I have over 200K miles on my Ecoboost and it has been totally reliable. Just 2 tune ups is all I have spent on this engine plus oil changes. The rest of truck is solid and like new!
I believe it would have made sense to have the same driver in each vehicle. The problem is that brakes heat the up the most when coming to a complete stop. The driver of the F150 could easily have applied the brake harder and over a shorter period of time as well as performing the majority of the braking (As noticed).
You have great points! But this towing test is extreme enough that some trucks will not be able to keep 60 MPH all the way up. You saw a little bit of it with the Tundra. It was WOT, but slowing down at times.
I love these videos. Just bought a 13 FX-4 with the EcoBoost and the max tow pkg. I pull a 32 foot camping trailer behind it that's close to 10k with the tanks loaded. It works like a champ. I bought the EcoBoost on the torque alone but I'm a big fan of all these half ton trucks. I think I'd be happy with any of them to be honest.
Actually, we said the max tow rating on this F-150 was 9,600lbs. According to Ford. You can check ford.com for more details. This test truck did not have 'Max Trailer Tow' package - which bumps the max to 11,200 lbs.
We are not done! We will keep doing the Ike Gauntlet as long as you keep watching. The Ram and other trucks will be tested soon. We hope for end of September.
Hi guys really enjoyed the review ! I live in West Virginia where we have I-64 Sand Stone Mountain which is 7% for 5 or 6 miles. An even more interesting test would be one that is closer to the MAX tow rating of these vehicles. I work in the rental equipment business and if you are ever looking for something heavy to tow. Check out your local United Rentals or Sunbelt. A towable 125 KW Generator Unit would weigh about 11,000lbs. This way you could hold them all WOT the whole time. Thanks
The proof is in the pudding. 420 ft/lbs at 2500 RPM. High torque at low RPM, perfect recipe for towing. If it wasn't, big rigs wouldn't be diesel. Haters gonna hate.
The issue with turbocharging an engine is primarily the accelerated wear on the piston rings. With a steady diet of towing these engines won't see 100,000 miles.
I pull a 10K 5th wheel with my ECO Boost with no problem. Max tow package, 4X4. 65 mph @ 2000rpm. Been pulling it around for a year. Raised the box on 5th wheel to clear the bed rails on turns. Not over weight. Love my Ford.
The 3.73 rear end is there because the 22'' Wheel tire combo is so large it needs shorter gearing. And also the ties on the 22" wheels are not up to the task of towing 11,100lbs.
Of course the Tundra (and Silverado) are at a disadvantage in this test due to the elevation and the F150's turbo engine but I suppose Ford would just say that that was the point! At any rate, I think its safe to assume that any of these trucks is more than adequate for typical towing duties and that the torque advantage of the Ecoboost engine gives the F150 a slight edge. Great video guys!
Shoulda gave it full steam, done 90 up the hill and totally slayed the competition. I like how they weren't at full throttle, the engine was at a relaxed rpm, and it still beat everything. Ecoboost all the way. The only ecoboost haters are people that have never driven one.
Who cares if they tow a little better. If you tow a lot with ecoboost they won't last that long. Sure if you use it to get groceries and light towing it may last.
This truck did win fair and square but he said that this truck has a higher towing capacity than the Toyota Tundra which is false. This truck has a towing capacity of 9,600 lbs. which is said a couple of times in the video but the Toyota Tundra has a towing capacity of 10,500lbs.
I own two commercial 1998 Chevys, they are have the 350 5.7L both with a quarter million miles on them, I have tuned them and changed the oil... I own one 2003 F250 Superduty and I have replaced every major part and most miner parts, totaling $11,900 just to keep it running. Ford's parts department greats me by my name when I walk in their door, Nobody knows my name at the Chevy parts department. With all that said, I love the 48 mpg "average" my wife's Toyota Prius gets...
"Echo" "V4", 9600lbs, you mean 11,000 lbs towing capacity? 3.73 as the lowest when it's actually 4.11? How do you guys review these things with all of this information?
The trailer wasn't carrying quite as much of the braking, which was part of it. The final drive ratio of the Tundra was also much lower, which means you get better engine braking. The 22's on the F150 limited may also have played a role. I don't know if those have a larger outer diameter than the wheels on the Tundra, but if they do that gives the wheels more leverage against the brakes - making them work harder.
My wife mainly drove the truck, she had a long commute to work, she had to fill up nearly twice a week at $100.00 a tank, it got expensive real quick. Whereas I worked 4 miles from home and a tank would last me a month. I worked at a gm dealership so when I went to ford I wanted to be loyal to the brand so we traded the 09 G6 which got mid 20's on fuel. Since going back to gm we traded the f-150 for a '13 Buick Regal GS 6 speed manual, I have seen it on 30.2 mpg running 80mph on a 1500 mi trip
Hey roman. I think the time given to the ecoboost is a bit unfair because it could've gone much faster uphill. I think it would make more spence to multiply the time times the mpg.
Roman, why would you expect the time to climb to the tunnel to be different? You're trying to maintain the same speed in the trucks. That should net you the same time to climb the hill since it's the same speed over the same distance (allowing for speedometer error). The only difference you should expect to see going up, maintaining the same speed (60 mph) will be in fuel usage. Now, if you wanted to see time differences, you should've tried to get up the hill as fast as you can.
4.10 gears are available as an option on the F150 (in the FX4 model for sure). However, they are probably not the best choice for a daily driver that does not haul and sees a lot of highway travel. One more (very minor) correction, trailer dropped the truck two inches (39" down to 37"). All manufacturers make a good truck nowdays, but personally, I went with the F150...couldn't be happier.
When I saw a few videos months ago, I didn't like it. I found them unprofessional and you were not funny where you tried to be. But now I am a subscriber and the videos from you guys are getting better and better. Good job!
Youre lost and you're absolutely clueless, go play your games, seems like you can't see beyond what's in front of you.... When you understand how all the variables play into this test and why committing to a set mph while towing a load on a 7% grade at 11,000ft maybe you might be able to enjoy these tests. This is real world and you're still stuck on a sheet of paper with 1+1=2...Wakeup!!!!
I am also interested on seeing the Ram 1500 diesel. But the towing numbers they released are disappointing. I believe it was only 7200 lbs. Please Please test it! I am a ford guy but that truck sounds very tempting. Thanks for all the great reviews you guys do!
"3.6L V6 in the F-150"? Are you talking about the 3.5TT or 3.7 NA? I'd love to see the 6.2 Chevy up against the 3.5 Ford in this comparison. (I'm really not sure what you're saying here)
I have a question guys. How did you got such a difference on the brakes of the Toyota and Ford temperature? Does the Ford automatically apply the brakes?? I mean it doubled the readings of the Toyota.
This was likely mentioned months ago... but how could you measure from 39" stock to 37" w/ load and YELL "3 inches!" as if you cannot subtract as well as a 2nd grader! 39 minus 37 equals TWO(2)... NOT 3!
It aggravates me that Ford acts like they invented the turbo to provide power when you need it and fuel economy when you don't. That's a concept that has been prevalent in the auto industry for at least 4 decades that I know of
Right, but that's assuming that each truck can maintain 60 mph the whole time. There were times where they had the pedal floored and still couldn't go 60.
I'm talking about a small displacement V6 not a 12 liter. Bearing loads and ring wear on an ISX, C15, 4206 or any of the other 12 Liters is totally different.
I use to own an ecoboost, they were powerful, gas mileage stunk, averaged around 16-17, they are known to have intercooler issues. Moisture will accumulate in the bottom of the intercooler and get aspirated into the engine causing a misfire or drivability concern.
sweet! awesome review guys, any chance you are gonna throw in the 8 speed ecodiesle as well? Im waiting on a real world test of that combo as i am eyeing it for my new DD.
Correct! Ford doesn't use cylinder deactivation. Instead they use smaller displacement with turbo to combat fuel use. If you keep your foot light on the pedal and avoid boosting that turbo unnecessary, you will get the true v6 or i4 fuel consumption. Problem is, most people are having too much fun and can't get their foot off. GM new Gasoline Direct Injection small block V8s shut off half of the cylinders during highway cruising to save fuel. But when towing, it has to run on all cylinders.
What octane fuel did you use in the Ecoboost? From experience there is quite a difference in the low in pull when comparing regular v. premium the the Ford. And also, thanks for the great videos, getting more professional and informative each time! Keep up the good work! Maybe you could do a test where you test the ability of the Ecoboost with difference octane fuels????
You know years ago I would have said the same thing but I've seen 3 horse slant with a small short wall trailers being pulled by F150's and there apparently are quite a few 5th models available for 1/2 ton trucks. But my biggest worry would be the stopping power. Its hard to stop a trailer that out weighs the truck. just my 2 cents
The limited has the All wheel drive option and the 22" rims which drops the tow rating to 9000 lbs. They should have used an FX4 or a lariat to do the test with the 11,300 lb tow rating. Also the drop was increased because of this too.
The Toyota has bigger feont brakes, something to also consider. Final drive ratios mean squat, you have to look at the transmission gearing also. Also consider that the Toyota used an aftermarket brake controller vs Fords integrated brake controller.
True. And I'm looking forward to seeing how The General's product does. It just seemed to me that you guys were assuming there would be differences, maybe big differences, in the times. And I was surprised at how much quicker the Ford was than the Toyota (yay boost!). But it's the same distance and (roughly) the same speed so times should be similar.
by dad had a 1500 chevy with extended bed and we can fit same amount of wood and supplies for camping in fords f150 regular so the higher walls do pay off
Nice test. Would love to know which interior was the qiestest/ most isolated from the outside noise? I couldnt tell from this test, I could hear the F150 engine in your recording
The F150 driver did say that he felt like the F150 would have no problem doing 80 mph up the incline. The tried to keep them all at 60 because: 1. the first truck that they tested, struggles to maintain 60 mph up the incline 2. a more fair measurement of MPG.
So i wana know so for the guy saying that they should of tested the 5.0 ford vs chevy 5.3 and tundra with a 5.7? Doesnt make sense to me so than the ecoboost should be compared to duly or wat?
the brake temp test is not conclusive! different trucks will have different operating temps and if you bought a different brake pad it would change more still. you would also have to measure the wattage of the trailer brake controller at the trailer and average that for the trip. it was neat to see the brake temps included in a test like this.
for real road testing I think you guys should go for over all fastest up the ike gauntlet like flooring it as long as you aren't really putting anyone in danger because I don't know about you but the speed limit is not always followed when actually driving.
A pity they were not able to all pull the same weight, good test though, perhaps to add a bit more to the test, you could add a stop and start on the uphill once or twice, that would really show the pulling capability in the timing. the brake test was a bit of a fail i think, if one has like sway stability control and is working the brakes alternatively, then surely others without the same feature or adjustment will give different results?
What sense does it make to time the individual runs? If your goal is to keep the same speed, you will get the same time. Either way, I'm an Ecoboost owner and couldn't ask for a thing more when pulling my travel trailer.
So really it doesn't matter the time if your aren't going faster then your test conditions allow. So really it matters how relaxed the engine felt and fuel economy
I would be skeptical about the long term reliability of the tundra given that for the same amount of towing, you have to really rev the heck out of it.
Toyota (TRD) offers superchargers that don't affect the warranty because it's there product. They ask you if you want to put superchargers, performance air filters, exhaust systems, etc. when you're about to purchase the vehicle. All part of TRD (Toyota Racing Development).
So 23 seconds faster is close? Did you not hear him say he has plenty of pedal left? They could've went much faster towing the same weight when the tundra was struggling the ford was excelling. Easy choice in my books. Go ford.
Assuming the Silverado will have 3.42 gears I think it will pull about the same as the Tundra. Probably in third around 3800r.p.m. I'm guessing since fourth gear is around 2800r.p.m. I think the cabin will be noticably quieter than the Tundra.
There should be some emphasis on operating temperatures here. The end goal is to have a truck that will get the job done reliably for a long time. Engine water/oil temps and transmission temperature should be big factors. I'd hate to see what kind of temps were going on with that Silverado... They were revving that pretty hard.
The EcoBoost only gets good fuel economy when it's empty. It get's worse mileage than the 5.0 with a load or a trailer, I bet with the max 11,300# trailer the 6.2L would get better mileage in an F150.
My Ecoboost does great!!! It easily compares to my 2008 F250 6.0 diesel in terms of fuel economy when empty and towing. I tow a 9,000# fifth wheel. I get 23mph empty and 11.5 while towing. I am happy with that!!!!
people always forget when under boost no matter the engine all bets are off.... even look at a ZR1 vette.... under boost im sure its under 5mpg... I know my 04 cobra drank fuel under 9psi load
I have over 200K miles on my Ecoboost and it has been totally reliable. Just 2 tune ups is all I have spent on this engine plus oil changes. The rest of truck is solid and like new!
I believe it would have made sense to have the same driver in each vehicle. The problem is that brakes heat the up the most when coming to a complete stop. The driver of the F150 could easily have applied the brake harder and over a shorter period of time as well as performing the majority of the braking (As noticed).
You have great points! But this towing test is extreme enough that some trucks will not be able to keep 60 MPH all the way up. You saw a little bit of it with the Tundra. It was WOT, but slowing down at times.
I love these videos. Just bought a 13 FX-4 with the EcoBoost and the max tow pkg. I pull a 32 foot camping trailer behind it that's close to 10k with the tanks loaded. It works like a champ. I bought the EcoBoost on the torque alone but I'm a big fan of all these half ton trucks. I think I'd be happy with any of them to be honest.
Actually, we said the max tow rating on this F-150 was 9,600lbs. According to Ford. You can check ford.com for more details. This test truck did not have 'Max Trailer Tow' package - which bumps the max to 11,200 lbs.
The F150 did really well , impressed !!
Thanks for the segment on cargo volume. No one else really mentioned that annoyance anymore.
We are not done! We will keep doing the Ike Gauntlet as long as you keep watching. The Ram and other trucks will be tested soon. We hope for end of September.
truck guy has a LOT of knowledge and is a cool old dude :)
Hi guys really enjoyed the review ! I live in West Virginia where we have I-64 Sand Stone Mountain which is 7% for 5 or 6 miles. An even more interesting test would be one that is closer to the MAX tow rating of these vehicles. I work in the rental equipment business and if you are ever looking for something heavy to tow. Check out your local United Rentals or Sunbelt. A towable 125 KW Generator Unit would weigh about 11,000lbs. This way you could hold them all WOT the whole time. Thanks
I think the OEM's actually do test on Sandstone Mountain. I've heard people say they've seen weirdly masked vehicles going up and down it.
The proof is in the pudding. 420 ft/lbs at 2500 RPM. High torque at low RPM, perfect recipe for towing. If it wasn't, big rigs wouldn't be diesel. Haters gonna hate.
The issue with turbocharging an engine is primarily the accelerated wear on the piston rings.
With a steady diet of towing these engines won't see 100,000 miles.
I pull a 10K 5th wheel with my ECO Boost with no problem. Max tow package, 4X4. 65 mph @ 2000rpm. Been pulling it around for a year. Raised the box on 5th wheel to clear the bed rails on turns. Not over weight. Love my Ford.
So the test was to see which Truck could get up ike the fastest @ 60 mph? What weighs more a ton of bricks or a ton of feathers?
how about testing a supercharged Tundra just to offset the elevation effect?!
if they were smart enough to have one on the market, but im afraid ford beat everybody to the punch....haha!!
They do now
The Chevy video will be out Monday, and other trucks (like the new Ram) coming later (hope for late September).
Man, Roman, you guys out did yourselves. Very balanced.
What kind of hitch system is being used at 5:24 that lets you shift left and right?
The 3.73 rear end is there because the 22'' Wheel tire combo is so large it needs shorter gearing. And also the ties on the 22" wheels are not up to the task of towing 11,100lbs.
Of course the Tundra (and Silverado) are at a disadvantage in this test due to the elevation and the F150's turbo engine but I suppose Ford would just say that that was the point! At any rate, I think its safe to assume that any of these trucks is more than adequate for typical towing duties and that the torque advantage of the Ecoboost engine gives the F150 a slight edge. Great video guys!
Shoulda gave it full steam, done 90 up the hill and totally slayed the competition. I like how they weren't at full throttle, the engine was at a relaxed rpm, and it still beat everything. Ecoboost all the way. The only ecoboost haters are people that have never driven one.
Who cares if they tow a little better. If you tow a lot with ecoboost they won't last that long. Sure if you use it to get groceries and light towing it may last.
This truck did win fair and square but he said that this truck has a higher towing capacity than the Toyota Tundra which is false. This truck has a towing capacity of 9,600 lbs. which is said a couple of times in the video but the Toyota Tundra has a towing capacity of 10,500lbs.
I own two commercial 1998 Chevys, they are have the 350 5.7L both with a quarter million miles on them, I have tuned them and changed the oil... I own one 2003 F250 Superduty and I have replaced every major part and most miner parts, totaling $11,900 just to keep it running. Ford's parts department greats me by my name when I walk in their door, Nobody knows my name at the Chevy parts department. With all that said, I love the 48 mpg "average" my wife's Toyota Prius gets...
"Echo" "V4", 9600lbs, you mean 11,000 lbs towing capacity?
3.73 as the lowest when it's actually 4.11?
How do you guys review these things with all of this information?
The trailer wasn't carrying quite as much of the braking, which was part of it. The final drive ratio of the Tundra was also much lower, which means you get better engine braking. The 22's on the F150 limited may also have played a role. I don't know if those have a larger outer diameter than the wheels on the Tundra, but if they do that gives the wheels more leverage against the brakes - making them work harder.
My wife mainly drove the truck, she had a long commute to work, she had to fill up nearly twice a week at $100.00 a tank, it got expensive real quick. Whereas I worked 4 miles from home and a tank would last me a month. I worked at a gm dealership so when I went to ford I wanted to be loyal to the brand so we traded the 09 G6 which got mid 20's on fuel. Since going back to gm we traded the f-150 for a '13 Buick Regal GS 6 speed manual, I have seen it on 30.2 mpg running 80mph on a 1500 mi trip
Hey roman. I think the time given to the ecoboost is a bit unfair because it could've gone much faster uphill. I think it would make more spence to multiply the time times the mpg.
Roman, why would you expect the time to climb to the tunnel to be different? You're trying to maintain the same speed in the trucks. That should net you the same time to climb the hill since it's the same speed over the same distance (allowing for speedometer error). The only difference you should expect to see going up, maintaining the same speed (60 mph) will be in fuel usage. Now, if you wanted to see time differences, you should've tried to get up the hill as fast as you can.
4.10 gears are available as an option on the F150 (in the FX4 model for sure). However, they are probably not the best choice for a daily driver that does not haul and sees a lot of highway travel. One more (very minor) correction, trailer dropped the truck two inches (39" down to 37"). All manufacturers make a good truck nowdays, but personally, I went with the F150...couldn't be happier.
After the warranty runs out, those turbos are going to be expensive to replace.
When I saw a few videos months ago, I didn't like it. I found them unprofessional and you were not funny where you tried to be. But now I am a subscriber and the videos from you guys are getting better and better. Good job!
why are we climbing the same hill at the same speed and checking time? It would have to be the same time if run at the same speed....
Seriously??? Go open the all basic comprehension book than come back and watch this video. Maybe you too might enjoy it?
You did not do well in math......
You did not do well in comprehension......
Micah Watts
your comment makes no sense and you dont even know it.
Youre lost and you're absolutely clueless, go play your games, seems like you can't see beyond what's in front of you....
When you understand how all the variables play into this test and why committing to a set mph while towing a load on a 7% grade at 11,000ft maybe you might be able to enjoy these tests. This is real world and you're still stuck on a sheet of paper with 1+1=2...Wakeup!!!!
Why do you measure the brake temperature on the driver's side, exposing yourselves to traffic.
Depends on the configuration. I think the max tow package has other options in addition to the 3.73 axle.
Nice videos. You guys put a lot of work into these.
You guys have really come a long way, especially Andre. Congrats fellas
I am also interested on seeing the Ram 1500 diesel. But the towing numbers they released are disappointing. I believe it was only 7200 lbs. Please Please test it! I am a ford guy but that truck sounds very tempting. Thanks for all the great reviews you guys do!
Makes sense... Specially the different rear axel ratio. Didn't not though of it. Kent did mention that the Toyota had 4 something...
"3.6L V6 in the F-150"? Are you talking about the 3.5TT or 3.7 NA?
I'd love to see the 6.2 Chevy up against the 3.5 Ford in this comparison.
(I'm really not sure what you're saying here)
I have a question guys. How did you got such a difference on the brakes of the Toyota and Ford temperature? Does the Ford automatically apply the brakes?? I mean it doubled the readings of the Toyota.
This was likely mentioned months ago... but how could you measure from 39" stock to 37" w/ load and YELL "3 inches!" as if you cannot subtract as well as a 2nd grader! 39 minus 37 equals TWO(2)... NOT 3!
It aggravates me that Ford acts like they invented the turbo to provide power when you need it and fuel economy when you don't. That's a concept that has been prevalent in the auto industry for at least 4 decades that I know of
Right, but that's assuming that each truck can maintain 60 mph the whole time. There were times where they had the pedal floored and still couldn't go 60.
I'm talking about a small displacement V6 not a 12 liter. Bearing loads and ring wear on an ISX, C15, 4206 or any of the other 12 Liters is totally different.
Good reviews so far. I'm impressed and I've learned a lot.
I bet they added a few more bungee cords to hold that Tundra's bed on for this test!
I use to own an ecoboost, they were powerful, gas mileage stunk, averaged around 16-17, they are known to have intercooler issues. Moisture will accumulate in the bottom of the intercooler and get aspirated into the engine causing a misfire or drivability concern.
sweet! awesome review guys, any chance you are gonna throw in the 8 speed ecodiesle as well? Im waiting on a real world test of that combo as i am eyeing it for my new DD.
Correct! Ford doesn't use cylinder deactivation. Instead they use smaller displacement with turbo to combat fuel use. If you keep your foot light on the pedal and avoid boosting that turbo unnecessary, you will get the true v6 or i4 fuel consumption. Problem is, most people are having too much fun and can't get their foot off.
GM new Gasoline Direct Injection small block V8s shut off half of the cylinders during highway cruising to save fuel. But when towing, it has to run on all cylinders.
What octane fuel did you use in the Ecoboost? From experience there is quite a difference in the low in pull when comparing regular v. premium the the Ford. And also, thanks for the great videos, getting more professional and informative each time! Keep up the good work! Maybe you could do a test where you test the ability of the Ecoboost with difference octane fuels????
You know years ago I would have said the same thing but I've seen 3 horse slant with a small short wall trailers being pulled by F150's and there apparently are quite a few 5th models available for 1/2 ton trucks. But my biggest worry would be the stopping power. Its hard to stop a trailer that out weighs the truck. just my 2 cents
The limited has the All wheel drive option and the 22" rims which drops the tow rating to 9000 lbs. They should have used an FX4 or a lariat to do the test with the 11,300 lb tow rating. Also the drop was increased because of this too.
The Toyota has bigger feont brakes, something to also consider. Final drive ratios mean squat, you have to look at the transmission gearing also. Also consider that the Toyota used an aftermarket brake controller vs Fords integrated brake controller.
A good infrared camera like a Flir is a better device to measure the temperature of the brakes.
how many people use goose necks or any fifth wheel on a 150 or 1500 series truck, i realize that people do use it for that, but not many...
you guys put out awesome videos please continue
True. And I'm looking forward to seeing how The General's product does. It just seemed to me that you guys were assuming there would be differences, maybe big differences, in the times. And I was surprised at how much quicker the Ford was than the Toyota (yay boost!). But it's the same distance and (roughly) the same speed so times should be similar.
What's the point of the timed run test if you're doing a set speed limit of 60mph?
by dad had a 1500 chevy with extended bed and we can fit same amount of wood and supplies for camping in fords f150 regular so the higher walls do pay off
Thought all 3.73:1 ecoboost trucks could tow 11,100lbs? You said 9,500lbs on your model which means it didn't have the 3.73 or 4.11 in the fx4 option
Great video, I love these towing contests!
i think the test is GREAT!! but a limited with 22 inch wheels is not for towing im impressed it did as good with 22's lol
Nice test. Would love to know which interior was the qiestest/ most isolated from the outside noise? I couldnt tell from this test, I could hear the F150 engine in your recording
The F150 driver did say that he felt like the F150 would have no problem doing 80 mph up the incline.
The tried to keep them all at 60 because:
1. the first truck that they tested, struggles to maintain 60 mph up the incline
2. a more fair measurement of MPG.
39"-37"= 2" inches right? LOL
So i wana know so for the guy saying that they should of tested the 5.0 ford vs chevy 5.3 and tundra with a 5.7? Doesnt make sense to me so than the ecoboost should be compared to duly or wat?
i am with you on this. i traded my 99 extended for a 03 crew cab. granted it is a bigger motor but the mileage is at 8 mpg in the 03 vs. 18 in the 99
the brake temp test is not conclusive! different trucks will have different operating temps and if you bought a different brake pad it would change more still. you would also have to measure the wattage of the trailer brake controller at the trailer and average that for the trip. it was neat to see the brake temps included in a test like this.
Monday, can't wait to see how it does .
Really enjoy these video's guy's! Keep It up!
Ford doesn't offer cylinder deactivation for the ecoboost right?
MKS 3.5L V6 ecoboost AWD, been selling since 2009.
for real road testing I think you guys should go for over all fastest up the ike gauntlet like flooring it as long as you aren't really putting anyone in danger because I don't know about you but the speed limit is not always followed when actually driving.
A pity they were not able to all pull the same weight, good test though, perhaps to add a bit more to the test, you could add a stop and start on the uphill once or twice, that would really show the pulling capability in the timing.
the brake test was a bit of a fail i think, if one has like sway stability control and is working the brakes alternatively, then surely others without the same feature or adjustment will give different results?
Price difference, $8K. Supercharger upgrade time for the Tundra! :)
The ECOboost has been on the road since 2011 and they have been solid. I predict a few fires with 2014 Chevy...
How many people are using a 1/4 ton to haul a 5th wheel? Seems like a moot point to complain about.
You could have done better if you didn't limit the truck to just 60. Is that the speed limit for towing?
What sense does it make to time the individual runs? If your goal is to keep the same speed, you will get the same time. Either way, I'm an Ecoboost owner and couldn't ask for a thing more when pulling my travel trailer.
So really it doesn't matter the time if your aren't going faster then your test conditions allow. So really it matters how relaxed the engine felt and fuel economy
I would be skeptical about the long term reliability of the tundra given that for the same amount of towing, you have to really rev the heck out of it.
They make some pretty lightweight 5th wheels specifically for half-tons. But yeah, a heavy duty would still be the way to go.
Love your towing videos!
Toyota (TRD) offers superchargers that don't affect the warranty because it's there product. They ask you if you want to put superchargers, performance air filters, exhaust systems, etc. when you're about to purchase the vehicle. All part of TRD (Toyota Racing Development).
So 23 seconds faster is close? Did you not hear him say he has plenty of pedal left? They could've went much faster towing the same weight when the tundra was struggling the ford was excelling. Easy choice in my books. Go ford.
Assuming the Silverado will have 3.42 gears I think it will pull about the same as the Tundra. Probably in third around 3800r.p.m. I'm guessing since fourth gear is around 2800r.p.m. I think the cabin will be noticably quieter than the Tundra.
cool. what were THEY towing???
For a couple of thousand more you can get a F350 powerstroke fully loaded.
Hey guys, great job!! What axel ratio was used on each truck?
Thanks
E
If you have to keep it at 60 then whats the point of timing it?
El_Draque lol, exactly
Not sure about the 22's, but for the 20's the reduction is due to Ford using passenger tires as opposed to light truck tires...it's all about cost.
There should be some emphasis on operating temperatures here. The end goal is to have a truck that will get the job done reliably for a long time. Engine water/oil temps and transmission temperature should be big factors. I'd hate to see what kind of temps were going on with that Silverado... They were revving that pretty hard.
This would be interesting with that old Chevy 2500 Duramax you guys modified for perspective on a good budget truck.
This looks like highway 70 in Utah. Correct?
The EcoBoost only gets good fuel economy when it's empty. It get's worse mileage than the 5.0 with a load or a trailer, I bet with the max 11,300# trailer the 6.2L would get better mileage in an F150.
My Ecoboost does great!!! It easily compares to my 2008 F250 6.0 diesel in terms of fuel economy when empty and towing. I tow a 9,000# fifth wheel. I get 23mph empty and 11.5 while towing. I am happy with that!!!!
people always forget when under boost no matter the engine all bets are off.... even look at a ZR1 vette.... under boost im sure its under 5mpg... I know my 04 cobra drank fuel under 9psi load
Why no hemi ram 1500 with the 8 speed to test?
Why is it called ecco if the Silverado and Ram get better MPG?
I thought the Limited trim level has a towing capacity of 7300lbs and its so low due to the 22" wheels.
Wow, its surprising a import FOREIGN company would have more North American parts than for ex, the F-series being domestic. When did this start?
dont the trucks have auto headlight leveling?