(partially) new Tundra coming?

[Todd780]

The Coyote is a lot of things... But "old school" isn't one of them...haha.

But, hasn't it been out for nearly a decade now?

 

[BigSwede]

Ah. Never had an issue with mine. But, have heard about a few issues with them. I'd be interested in the EcoBoost since I tow and it makes the power down low.

I got some more details from him about the 5.0 F150 he just got rid of after only 49k miles:
"Think it was a Monday or Friday build. I really liked the truck but it was full of gremlins, weird noises/clunks. The engine/trans computers had to be re-flashed several times. Trans was always sluggish, never was in the right gear, clunked. Just had timing chain guides, cam phasers and such changed, both differentials were rebuilt (bearings). Engine ran like ******** on 87 octane and would ping if you didn’t run premium."

 

[Todd780]

I got some more details from him about the 5.0 F150 he just got rid of after only 49k miles:
"Think it was a Monday or Friday build. I really liked the truck but it was full of gremlins, weird noises/clunks. The engine/trans computers had to be re-flashed several times. Trans was always sluggish, never was in the right gear, clunked. Just had timing chain guides, cam phasers and such changed, both differentials were rebuilt (bearings). Engine ran like ******** on 87 octane and would ping if you didn’t run premium."

Crazy! I've got 106,000 miles on my 2015 and no issues aside from the lead frame in the transmission.

Had to have that replaced. (Not under warranty) Annoyed me cause if the same part broke on a 2 year older truck, it would have been covered under Ford's huge recall for same part in the same transmission.......

 

[Deleted member 9101]

But, hasn't it been out for nearly a decade now?

Yep... It has. Its also a high compression, DOHC, and direct injection. It's every bit as "complicated" as every other modern motor.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

I got some more details from him about the 5.0 F150 he just got rid of after only 49k miles:
"Think it was a Monday or Friday build. I really liked the truck but it was full of gremlins, weird noises/clunks. The engine/trans computers had to be re-flashed several times. Trans was always sluggish, never was in the right gear, clunked. Just had timing chain guides, cam phasers and such changed, both differentials were rebuilt (bearings). Engine ran like ******** on 87 octane and would ping if you didn’t run premium."

Dude... That sucks! My F150 is at 60k, with more "full boost" launches than I can count, and mine hasn't flinched.

 

[tacollie]

My buddy is looking to replace his 18' F150 with a Tundra. His 5.0 has had the top end apart 3 times and the tranny just quit. All the problems were "fixed" under warranty but the Ford dealer here sucks. I told him his truck is a POS and there's no way all Ford's can be that bad. I also told him to get in the habit of buying gas ?

 

[ITTOG]

Speed seems to be a major factor in fuel economy with either EcoBoost. If you are on flat ground, set your cruise at what ever the highest speed that you can travel while not making any boost.

Neither motor makes a lot of power on it's own, so if you're not spooling the turbos you are not having to feed 325 or 400 hp.

That is possible in Florida where it is so flat you can see from one end of the state to the other. But even in flat houston, that is not possible. Only flat ground I can get about 21 on my 3.5 if there is no wind. But when you add overpasses and some hills north of the city, i drop down to about 19.5. Get me into north texas or south Oklahoma and it is more like 17.5. If I lock the 10 speed at 7 gears I can usually reclaim 1 mpg on average.

In my 5.7 Tundra I got 17.2 mpg regardless of terrain.


All of these numbers are about 60 to 70% highway miles given my commute is 112 miles per day.

 

[ITTOG]

My buddy is looking to replace his 18' F150 with a Tundra. His 5.0 has had the top end apart 3 times and the tranny just quit. All the problems were "fixed" under warranty but the Ford dealer here sucks. I told him his truck is a POS and there's no way all Ford's can be that bad. I also told him to get in the habit of buying gas ?

I would do the same with my '18 F150 if it wasn't all scratched up from off roading.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

That is possible in Florida where it is so flat you can see from one end of the state to the other. But even in flat houston, that is not possible. Only flat ground I can get about 21 on my 3.5 if there is no wind. But when you add overpasses and some hills north of the city, i drop down to about 19.5. Get me into north texas or south Oklahoma and it is more like 17.5. If I lock the 10 speed at 7 gears I can usually reclaim 1 mpg on average.

In my 5.7 Tundra I got 17.2 mpg regardless of terrain.


All of these numbers are about 60 to 70% highway miles given my commute is 112 miles per day.

I get about the same reguardless of where I am. Even in the mountains of NH and NM I still get about the same as in Fl. The 2.7 is definitely better than the 3.5 when it comes to fuel economy. When I had a 3.5 in a work truck I usually got 20-21 mpg.

Also...Florida is far from flat...lol.

 

[ITTOG]

I get about the same reguardless of where I am. Even in the mountains of NH and NM I still get about the same as in Fl. The 2.7 is definitely better than the 3.5 when it comes to fuel economy. When I had a 3.5 in a work truck I usually got 20-21 mpg.

Also...Florida is far from flat...lol.

If your truck has turbos then I've got to call bull on that. I know Florida does have some hills but it is far from NM. There is absolutely zero chance you get the same mileage unless you found a flat spot in NM or NH. The trucks are the same size and basically the same weight therefore the size of engine will not matter. What matters is the turbos suck fuel like it is endless and unless you can turn yours off then there is no way you are getting the same mileage. Just the elevation difference in NM would cause a difference in mileage.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 9101]

If your truck has turbos then I've got to call bull on that. I know Florida does have some hills but it is far from NM. There is absolutely zero chance you get the same mileage unless you found a flat spot in NM or NH. The trucks are the same size and basically the same weight therefore the size of engine will not matter. What matters is the turbos suck fuel like it is endless and unless you can turn yours off then there is no way you are getting the same mileage. Just the elevation difference in NM would cause a difference in mileage.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

Clearly you missed the word "almost" in my post...lol. My MPG only varies by 1-2 MPG regardless of where I am. Orlando FL, Alamogrodo NM, Cloudcroft NM, Boston MA, Salem NH... All with in 1-2 MPG.

The 2.7 is a completly different motor than the 3.5. It has a smaller displacement, different cam profiles, smaller turbos, better flowing heads, and a much different program running it. Its more a more efficient and more responsive motor....which is why 0-60, towing 8600lbs, it out runs the 3.5.

 

[ITTOG]

Clearly you missed the word "almost" in my post...lol. My MPG only varies by 1-2 MPG regardless of where I am. Orlando FL, Alamogrodo NM, Cloudcroft NM, Boston MA, Salem NH... All with in 1-2 MPG.

The 2.7 is a completly different motor than the 3.5. It has a smaller displacement, different cam profiles, smaller turbos, better flowing heads, and a much different program running it. Its more a more efficient and more responsive motor....which is why 0-60, towing 8600lbs, it out runs the 3.5.

Sorry I definitely missed the about/almost. I also didn't know your turbo's were smaller and cam profiles were different. With these differences I can definitely see it being almost the same. LOL

Glad I called you out though because I learned about the different turbo's and cam profiles. I would have thought the only difference would be the displacement to help save costs associated with spares, programming, and training/maintenance, etc.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

Sorry I definitely missed the about/almost. I also didn't know your turbo's were smaller and cam profiles were different. With these differences I can definitely see it being almost the same. LOL

Glad I called you out though because I learned about the different turbo's and cam profiles. I would have thought the only difference would be the displacement to help save costs associated with spares, programming, and training/maintenance, etc.

About the only thing the 2.7 and 3.5 share is the air filter and a couple of sensors...lol. The 2.7 is a motor that was designed from the ground up to be a truck motor with two turbos hanging off the heads....lol. The 3.5 EB is based on the 3.5 N/A from 1990s. While it's a good motor, they made some compromises and engine technology has improved since it's release.

 

[rruff]

What matters is the turbos suck fuel like it is endless and unless you can turn yours off then there is no way you are getting the same mileage. Just the elevation difference in NM would cause a difference in mileage.

Elevation improves mpg, and the hills reduce it. Jnich77 is from the part of NM where I live, and he's talking about non-freeways mostly, where the speeds are slower.

FYI according to Fuelly averages, the Tundra 5.7 gets ~14mpg, the 5.0 or 3.5TT F150 ~16mpg, and the 2.7TT F150 ~18.5mpg. If you drive a lot that 2.7TT could cover a lot of "sins" with fuel savings. I see little point to the 3.5TT honestly.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

Elevation improves mpg, and the hills reduce it. Jnich77 is from the part of NM where I live, and he's talking about non-freeways mostly, where the speeds are slower.

FYI according to Fuelly averages, the Tundra 5.7 gets ~14mpg, the 5.0 or 3.5TT F150 ~16mpg, and the 2.7TT F150 ~18.5mpg. If you drive a lot that 2.7TT could cover a lot of "sins" with fuel savings. I see little point to the 3.5TT honestly.

The 3.5 is nice if you need the accompanying tow rating.... I don't need it, thus the 3.5 would have been a waste of money. The only upside the 3.5 would have for me is the potential to make more HP with aftermarket parts (there are some pretty large turbo upgrades for it)... But that takes things to a level that is waaaay above what I want/need in a daily driver...lol.

My dad and my brother both have the 3.5 and for them it works. For my dad it was the only motor available in the Navigator in 2015 and my brothers 2019 Limited F150 only comes with the 3.5 HO. They have zero complaints, but they do spend more on fuel than I ever will.