FrankReynoldsCPA

It looks better than the current gen, but then I've also never been a fan of the current gen styling.

Going to be interesting to get official numbers from that 3.5 TTV6. If it's the same 409/479 as the Land Cruiser, then it still lags a bit behind Ford's 3.5 which is capable of 400/500 in the standard model, 450/510 in the Limited/HO, and 430/570 in the Powerboost.

Toys4RJill

‘The cost of diesel Tundra will be much higher than the gasser models. Once people see the sticker shock..then it’s likely they would go for gas. I think an equivalent Land Cruiser diesel V8 is $125k converted to US $$

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

except that's not true. Hood lines have become absurd and higher than the bed in many cases.

mmarshall

Engineers and designers might have to verify this, one reason I suspect for those high hoods and cavernous underhood space is tho allow enough cooling air to flow around the engine to cool those big V8s making several hundred HP and ft-lbs. of torque. While the majority of engine-cooling comes s from the formal radiator/water-pump/coolant system, a significant amount also comes from air that can flow around the hot engine block. I've reviewed a couple of Nissan products in the past (not the Titan) that ran somewhat on the warm side (more than average) because the engine and other components were simply packed in too tightly under the hood, and air didn't circulate freely.

One might (?) argue, with some justification, that there are some V8s, such as those in high-performance cars, that run fine, with average underhood temperatures, without being stuck down inside of Mammoth Cave underhood. True, but those V8s are generally tuned differently from truck-powerplants, have different HP/torque-curves, and produce heat in different ways, under different conditions, than sports cars and high-performance cars.

SW17LS

Thats not the reason. This is a styling thing.

mmarshall

I'm not sure they would do that simply from a pure styling-perspective. Too many other full-size pickups already do exactly the same thing.....most likely for other reasons as well.

SW17LS

Believe it. Its a styling trend in the pickup segment, hence why the other full sized pickups do the same thing.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

thats why i said they tend to. Look at a F150 and Ram, they line up. Chevy is just straight up hideous this generation

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

diesel has a huge amount of headaches, yes it makes higher mileage but the fuel cost is higher. The engine costs more up front and the maintenance is higher. Diesel parts are more expensive when they break and you have to deal with filling up DEF. They are usually a $3k option, can buy a lot of gas for 3k. Diesel is good if you tow often. Its even worse on the HD truckks, the diesel option is $10k over a gas engine

gadgetman1

Playing devil’s advocate for a moment; my Camaro is a 6.2 V-8 that’s neatly sandwiched into the engine compartment. It cools just fine. The Chevy 2500 HD also has a 6.2 V-8 that sits in what looks like the Grand Canyon of engine compartments. I can drive the Camaro all day in 105 degree heat at 75-80 mph & have a cool running engine getting 26 mpg without cylinder deactivation. I realize the Chevy 2500 HD also offers a 6.6 V-8 Duramax diesel engine, but it’s not crazy larger than the 6.2. Most of the space is wasted. They use active grill shutters to close off the engine bay during certain conditions. I’m not convinced that cooling has anything to do with a Godzilla-looking front end.

gadgetman1

I will gladly pay $3k for an economical engine that will last past 200,000 miles, tow & still get great mpg. DEF usage is next to nothing - fill it up at every oil change & top it off after towing. Yes, there are more expensive & have more working parts, but there is a payoff in the performance that no gas motor can match. Having an engine that produces peak torque at just 1,500 RPMs is very special & extremely useful. Nissan used to make some great Diesel engines & even put one in their Maxima! They dropped it after diesels got a bad rap because of the GM 350 diesel fiasco. Towards the end of GM’s 350 diesels, they worked most of the problems out & one could have a gorgeous giant Olds 98 or a Cadillac Seville that could seat 5 adults comfortably & get 30 mpg! If GM had stuck with that & really made an effort to produce a quality product, we would be seeing probably 50% diesel engine usage by now.

Wilson2000

Please consider, however, most owners aren't towing most of the time. Too, most owners aren't into the boost most of the time. The concept for the V6tt is that you can drive the truck economically most of the time, but have power in reserve when you need it. Additionally, a drop in mileage during towing affects all engines.

gadgetman1

Try telling that to the Ford Ecoboost folks. The 3.5 isn’t much different than the 5.0 V-8. The 2.7 is the only one that is somewhat economical.

mmarshall

I addressed that in an earlier post......don't know if you saw it. V8s in high-performcnce cars like the Camaro tend to be tuned differently from V8s in work-trucks. They have different a different emphasis on their function, different torque/HP curves, and different ways of building up heat.

gadgetman1

I missed that post, but it’s definitely tuned different. The Camaro has 455 torque & 455 hp. I think the truck engines have higher torque & lower horsepower, but it’s not way different. The Corvette also uses the same engine with another more aggressive tune with a little more torque & horsepower. I’m pleased with my 6.2 without cylinder deactivation that was built in St Catherines, Ontario. They seem to have way less issues than the engines with cylinder management.

But in staying on topic somewhat, I still don’t understand Tundra’s giant engine compartment that is primarily going to have a twin turbo V-6. Very few models will have the V-8 & I would expect that the V-8 will be phased out completely in the next year or two. I’m sad that this truck is so ugly. I was really looking forward to something special!