp in a RAM TRX, maybe it is not as obvious as you think. For many of us the need to spend 80 grand on a pickup truck is more of a "maybe not" kind of proposition. But hey whatever floats your boat, or pick-up truck.
@@kingsolo6241 you are probably correct and it is really sad. My 5.3 v8 gets better mileage than the GM v6
Another great video by Nathan and Andre. Great way to test the Ram and Toyota mpgs. That 70k price tag is crazy tho.
Nathan had mentioned that the Ecoboost’s rev higher when towing than the new Tundra was. In my experience with my F150 Ecoboost, it will cruise in 10th gear while towing my 25 foot camper. 10th gear at 100-110 kmh it rev’s at 1700-1800 rpms. It can hold 10th on flat ground. Head wind and hills it will down shift to 9th and sometimes 8th. But will almost always stay below 2500 rpms while cruising.
I love my flat ground cruise in my 2020 super duty with the 6.7. 1400rpm at 105km/h. Pulls every hill in 9th while towing 8500lbs fifth wheel. Averages 17.2l/100km(13.6mpg)
I agree totally. I have always loved how my eco boost has such a nice torque curve it doesn’t rev much more than 2500 at 70 while towing.
Nothing against the Toyota but we all know Ford has far greater experience engineering these vehicles, especially for towing, and that's who I trust more. Toyota is just now implementing what Ford started over 10 years ago, which is a smart move, but they are more of a follower rather than an innovator in the truck market.
@@sly9263 Well, you are right, Toyota is a follower most of the time, but it is only to the advantage of the Toyota truck owner. They prefer perfecting their solution in house rather than at the expense of their customers. That gets my support.
@@marcraymond7741 eh, I don't really buy the whole perfecting thing. They have the same problems and failures as anyone else... the turbos are seizing the wastegates and blowing up right now. They just have longer periods between updates like that than most, which increases reliability but only because of that reason, IMO
First off great video!! I was shopping new tundras since before they came out but no dealer here in fl would allow me to put a deposit with Guaranteed MSRP. Ended up with a fully loaded rebel with sunroof with 18k miles for 49k. I did the math and it would take a long time to make up the mpg savings between the two… now watching this maybe it’s closer then I thought
Great video love the sound of the V8
Guy's. I have a 2022 Rebel with 4300 miles on the clock. Using your method of fueling up after a 100 mile trip with 87 octane on the PA Turnpike, I got 17.9 MPG. The same trip with 89 octane, I got 20.1. It seems to like 89. I am going to try it with 91 octane next time.
Wow, I really thought they would get better mileage than that towing. I had a 1999 Chevy K3500 crew cab long bed with the 7.4 ltr and 4 speed auto. It got right around 8mpg when towing a similar trailer. The worst mileage I got was fighting a headwind in Wyoming, then I got only 6.6mpg. The 8mpg was consistent through Colorado, but not in the mountains. I really miss that truck, and 70k for a new truck would really talk me into an old truck with an LS swap. I love that you guys test in Colorado altitude, keep up the great content!
That’s what they get Towing ,That trailer is a brick and they aren’t using Diesel’s so that’s what you get doesn’t matter whatever you have. My 8.1 big block engine in my 2001 GMC got the same miles per gallon towing as my 3.5 eco-boost F150 the only thing I will say is the F150 has more pulling power that little 3.5 outpulls the 8.1 even though the 8.1 is tuned and not stock .This is the same situation that Toyota will out pull that hemi all day long,All these guys saying I’ll take the V8 Haven’t towed with a tundra or an F150 eco-boost if they did they would never be saying I’ll take the V8 again,After driving the. Eco boost. The V8s feel weak,who cares how it sounds it’s getting it’s doors blown off towing at twice the rpms to keep up .
@@JohnDiMartino I'll be the first to call bullshit on that...and not the last.
I tried buying a Tundra this week, and I found every dealer (23 total) within a 100 mile radius marking up the Tundra well over MSRP. The cheapest markup was $8k on a SR5 with 2WD marketed as “off-road ready” due to upgraded tires.
Toyota and Ram, can you please address dealer markups like Ford and GM recently have. At this point it’s impossible to find local Toyota dealers even willing to take a custom order.
I noticed the same thing, the toyota dealers that actually had a tundra in stock were all marked up. I ended up picking up a rebel, the dodge dealership had no markup on the rebel or any lower mode trucks. It did have an insane markup on the trx tho.
April
202
1 bought a ram 6,500.00 off sticker
The new tundra has issues the dealer here already had 2 returned blown motor is what they said. I'll wait for 23 24. Stick with my 14 tundra I'm fine. Mark ups what a rip off
The chip shortage is actually affecting Toyota now. Their build philosophy only built what they could get parts for vs Chevy who built a bunch of trucks are awaiting chips
I live near San Diego and bought a brand new Tundra SR5 4X4 Long Bed from a great dealer in North Platte Nebraska. It was at list price, zero markup. I then paid $2000 to have it delivered to my house. You can do the same.
Interesting test! Look forward to Mopar’s turbo inline 6 coming out even though will miss the sweet sound of the hemi. I thought the YOTA would be considerably more efficient than the Ram. The Rebel GT is sweet, but 71k is over the top. Thanks for sharing!
$71K is over the top.
I hope it's a 4.0L lol. Bring back the 4.0L as a DOHC turbo!
@@35RSkyline man that would be a beast but we can only dream
I've had 3 Ram 1500's with the 5.7 Hemi and I really, REALLY love that engine. I hope Ram is smart enough to keep the Hemi available after they offer the turbo inline 6, like Ford did with the 5.0.
Had and cam and lifter issues? I keep seeing that issue pop up recently. Did 3 of them last month
@@blackadax9370 I probably would not have had 3 and really, really loved them if I had any issues.
@@blackadax9370 I had that problem on my 2011 but had almost 200000 on it.
This gets brought up. What failed? At how many miles. How was the oil pump how did the oil look
Why 3? Failures or just like upgrading?
Tundra everyday. That TTV6 is fast, efficient, and powerful.
Yes !
Would like to see more GMC AT4 3.0 diesel comparisons. It is a great engine and offroad package with great fuel economy.
Diesels are the best engines ,always said it.
Obviously gvt wanted them to die, too efficent.
How much oil does that 3.0 liter burn since there is a recall and all my buddies can't keep oil in the gm junk.
The biggest difference between the 2 is the tires. The tundra in its "off-road" package still has street tires, where as the ram has an actual off-road worthy tread that's going to equate to a lot more rolling resistance.
Not enough to justify the difference, ESPECIALLY once towing. Nice try though,,,,, haha.
That is a difference but definitely not the biggest
@@shitloveaduck clearly physics is not your strong point. The Duratrak's are going to have a higher rolling resistance and more rotational mass. Takes more power to get them moving and more power to keep them moving. A fairer test would have been using a normal Ram, like a Bighorn, with the stock Wrangler SR-A's that come on most Ram's.
@@shitloveaduck should try it some time. Throw an aggressive all terrain tire on for a few hundred miles, then switch back to a street tire of the same size. Guaranteed you'll see a significant difference in mileage. Between the rolling resistance and the extra weight, the mileage difference is significant. 1-2 mpg minimum.
@@hunterdan2002 Correct. there is a guy on youtube with a 22 tundra and he put bigger geolander m/ts on, yeah even worse than a/t, and his tundra mileage dropped over 3mpg hwy.
If I were wanting to tow, and was overly concerned about MPG or range between fill ups, I would buy a diesel and be done with it. Between these 2 vehicles however, having that GT sound is so phenomenal, I would not care about the 1 MPG difference(rounded) that the Tundra had over me. LOL
The GT sounds good for sure, but I would not want to listen to it for 4 hours straight, downshifting and revving on every dumb little hill I encounter. That's the beauty of the TTV6. Very quiet and smooth under load like this. Even when they pulled the 8100 lb trailer up the IKE I don't think the Tundra went much over 3000 rpm.
The Ram kept having to jump 4000+ rpm on the little rolling hills.
Tire! But what about the $20k difference to get the GT? Tundra guys could do a lot of damage in parts and accessories with that kinda difference.
@BL Dontmatter Or, instead, I could just not buy an underpowered V8 that has to rev 4k on every dumb little hill. Plenty of options out there that tow better than that hemi.
And here am wishing I could afford either one
Diesel introduces a hefty financial burden on top of already expensive trucks. It's thousands extra for the engine, thousands extra for the transmission, and thousands extra for the mechanical maintenance. If you're full-time towing long distances for the next 10+ years, then diesel makes sense. Otherwise, gasoline is the way to go (price wise).
Love a Tundra but I love that V8 sound more! 🐏
Love the rotary dial because it frees up space for the class leading sliding console.
You know I have to disagree on this one. I did like the extra storage space I owned a 2016 and a 2019 ram. However I just didn't really get used to that dial
Rotary dial is lame, sorry. Column shift FTW
@@BC08 Why?
@@sunnyvalejedi Dial is the most dainty and 🌈 gear selector possible.
@@BC08 I’m secure enough with my manhood to have a dial and sweet console, but you like to have your hand on a stick with a knob.. You realize that the stick gear selector has no manual linkage to the transmission- it’s all electric.
Are you also resetting the MPG meter when doing the Trip meter? A difference in MPG between the dash and your calculations could be because of that. Just a thought
Great video. I tow with a 2013 tundra sr5 2wd double cab 5.7 . Does decent on mileage considering my toy haulers pretty heavy. Thanks for the videos. Will definitely help me on my decision when I buy a new truck. Keep em coming.
6 u u b52s
Thanks for doing real world testing like this!
I'll take the V8, and even more so with how similar the mpg's are to the V6 of the Tundra.
and if you are at sea level there the tundra doesn't make that much sense.
Same here call me old fashion i keep my V8 any day over the v6
@@nwharbes Agree. Naturally aspirated
I'll take the truck that won't be worth $8 in 10 years
@@nwharbes Amen to that brother V8 or nothing.
Personally, I think the prices are insane. I'm just gonna keep upgrading my old 02 Silverado. It's an unusual configuration in that it is an extended cab long bed Z71 4x4. You don't see many ext cabs with a full 8 foot bed in the 1/2 ton. Not even sure if you can order one any more. You see lots of work trucks with the regular cab, but not the ext cab. It's completely rust free and in great shape inside and out. No the interior won't be as modern, but I'm pretty sure I can add whatever modern technology that I want and as far as I'm concerned, it's a lot cooler than the new ones. It has 350k miles on it and runs perfect, but I can put in a re-manufactured motor and trans installed probably $10-12k. Yes, I know a bunch of mechanics. LOL
More people will be keeping their trucks like this..
New and used are no longer affordable to most
You can get a new f150 with extended cab long bed
Right on brother.
I enjoyed this video. The conversation on the road trip was full of good information. Thank you all.
Turbos help a lot at higher elevations. Ram would have been way more efficient at sea level.
More than double as efficient though? You're being pretty optimistic.
3.92 gear rato of ram gt
@@benlzicar7628 agreed
This is a perfect test for me. Thanks for taking the time to make this video.
Thanks for doing this comparison. I’ve always thought that all the trucks in today’s market are fairly equal. Just buy the one that has the features you like and the one that fits your butt. Being a guy that transitioned from F-150’s to a Tundra in 2004, I think over the long run “cost of ownership” is less with a Tundra than the other trucks. It will be interesting if the 3rd gen Tundra can maintain its reliability.
The comments about street tires vs all terrain tires are very valid, but most of us understand that TFL can’t spend all their time swapping tires and gear ratios, in other words “run what you brung” or what the manufacturers give you.
Like I’ve said before, I’d like to see TFL do your mileage test over a longer loop, take I-76 to Fort Morgan and return. That way you wouldn’t have to deal with the construction zone and would have less traffic.
Can’t wait for the next comparison, Andre’s F-150 hybrid vs the Tundra.
So the Tundra is
$13,800 Cheaper
1.3 MPGS MORE WHILE TOWING
0.4 MPGS MORE ON REGULAR DRIVING
HAS A LOWER MAINTENANCE COST?
would love to see the same loop/camper behind a 3.0 duramax and ecodiesel
Ram quit making the ecodiesel. GM is the only one making a diesel half ton now and they just beefed it up, did some improvements and upped the hp and torque.
I also just wanted to say TFL truck is my absolute favorite channel for everything trucks. I love the depth you guys go into with each truck and your honesty with everything you guys put out. Keep the great content coming as always 💪
I really do not know how this channel doesn’t have more than a million subscribers. I picture this channel being at least 5 million subscribers with info provided.
Love these videos. Such real world comparison here and in the other videos I have seen. Keep up the great content.
I have a 2022 Toyota Tundra SR5 4X4 that I use to pull a 2023 Airstream Bambi 19cb trailer. The Tundra has a tall shell on the back to carry a dualsport motorcycle. My gas mileage averaged 12.8 mpg on a trip from Poway California to Sedona AZ and back. Two differences between my rig and the test: my trailer weight was about 4,000 lbs and my cruise control speed was 63 mph. The Tundra (and probably the RAM as well) only uses the gas it needs. You can conserve fuel if you slow down even more. 👍. Thank you for a great review of these trucks!
My 2016 F150 with a 2.7L ecoboost gets between 11 and 13 mpg towing our 7200lbs 27 ft travel trailer.
Anecdotally my setup (2.7L , 6 speed auto, 3.55 gear ratio) can out accelerate a Nissan Kicks while towing 7200lbs 😁
Are you at 5k ft elevation? it will bring it down some. but the 2.7 is great on gas
So?
How fast are you towing? 55?
@@pryme2013 I would think it might be better. Hence why jets flight at high altitude, less air to punch through.
My 2.7 is about 15 to 16 l/100 km pulling 3000 lb boat but empty between 9 and 10 l/100km like 1400 to 1500km per tank with the 136l tank. Wouldn't trade it in for anything but a newer one with a 10spd or a powerboost
Very interesting how all the new turbo v6 engines are working out. Everyone seems to be optimizing for different things
I think it is smart to naturally have the power as it is needed and then have the fuel economy during normal driving. There is no cylinder de-activation gimmicks and the like.
@@larrybe2900 I mean... if you want torque for towing and fuel economy... The F150 Lightning is your truck.
@@koobertohumperdink8702
Getting electric involved is a given for torque. I was referring to the average ICE PU. The availability of power without adding more complexity while aiming for better overall fuel economy is a smart platform. And why not, the average driver does not use the power band very often. I want to see how the same displacement for Chevy holds up with their 2.7 four cyl. If only I had that kind of power available in my simple '87 Dakota 4 cyl. that couldn't get out of its own way. lol
👍 great video, I have a 2022 ram 3500 with a 6.4 hemi and 373 gears and the 8-speed transmission. I have ran a 290 mile loop a few times and have come up with 17.8 MPG with the factory tires and wheels. I added the leveling kit and went up from the factory wheels which measure about 32.5 in up to tires that are about 34 in when they are a little low on air. After adding the aftermarket wheels and tires about a week ago I made that loop which is going down to the Minneapolis St Paul airport from where I live at about 290 miles it was snowy and I made the trip in four-wheel drive the entire way and ended up at about 12 miles per gallon there was a lot of stop and go traffic due to the bad weather I believe I could have pulled 13 miles per gallon except I got stuck driving about 15 to 20 miles at about 15 miles per hour stuck behind plow trucks. My brother has a 2019 half ton ram warlock that gets a little bit better MPG than that one does and it has the hemi also. I would bet my 3500 ram would get better miles per gallon than both of those towing that trailer. And the price was between the two of them at around 61,000 MSRP . This is the first winter I have owned it and just around town in the snow with my snow plow on and snow plowing I get around 8.3 miles per gallon that is not strictly snow plowing that is a mix . And that is awesome miles per gallon... My 1999 1-ton single axle 454 truck probably gets up to 5 miles per gallon plowing. And my 2002 2500 HD 8.1 L with the Allison transmission gets up to 7 miles per gallon in two wheel drive on the highway in the summertime, and gets the same miles per gallon towing. Trucks have come a long way.
And my summertime loop with the factory tires was at 70 to 80 mph
That's about equal to my gutless 3.55 v6 Dakota that weighs 2500lbs less. Not too bad. 13-14 city maybe 17 hwy on a good day with a tailwind. I don't like the truck but it has low miles no rust and it's paid for
I'm liking the direction that Dodge is going with reviving the old school straight six and adding turbos. This should be good!
Less weight and an inline is an improvement over a V engine overall for sure. I'm doing an engine build , dual intake cams E85 and 14 PSI on my inline 27 year old LLO inline 4 cylinder and my engine only weighs 220 lbs, with the lost foam method..lol In theory one guy can pick the engine up...lol Love how effortless it is vs my old camaro that was close to 4000 Lbs with a cast iron V8...lol But the torque in the Tundra is pretty substantial on this video.
In-line will have more torque they should have never quit making them
@@junechris in-line 6 should be a smooth engine. One cylinder head should make manufacturing cheaper. An in line 6 will be less compact than a v6, but these trucks have plenty of room under the hood.
Im glad I bought a brand new 2007 Tundra SR5 4x4 when they first came out. Has 282k runs great. No payments since 2012 :) I towed 15K with no problems.
Well there is a load of bullshit. That pos rice burner is 7k pounds over its limit 🤣🤣 good try
Most are brand loyal, the comparisons like this are entertaining, but to compare the various models against and withing the brands could be a very helpful thing to have. It could be done with all the brands, chevy, ford, ram, toyota, and what ever other is available to cover the various models and levels to each other.
The cold air adds a lot of drag and significantly reduces MPGs, as well as the elevation.
Cold air also helps the turbo push denser air in the motor
These twin turbo V6's are definitely compelling on paper..
But I simply don't have trust in their overall reliability over the years.
Gas V8s and lower gearing is still the best for the affordable working truck
Yep you got it brother.
I found the trip meter in my Tacoma to be pretty accurate as well.
The look on Nathan’s face 23:40,when Andre keeps talking and trying to make eye contact while he’s driving and towing.
Nathan’s face is like keep your eyes on the road putz.😒
For comparison on the RAM I had a 2014 1500 HEMI with a 3.21 Differential short bed, 8-speed transmission and coil spring suspension with aftermarket air bags on the rear axle. I also had an aftermarket hard bed cover. On one outing I pulled a 7000+ pound trailer for 8083 miles according to the trailer miles recorded by the truck. I went from Las Vegas to the East coast passing through 29 states. Overall, I averaged 10 to 11 MPG for the whole trip. At one point on the trip pulling the trailer we could not get regular gas and had to take premium. No difference in performance or MPG was noticed.
During the separate trip from Las Vegas to Washington, D. C. and back without a trailer I saw average MPG readings of up to 25 MPG on the long flat stretches using cruise control at 75 MPH. Overall, I saw about 20-21 MPG for the entire trip.
ram gt has 3.92 gear ratio that is the difference and jacked up suspension.
Interesting, and good truck.
Tbh that's pretty good in my opinion for a 1500 v8 gasser, granted the 3.21 gears probably helped with that, I have an 03 1500 5.7 with the 3.92 and 17-18 is the highest I can get (according to computer) while babying it around with cruise control on the highway lol. Otherwise I normally get around 13-15 mixed.
Interesting info, I have the 3.92s and have never seen higher than mid 18s. I had figured that it was the gearing.
@@jeffforbes70 I ordered the truck with 3.21 gears because I did not expect to travel a lot and not pull a trailer. I did tow a 26' RV 8002 miles around the U. S. with little trouble.
Great test! I guess my F150 Eccoboost, max tow with the 5-Star tune gets better towing mpg then I thought, it right inline with the Tundra. Towing a big tall box like a camper pushes a lot of air and really puts a load on these trucks! Much different then towing an open trailer.
I'm guessing you get better mileage not towing then these two trucks. Care to share mileage towing and not towing?
Its hard to tell what different trucks get towing. My 5Star tuned F150 Ecoboost max-tow got anywhere from 6.7 mpg to 10.8 mpg towing my 5500 lb travel trailer. Depended on the conditions I was towing in. A tail wind would get me over 10 and a headwind could push be down in the 7's. The 6.7 I got was an average over 9 hours towing from South Dakota to Utah as a winter storm was blowing into WY. 9 hours straight of fighting a 30+ mph headwind.
In those conditions at that elevation I am not sure the Ram could have realistically held 65 mph. My Ecoboost was working very hard just to maintain speed on the flats and was WOT on the climbs.
@@Rottingboards For towing, I've gotten 7.8-9.8 mpg average. That's with a 32' foot, 12 foot tall, 8500 lb toy hauler. I've never had a lack of power, but as Jay states, it is much hard to tow against a strong cold wind! Not towing my milage has varied at because I don't drive that much anymore. I've averaging 15 in the city to 19-20 on the highway. This is with 3.55 gears and stock tire size.
@@jasonlakomiak179 Thanks so much, I have been going back and forth on these trucks. You gave me real numbers...appreciated.
@@Jay-me7gw thanks for your real world numbers.
Just curious guys what was the rpm's at, say 70 mph on both vehicles based on rear end ratios and transmission gears , not a big difference I'm sure based on mpgs not towing. Nice job, thanks for sharing and stay safe.
Agreed and the reason the Ram was off was they let it idle while they shot the trader hookup scenes. They went from 17.5 to 17.1 MPG before resetting for the trip gage.
I have tried many times to get rpm's on trucks from youtube comments and have never gotten a response. I know this isn't the truck in video but my 2019 tundra 4x4 limited with 5.7l and 6 speed transmission is just a hair above 2k (say 2050) rpms at 80mph. I would love to hear this info from other truck owners.
Always watch you guys when deciding on which truck I want! Very informative and entertaining! Keep it up guys! 👍🏽
As far as I see it is the same as the F150. Turbos give a more premium experience and make it easy to drive and tow but you will never save on gas. Only way to do that is detune it, or overgear it, or stop/start, or hybrid it. But roi is still not huge. The roi on Toyota's hybrid truck doesn't even work which I find weird since they are the leader in hybrids.
These TT V6s are keeping me busy.
For the last few months I've only been working on repairs of these engines even though they represent a small portion of our fleet. $1000s of dollars in parts every time.
so going with the V8 would be a better route? (currently looking at tundra and can't decide which motors to get)
I would assume every tundra would be under warranty at this point… must be eco boost
If you care about fuel economy when towing a brick like that, there’s a really simple way to improve it: Just slow the heck down. Seriously, even 5 mph would make a big difference.
70mph is faster than most travel trailer tires are rated for anyway. Yes, the trailer in this video had light truck tires, but that is not very common.
Yeah, 65 is the max I tow at, especially with travel trailers. Anything more is just wasteful on fuel, not to mention unsafe. If you 'need' to go 70+ when towing, you've got the wrong priorities in life. I'd go a little slower and get to my destination safely and use less fuel rather than suffer a tire blowout and end up in a ditch or spend 50% more on fuel.
Which one will rust the least in 300k? Which one will go the most miles in 15 years? Mpg cost in ownership? Resale? Dependability? Thanks
Nice! I'd love to see what the 3.0l Duramax would be with that trailer. The RAM did have more aggressive tires which hurts economy.
Judging by what owners are seeing, the 3.0 Duramax wouldn't make it to the test location to hook up to the trailer without breaking down.
@@4-LOW I have two in the fleet now and other than one having it's def tank freezing, no issues. Both are two years now and have about 150-250 km put on them each day 6 days a week. Back when we got the first one I took if for a cruise up to the cottage and back, averaged 32 MPG over 600km of driving (mostly hwy). Now that they both have been basically city mules with probably a 65-35 city hwy split they sit around 25 MPG. Best little delivery trucks I've bought so far.
@@4-LOW I've heard a lot of good things... There's always going to be problematic engines and you don't always hear the whole story. You'd never buy an Ecoboost if you started to look up timing chain and cam phaser failures but they sell the crap outta them
@@ericmackison9517 the 3.5 is the shitty ecoboost. it is a duratec v6 with turbos strapped to it. still has the internal water pump too. people should only buy the 2.7 ecoboost or the 5.0
@@bendino9016 no doubt. If the Ecoboost engines were so great they'd be in the super duty's.
I'm just curious to see the long term reliability of the twin turbo V6.
Toyotas no stranger to building a good turbo motor, 2jz was a very reliable turbo motor in stock form
I came from the future to tell you it’s sh💩
The BIG difference here is that the Rebel is rolling on Goodyear Duratrac’s which are quite heavy and knobby…
Noticed this at the first shot of the trucks. Plus them being a mile high. I take these guys with a grain of salt on everything. Especially living an hour from the Gulf of Mexico. 🤷🏻♂️
I love my KO2’s so sticky
would have been better to compare a ram big horn with off road package. less aggressive tires than the duratracs, and a total different front end. Most all Ram 1500s come with a 321 gear ratio. The Price would have been nearly the same.
Yeah definitely tires are a huge difference in this comparison
Rolling resistance is 5% of total fuel use. So the 20% difference in r.r. between tires would make (20% of 5%) 1% difference in mileage. And 20%-30% difference in rolling resistance is probably realistic according to tests on other types of tires here in Europe. I have never seen those tests in US car magazines (Car and Driver) so I might be wrong. But even if Duratracs have DOUBBLE the r.r. of other tyres that would only make less than 5% difference in mileage.
I have no interest in picking up some of the vehicles you guys review and share but I always love listening to you guys except Tommy most of the time. I can honestly say i just down right enjoy you guys period reviewing and looking at cars like a car guy really does. Thanks guys.
Still rather have a v8 with a full size. The 5.7 will be missed
Same here brother.
Same. Can't beat the sound of a V8. The V6 sounds like trash on a full size truck.
Wonder if you would have slapped some off-road tires on the Yoder to get a more equal comparison against the Ram???
What I'd like to see you two do as a comparison is a 2nd gen tundra vs the new 3rd gen tundra, for potential buyers like myself who own a 2nd gen tundra(2011 Tundra SR5 TRD) to see if it's worth the money to switch rides. If this is at all possible. I know the new tundra is more efficient but how much more in a apples to apples test.
Not sure, Toyota would support that
Would that matter since TFL owns the Tundra?
As an owner of 2010 and 2016 Tundra that I use for work and tow often I'd like to see this as well but either way I won't be getting the new Tundra for at least 2-3 years to let them work out the bugs hopefully
Ok....I picked up my new '22 Tundra 4x2 yesterday with just 4 miles on her. Took it for a 150 mile+ loop on secondary roads including I-5 and 101.....Depending on the speed and terrain, I was getting between 20 and 28 mpg.... I'm a happy person.
Looks like I'll be keeping my 2020 Tundra. I get almost the same MPG without towing and get better towing MPG. I get close to 10 MPG towing a 7000lb 32' Travel Trailer. May consider getting the 2022 if the hybrid has way better MPG.
I think the tundra will get better mileage when it has 10,000 mile
how much do you drive? the money you will lose buying new will never be offset by a few mpg's unless you are driving 70k miles a year.
@@bendino9016 I would never buy a new tundra unless I won the lottery, I generally buy a truck/ car 5 years old. That why I was disappointed that they did not include a v8. Down the line will need a used 2022 tundra.
For all the new technology you can't break the laws of physics. My lifted gx470 also gets around 18mpg though with our 5k lb aerodynamic camping trailer i manage 15mpg.
I agree on the shift lever versus dial. I have grown to hate the dial in my Ram.
What are the final gear ratio in each truck? I do believe the gearing will effect the MPG even though they are towing the exact same things.
You will never match two different brands exactly,,, they addressed your comment.
@@shitloveaduck I probably missed it, 30 minutes for a MPG test is a bit much, I skipped around. Thanks for the comment though.
I think Andre said 3.3x for the Tundra, 3.92 for the Ram (but the 8 versus 10 speed is also a factor because of different ratios for final gearing).
@@paladin11C40 - I have missed comments like this many times!! Hahaha. I just call it “old timer’s”. Heh heh.
My 12 valves gets about 13mpg towing 10-14k lb daily. These mpg numbers aren't convincing me the EPA regulations are actually helping.
The Rebel is equipped with a true A/T tire, lifted suspension, and 3.92 gear. This is not exactly apples to apples.
in fact with that info, the ram is actually more efficient if you think about it. put those tires and lift on the toyota with a 3.92 or 4.10. it will use more fuel for sure.
@@bendino9016 right! It also helps to explain why the Ram was turning engine speed far higher. But if this were a 3.21 Ram, it would've been a completely different outcome. Still, 1.5mpg hit aint so bad for a true offroader like the Rebel GT.
@@hellkitty1014 I'm not so sure. I haven't driven the Yota but owned several 3.5 EcoBoost and a 5.7 hemi Ram. The Ram does a lot more downshifting than the Fords. The older 6 speed Fords downshifted much less than the pseudo 6 speed Rams and the 8 speed Ram downshift a lot more than the 10 speed Fords. It's the same towing or empty. The Ford just makes a lot more torque at cruising RPM than the Rams and can hold a gear much longer. The hemi has to spin a lot faster RPM to make power.
Ok, I get the comparison you are after here, but a comparison I wish you guys would do is within a brand of vehicle and the performances of the different levels and set ups one can chose from at the dealer. For example, the base model Ram 2500, vs the Ram 2500 Larimie, vs the Ram 2500 Power Wagon, showing how each comes set up in their perspective level of vehicle, and then how they each handle the various situations, like mud, snow, sand, rocks, trail, and so on. The overall goal being to assist those interested in the brands already to understand what to expect when they buy the various models and not get a truck that wont perform as they wanted. Just an idea.
For 1 gallon difference I’d rather have the V8 with less mechanical parts to go wrong. If you loose a turbo on that V6 the cost of that can be crazy
“Less parts” is factually incorrect.
Unless you don’t consider pistons and associated equipment “mechanical”.
You know those semi-trucks that haul everything and run for 1million miles plus? Turbocharged.
The “lose a turbo” fear is a myth.
@@Cataclysm1 I’m not trying to be a D but you just compared a turbo diesel to a gas diesel motor which is by no means a fair comparison
@@PDYALL a turbo is a turbo. There is no reason to believe they have a high failure rate in gasoline engines.
@@Cataclysm1 well a diesel burns at cooler temperatures can handle higher compression rations and build better torque at lower rpm’s with less wear and tear compared to a gas turbo engine. But hopefully in the long run and technology it works out in the end. I’ve just been seeing a lot of 3.5 eco boost at around 120k in miles starting to fail.
All im trying to get at is if you plan to use the truck as a daily driver back and forth to work and an occasional tow here and there it would probably be fine. But if you plan on using it as a truck and hauling a lot of items and towing a lot I’d rather have the V8. But that’s the good thing with options is you can choose what you like.
What I think is that if you pull the same power out of a smaller engine(especially if you use turbos) it is not going to live as long. It is just a fact of life - higher BMEP, and combustion chamber temperatures and smaller parts. Now if you rarely tow then the small engine might last a long time but if you tow and use that horsepower you are going to shorten the life of that small engine.
Yep couldn't agree more brother.
It’s a shame many people don’t think about that with these new vehicles
@Captain Obvious. Doesn't matter; we are talking about engineering principles here; yes there is better quality with a Toyota but what I said still applies.
@Captain Obvious.Wow, such ignorant brand loyalty. I am also a Toyota lover and have owned many but, you are still wrong; in fact NO engine will last as long in a life of frequent towing as one with little or no towing.
Im curious if the ram would get better MPG with tow/haul off, I know in the several I've driven it will keep it in higher gear when it really doesn't need to
My buddy's Ram ('19 or '20) is just like that. It puts it in tow haul pulling his boat and it won't up shift unless he let's off the throttle but after it shifts he goes back on the throttle and it's fine, doesn't try to down shift. Seems the tow haul needs some transmission tuning done
@@logut80 I totally understand in high grade areas or needing the truck to have a high gear that it makes sense, but just cruising down a highway you definitely want it to use the 8 speed to its fullest potential for fuel economy
seems weird to me that people don't learn how to shift with their right foot. If you want it to shift up you just take your foot of the pedal for a sec. then get back on. been doing that for decades. all while towing a 28 foot trailer with a superduty diesel. people are lazy and pay for it at the pump.
@@uliwehner well a properly running/tuned vehicle should take care of it on it's own. You'd have to drive one these 8spd dodges in tow haul to fully understand how bad it is.
Yes the tow / haul mode holds the gears longer for higher rpms and torque but also heat dissipation . Lugging creates heat in transmission and engine.
I drove from Denver to Akron, OH a couple months ago while towing. Tow vehicle: 1995 Ford e350 EB 460 v8 3spd w/ OD (E4OD) 4.10 gear stock tire size, but lifted 4" because of the Dana 60 up front (yea she's been converted to 4wd!). About 2k lbs in the van, and towed my 95' 4Runner on tow dolly, with about 1k lbs in the back of that (roughly 5k-5.5k including 4Runner, dolly, and gear in the 4Runner). Cruised 55 mph pretty much all the way. Averaged between 10 and 11.5mpg depending on hills and such, running the lowest octane available at pumps. Granted, empty and no towing has been at best, 12.5mpg going 55-60 ( well aware they were doing 70 and I'd suffer significantly if I tried those speeds, but why's everyone in such a rush? Chill out and enjoy the ride.). But I'll still choose my 4x4 van all day every day going "slow" before buying one of these overpriced trucks. I can at least work on my van myself for the most part without crazy expensive specialized tools. I can also live out of it for extended periods of time once it's converted to a camper, so I won't need to tow a 7klbs camper behind me. Sure, it's a rough ride and sometimes loud, but I can mitigate some of those issues, it's 26.. they didn't do much for sound deadening and all the rubber seals on doors are shot. All that aside, I'm surprised these two trucks sucked as much fuel as they did towing. Unloaded, GREAT. And I'd pick the Dodge despite being a Toy fan because that V8 sounds awesome.
It takes a given amount of energy to move a load for a certain distance and speed. Given the same energy source it’s not surprising that the fuel consumption is nearly the same. The Ram will be more efficient at sea level as it is naturally aspirated.
... and at sea level, so will the turbo V6... What's your point?
The NA engine suffers a lot more at altitude then the turbo. The turbos performance won't change much, but the NAs will.
@@davidj.3441 wrong, the turbo will make EVEN MORE power at sea level (just like the NA engine)... the turbo doesn't magically stop working because there's more air at sea level.
...and if there's more air, the turbo engine will also not have to run as hard.
The only time a turbocharged will struggle is when the air temp is high (and the intercooler can't reject heat as quickly as with cool air).
Great video, shoutout to the $13 costco gloves, I have the same ones haha
Glorious and powerful V8!
Amen to that brother.
I tow all over New England in a similar size and weight camper (2021 keystone bullet 243bhs) with my 2020 Ram 1500 Laramie hemi - 3.92 rear, air suspension - and regularly get between 9 and 10 mpg, but I keep my speed to 65mph, which I’ve noticed makes a huge difference too.
Interesting test - I suspect electric and V6 is the future.
And yes, I wish I had the bigger tank, too 😂
Before the video starts, I can already guess which one gets better fuel economy just from looking at the tires
Can you compare a 2021 Tundra 5.7V8 vs and 2022 Tundra V6TT towing the same trailer the same day, the same route. Comparing to a Dodge tells me nothing. 8.8 MPG tells me my 2017 Tundra 5.7L does a better job than the new version. My Tundra gets 12 MPG towing my Escape 19 travel trailer (similar to Casita).
1.5 per mile seperate the two trucks, I would take the V8 hands down if Toyota had that engine.
Yep me too...put that V6TT in the tacoma.....it really needs help
@@jessehenry3751 thing would be burning the tires off at every light haha too much power but would be fun
Traffic, perhaps not a fair comparison
You characters were about a mile from my house when you filmed this. Awesome.
Not related to this test, but what I want to see is a test between a 6.2 GM and the 3.0 diesel. It's a real-world question for those of us buying a new GM truck. "Should I get the 6.2 or the diesel?"
Please look into the trouble gm is having with their reliability before you sign that much money away my friend
@Chris Lake you're way too trusting of those consumer reports people, the data is flawed and doesn't apply to the 1/2 trucks I'm considering.
As mucn as I want to like that 3.0 duramax, the belt driven oil pump, timing chain, tensioners etc, amd fuel pump drice gear are all on the back of the engine, and the cooling system is a technical nightmare. Its way too complex. I'd hate to own that engine when the warranty expires. I was actually considering trading my titan xd cummins for one till I saw how that engine is designed.
@@Jackmerius_Tacktheretrix every new engine is complex, it’s also beneficial to know that you get a longer warranty with gm diesels in comparison to the gas.
@@dannyellrich5827 they're currently being sued for the problems in the 6.2 ,but hey man its your money
Did you use the same pump every time? The shut off valve on the pump for when it's "full" can shut off at different times depending on the pump you use. For the test to be accurate, I hope you took that into consideration and used the same pump every time.
It's the tires that are making this difference. 100 percent. Those much beefier tires on the Ram are way harder on fuel.
Exactly, also like someone else commented the elevation level favors the turbo over an n/a motor
What impact do you think it had to the mpg?
@alan on my Super Duty diesel an all terrain to all season can make .5mpg difference depending on which variations of either are being compared. Only way to see for sure in this situation is to do test again with same tires on each. But i think the point of the vid is to compare as they are sold off the the lot.
@@SketchyXC I can see that. Do these trucks have P or LT rated tires? I think that too can make a difference in terms of miles per gallon. Definitely nice to have the stability and security of an LT tire but I think P rated tires are lighter and have lower rolling resistance as well.
In older tundras, in my experience, you do NOT want to tow with cruise control. It always drops to lower gears on hills than necessary and kills gas mileage. You are better off using your foot. I don't know if this is the same in the 3rd gen, but it is certainly true in the 1st!
If you can keep it under 2500 rpms then there shouldn’t be any issues.
I wonder how a twin turbo small displacement, 4.0 liter, V8 would do economy wise vs these twin turbo 3.5 V6s. The OEMs could do all new engines that are much smaller dimensionally. They would more easily make the power than the smaller V6s and still sound like a proper V8
Id say better. You'd need less boost to maintain speed compared to a smaller v6. Towing wise I wouldn't expect any better fuel economy but empty yes. Under boost turbo engines have to run rich so they use more fuel for the same horsepower than a naturally aspirated v8 that can run at stoich.
@@Jackmerius_Tacktheretrix see the "under post" part is what most people don't understand AND the EPA doesn't test under heavier load where the engine is under boost. This is why most For 3.5 Ecoboost owners report BELOW EPA fuel economy numbers. When you have boost,you use it. The feeling if power coming from a larger posted engine is addicting
this was quite interesting as this is just about all i use our 99 F250 Superduty for. dragging our 28 foot trailer to nascar races all across the south. we tow at 70-75 traffic permitting, and we average about 9-10 mpg over the last 15 years or so. some good hills going to bristol and martinsville, too. 5-6000 miles of towing per year. What is funny about that is when gas trucks, like f150 or silverados tell me they tow at 15mpgs or better with a 30 foot bumper pull. oh, yeah and it does fine... doesn't like the hills, though....
If the switch to turbo 6s was driven by consumers it would be more acceptable, its not, its being forced onto consumers. Same with the electrification. With such a small difference in mileage, Id be getting a V8.
The turbo tows like a dream, the V8 is struggling. Wonder which I'd rather have.
@Mach 1 you have the 2.7 or the 3.5?
Same here brother.
@Mach 1 Still wont outlast my 96 Ford F150 with a 5.0L (302) Windsor V8.
@Mach 1 I know the EcoBoost won't outlast the old 302 Windsor V8 in the 92-96 Ford Trucks.
MPG on any vehicle depends mostly upon 'the nut behind the wheel'.
Driving my 2 wheel drive 2019 5.0 F-150 with empty bed I get 28+ MPG and when fully loaded with firewood I get 22 MPG and that is driving through PA mountains.
My old Ramcharger with 318 V8 got 12 to 13 pulling a 2,400 pounds of boat and trailer with the A/C running. A steady foot on the gas is very important.
“….Driving the future”. If the future means no more V8s the future sucks.
Wait until you hear what the future really has in store
I have not watched to the end, but the idea of the video is what it is all about. A work truck must be used for work and that is how it should be tested for consumption. Eager to get to the end of video and the conclusion.
I have towed for Years. The glaring difference I see between the v8 and the v6 is that the larger displacement v8 provides a level of downhill engine braking that the v6 cannot give. Coming down out of a steep mountain downgrade in a lower gear is impossible with a turbo V6. You have to use brakes to slow down. I have towed heavy campers behind 350 and up v8 s and was able to start down the mountain in 2 ND gear and idle all the way to the bottom with very few brake applications of the trlr brakes
That’s is correct, I have noticed the same. But love passing the V8’s going up Hill.
@@terrynewell4749 I own a 2021 Silverado with the big 4 cylinder turbo. It is my runner truck and light to medium towing vehicle. It will tow 8 to 10,000 lbs quite comfortably down the interstate and through the hills. It won't hold back the load at all down a even moderate grade but it will snort right up that same grade realy well. It has more torque than my older v8 engines did. It will use more gas than they did pulling the same weight. Running empty it gets better gas milage than many cars. To drive a half ton truck down the highway and get 25 to 32 mpg is like driving a small diesel but in a gas burner. It drops clear down to 11mpg towing around 9,000 lbs though.
@@terrynewell4749 I did not mention that my big truck is a 1 ton Ram with a 6.4l hemi. It is a beast with a 50 gallon gas tank. It has the 8 foot box so that I could get the big tank and heavy tow rating. Hit the cruise and drag 14,000 lbs down the interstate like it was nothing all day long. It is way better at engine braking downhill and you aren't riding the brakes.
Do you think a brake application every few minutes is going to overheat your brakes? I'm not so sure.
@@andiamo66 Many times you will start to experience brake fade. The rotors heat up and it heats up your brake fluid and glazes your brake pads. Ceramic high performance brake systems help with this but new brake components are made out of compressed granular metal alloys. I have had massive damage to brake rotors in the past and have even had the brake material or pad come right off of the backing plate. The dealership said well that happens sometimes and we will fix it but you have to pay labor. The parts are under warranty though. Little good that does when you start down wolf creek pass with a heavy trailer and the first cutback you hit the brakes and it craps out the pad on the passenger side front wheel and you got metal on metal grinding the rotor and you are hoping and praying that the trailer brakes are up to snuff and can take the brunt of the abuse. I ended up getting the truck stopped. Thank god it was 4 wheel drive with a low range transfer case. I put the truck in low range and let the engine rev up and hold me back with a few trailer brake applications a few times to keep the rpms down. I did not touch the truck brakes but it took me forever to get down off of the mountain. Live and learn.
You should do the test with the V-8 tundra vs the.” V6... Makes the most sense to me??????
Being the tundra is turbo charged I wonder how it could benefit from 93 octane fuel...definetly pick up some power
Higher octane fuel does not increase available power. This has been disproved several times. The BTU per volume energy content doesn’t change with octane. You can even look up Engine Masters on Motor Trend TV. Season 6, Episode 2. They tested 87, 91, 110, 116 octane fuel and also E85. Between each fuel they optimized the engine timing in an attempt to maximize HP. Each fuel made the same power within 1 to 1.5 HP. Higher octane only increases resistance to knock/pre detonation. If your engine isn’t in pre detonation at 87 octane, higher octane fuel will do absolutely nothing but separate you from more of your dollars.
Something never stated or that I missed - What are the rear axle ratios of each truck. Were they the same? A turbo "boosted" engine usually have a 90,000 mile or some Maintenace ( read rebuild) of the turbo itself. A vey EXPENSIVE repair which usually negates any fuel saving if there are any. The engine itself is under more "strain" from the boosted air flow into the engine. Also causing faster internal wear. None of this is effected when testing new trucks. I am an ASE certified tech since 1983, Turbos ARE not durable or at least not AS durable as Superchargers.
I was going to post something similar v8s would last alot longer with less cost over the long run because of maintenance costs
Twin turbo engines are much more powerful with cold, more dense air. I would like to see this test again in the summer…. Please? :)
The non turbo engine benefits more, or should I say, relies more on that cooler more oxygen dense air... The turbo engines can pretty much spool up to their governed boost pressure in either condition.
Retest in the warmer weather and the non turbo engine will be lacking compared to now.
As for MPG, the dense winter air is likely harder to pull through for both trucks.
@@PsalmFourteenOne denser air=more fuel=more power. That's the biggest reason why fuel economy improves in the summer and decreases in the winter. The other thing too, is that the ram wasn't making full power due to the lower oxygen content, so it had to work harder to pull the same load. The tundra, was still able to make the same boost levels.
@@hunterdan2002 while you're correct that colder air requires more fuel and therefore worse gas mileage, the main reason gas mileage drops in the winter is actually the winter blend of gas they provide to reduce emissions. It has less energy in it so you use more of it.