Once you tune these trucks there insane I have a 2021 F150 3.5 eco boost with K&N drop in filters, magnaflow muffler and a 5 star E50 tune and I run 11.0 - 11.85 quarter mile time constantly witch in my opinion is pretty insane for a truck in my opinion

junk

@@allentoyokawa9068 Thank you for your great knowledgeable input there, now run along back to the playground with the other 7 yearolds.

@@Justaeuropeanman That IS impressive

How did 5-star tune a 2021?

I could have sworn that was a Sasquatch caught in 4K

😂

I saw tom cruise running . Nothing else

🤣🤣🤣

@@Silverback_GMT410 that was my gut reaction. Well played

New guy? Lol

Thank you for the kind words.

I don't understand why the run them in 4wd for these test. They act like they are testing 1000 hp trucks that have to be in 4wd to hook up. These people doing these test are not the smartest people

your crappy tundra got smoked bad...learn to live with it

I love my Poerboost! Nothing to complain about, and I've had it since Oct of last year.

I just bought mine 3 months ago. I absolutely love it. Tons of engine power and super comfortable. I actually got a chance to use the PPO a few weeks ago when we had a power outage for several hours. It too is so impressive and worked flawless.

Ford is the best. The only thing I don't like about them is the water pump situation, that's typically why I favor Chevy, because you get more horsepower stock without the turbos too.

It’s not . My gmc has it to. F150 is for people with bad credit who don’t know anything about trucks so they buy one cuz everyone else has one

Also i believe you will get the best mpg

@@ahmadmohd8595 pb on mine is 34 mpg one tank. Normal highway(75 mph) is 28.5 very consistently. I have a hwy Michelin tire as well. The LtX

@@robertwotring7318 Are you absolutely babying it to get 28.5 or is it normal driving with passing slower cars and normal driving behavior?

@@SkinnySkinch Normal. Posted speed limit 75 on I10. Cruising 75. I’ve gotten more. Winds are the big factor on the highway for me.

@@SkinnySkinch lifetime average is 22.0, but 50% of the miles have Been towing 5300+ pounds. Before the long tow trip, 26.0 was the running average.

And ford has some serious catching up to do with reliability😭

@@Zkgod24 i feel like after covid they've been having some quality issues, some mis matched parts they had to substitute here and there. Some of their ecoboost engines haven't been particularly successful as there are a shit load of different ones now. But as for the main ones like the 3.5 and 2.7, 300k mile engines. The ecoboost engines are totally reliant on good maintenance, there is 0 room for overdue fluid changes as they are basically high performance racing engines..

Ford is so advanced, Toyota copied the power train to a tee 😅

​@@Zkgod24the tundra's reliability is far worst than the f150

@@tunedbyeazy3538 no way lol.

Lol. I hope that was exaggerated/on purpose.

Ford will beat toyota's ass toyota sucks

What it running 0-60 ? I've got a 6.2l Trail Boss too. Love it so far, I'm not going to push it yet with only 1k on it.

@@ES44AC-2 I honestly have no idea it was at a drag strip they only do time in distance 60fts were all horrible because it was only launched in 2wd

Yep, it is amazing. It’s even moreso apparent when flying small N/A aircraft, when what was spirited performance at 2000 ft. turns into just about nothing at 12000 feet.

@@ES44AC-2 good idea.

Would be cool to see a towing drag race between them, both at altitude and at something lower to sea level.

What is the elevation? They never brought it up.

@@andyh8239 I believe they’re a mile or so above sea level.

@@andyh8239 they do in every other video, 5900ft at this track I believe

Toyota: making overhyped, underwhelming junk for 70 years now.

It probably comes down to factory tuning. Toyota probably tuned for higher mpg while Ford aimed for more power output.

@@darkdodger137 might need a peddle colander

@@darkdodger137 yup Toyota usually prioritizes fuel efficiency even if it’s a “performance” oriented engine

It is a heavier truck lol. The power is very similar.

can’t really call a king ranch a lower trim level, it’s up there in price with the rest of them

Best looking interior tbh.

Lower trim levels are quicker due to them weighing less. I love my '21 Powerboost Platinum.

The lower trims may be faster but literally all that means is that they’re faster. Doesn’t mean it can tow or haul more, doesn’t mean it’s better off road, doesn’t mean the interior is as livable for road trips etc…

@@calebnation6155 actually lower times can tow and haul more. My Platinum has a payload of of 1,318 lbs vs an XLT with a payload of 1650 lbs. That also effects the total amount towable. All those max numbers (payload, towing, mpg) manufacturers put out are gathered from their lightest trucks. Add weight via options a d it takes away from towing and payload.

What about the 5.0 ?? Is it faster then power boost or just more fun

@@jeangrey30455.0 is slightly slower than power boost.. spec wise from factory

Vs a coyote too. Would be nice to see

@@davidespitia186 - I like the Coyote, but it’s the slowest except for the 3.3. Base motor. That’s near sea level. Higher up like these guys are would mean it will be about the same as the Chevy 6.2 litre. Sorry, that’s just the way it is. I have had the Coyote and it feels great and is no slouch,,,,, there just really are not any “slow” full size trucks out there!! The fun truck that may surprise everyone, not unlike the F150 2.7 EcoBoost, would be a GM 2.7 4 cylinder. 310 hp and 420 lb ft of torque!!! Weight savings and that torque is developed wayyy down in the rpm’s. Diesel like launch with more hp for AFTER 60 mph,,,,,,. Be fun to see. There are sooo many match ups that would be fun!! The Coyote vs the GM 6.2 would be very close!!

Think C&D had them test pretty much even in numbers.

@@garys2157 - I didn’t see that one, but they really are close. I actually like the way the Toyota manages towing vs the Ford in the non-hybrid models,,,, that and I have the Ford!! Haha. Gotta be as objective as possible. If they suit your need, either truck is great!! I love the GM diesel and have a Tahoe DuraMax. It gets fantastic fuel economy and is a very nice driving vehicle,,,,, I have to use a small gel pad for the seats though. They are just too flat and hard on the bottom. That pad takes away the pain in my back and arse!! My F150 Tremor is much more comfortable in the seating department. I wish the Tahoes had the new truck dash,,,,, it would be nearly perfect then!! Still love it mind you. Just finished about 3700kms of driving in both vehicles,,,, road trip for some friends that helped me in the past while I was I’ll. Took them fishing on the west coast of Vancouver Island,,,, 6 guys (including me) and 2 ladies, all friends. It was a great experience!! The Tahoe was the favourite except for the seats. It’s quiet and just east up the miles. The fuel was more expensive per litre for it, but in the end it was still cheaper by a couple of hundred bucks approximately. Paid as high as $2.26/litre cad or $8.70/us gallon ($6.85 USD/US gallon gas) $2.45/litre of diesel!! $9.43 CAD/US gallon ($7.42 usd per US gallon!!!) fuel is expensive here in Canada, especially in the province of BC. Anyways,,,,,, I get distracted,,,, hahaha. Stay safe, Eh!

The powerboost crushes a raptor in a race. The trx crushes it though so for now the powerboost is the 2nd fastest truck atm. But the type R will crush the powerboost I'm sure.

I've got one for a daily driver 02' ford v8. It is SLOW gets 7-10 mpg highway.

I think the fact that the 3.0 duramax and the 6.2 are running the same 1/4 mile times is a testament to how much N/A engines are effected. 6.2 trailboss in Florida runs around 14.80s in the 1/4 mile.

@@fl_atv_riders4455 yeah you’ve mentioned that about the pos gmc a few times guy 🤣 still won’t beat a ford either way.

@Jebus Hypocristos I’m twenty years old so I’m no grandpa. When gas is $2-$3 a gallon the cost of electric doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. When US production of oil was cut back/stopped this administration simply created an energy crisis. Many low to mid income people/families don’t have $50k+ to go buy a decent electric car or truck. So no as of right now electric does not win all the time and especially on cost. Also as far as performance is concerned. You could buy a much cheaper 5.0 like I did and simply get the dealer to install a Roush or Whipple supercharger. With 700 hp on tap with a Ford warranty you are hitting 60 nearly a second faster than the lightning and you can actually get your hands on one. Even with a well equipped truck for around 50-60k with spending an additional 7-8k and you are saving at least 10-20k compared to a similarly equipped lightning or powerboost. For that you get better performance and range that is actually better than 250 miles on the fully electric. Our Secretary of Energy and many in this administration are invested with stocks in green energy so they are happy to make ice as expensive as possible. We need to open our eyes. They don’t care if it hurts lower and mid income.

@Jebus Hypocristos how old you? 16? There was no need for a jerk off comment here kid! Grow up

@@reidsgarage1100 wow! I am impressed! You sound way older, more mature, and more informed than most twenty year olds! Not to mention you’re on the right side of politics which is rare for someone of your generation. 👍👍

I agree. I waited for the new tundra, after mine was totaled 3 years ago. Very disappointed that the MPG wasn't improved more, as I will be towing a camper. Duramax for me, but I am waiting for the 2023s now as they are replacing the current Duramax 3.0

3.0 Duramax is already not recommened by Consumer Reports for poor reliability.

@@benjaminwayneb Consumer reports is a joke. The new tundra is plagued with issues. I’ll take the duramax and I’m a Toyota guy.

@@benjaminwayneb that’s a joke consumer reports are nothing against real world reports and that engine hasn’t had problems like the new tundra has had

@@benjaminwayneb Interesting, considering the 5.3 and 6.2 are smoking motors because of bad lifters.

videos are out there the powerboost smokes it

The 3.5L ecoboost runs on regular 87 or 93 premium. It makes more HP on 93 just like the 3.5L Tundra. I'm assuming TFL had the same grade fuel in each of those trucks. Getting a Limited Hybrid Tundra isn't available yet I don't believe but even so, it won't make up THAT much difference. The F150 powerboost is a rocket ship of a truck.

The Tundra Hybrid is just slower. Not a bad thing as it’s still very fast. Toyota seems to have it shifting at different points (especially noticeable in the towing videos) and mist likely for greater longevity. They have a reputation they are trying to keep, especially for being long lived trucks, and they are just protecting the powertrain more to keep that reputation alive. A worthwhile trade. They tow very well. This all being said when I am a Ford guy,,,,,,. The small camper I haul in my current F150 Tremor wouldn’t fit in the Tundras though. The Tundras, for some strange reason, only have a 49” space between the rear wheel wells. Eliminates a lot of truck campers.

You're actually spot on. The tundra will go into "limp" once the batteries and turbo get hot.

@@shitloveaduck that's a lot of excuses.

@@virgfresco1403 lololololol

That means it should be slower in the long run and.... it's not

Only because of the elevation. Sea level the 5.3L is fair bit quicker than the diesel.

The tundra has more hp & torque than the powerboost but the ford is quite a bit quicker.

What?? 18:55? The PowerBoost was in the 14s,,,,, the Tundra was 16:10 (???) Truly all of these trucks are fast. 0-60 might mean at altitude that the 6.2 is the slowest!!! Those trucks with the 6.2 really are NIT slow when you actually drive them!! I had a PowerBoost but now drive a Tremor with the 3.5 EcoBoost. Still a fast truck, probably a bit faster than the GMs. There’s no “need” for more power in any of these trucks really,,,,, Ford just seems to let the motors and transmissions go all out!! Toyota is holding back for reliability as usual.

Yet we see them in other videos testing the Toyota in off-road settings and bragging about how good it is.

@@JohnSmith-zi9or yeah that horse power and torque, just put bigger tires on it and it's offroad for sure..

definitely. helps that it has electric motors and turbos to help with the elevation problem

Likewise

A normally-aspirated engine at 5000 feet is 15% down on power, just because of the atmospheric pressure … That means the 6.2 engine at in Denver puts out less horsepower than the little 5.3 does at sea level …

100%. You hit all the reasons why the Tundra missed the mark. The 4Auto thing really is terrible. Especially because Toyota has the lockable Torsen center differential that they have been using in the Sequoia, Land Cruiser, Lexus GX and 4Runner for 20 years. That transfer case is probably the single best feature in my Lexus GX and it performs much better than the 4Auto case in my F150. The tundra with that setup would have awesome. And seriously, the lack of generator makes me not even consider their hybrid. The generator is the only reason I would buy a Powerboost.

They had 15 years to get it right and that is the best those idiots at crapota could do

I wanted to know the same thing

@@DieselDog1982 Here is what Toyota says about this recall: “Toyota is conducting a safety recall involving certain 2022 model year Tundra (including HEV) vehicles in the U. S. Approximately 46,000 vehicles are involved in this recall. Vehicles in this recall have certain nuts on the rear axle assembly that can loosen over time, and, in some cases, fall off, potentially causing an axle shaft sub-assembly to separate from the axle. If complete separation occurs, this can affect vehicle stability and brake performance, increasing the risk of a crash.“

Lol 😆.

@@Miiike604 This could cause accidents similar to the famous stocked cruise control or pedal issue.

What is a 2.7 Chevy? Ford has a 2.7 V6 and it's a rocket 0 to 60 or even the quarter.

Think it would give e a 5.3 GMC a good run.

@@davidwelsh829 it's Chevys 2.7 4 cylinder turbo I have a lease on one an I gotta say it's impressive don't know if I'd buy it but for a lease it's perfect

@@garys2157 yeah that's what I was thinking honestly I think it might beat the 5.3 because of weight difference

It won't come close to beating a 5.0.

3.31 vs 3.73 very simple

@@pryme2013, gear ratio’s don’t make as much of a difference nowadays with ten speed transmission. Besides, 3.31 gears is the only gear ratio available on the new generation Tundra’s.

@@stang-rv4pb false on both counts. and full disclosure i dont own either of these trucks. it doesn't matter how many gears a trans has, the ratio applies to all of the gears whether its 5 speed or 10 speed. the higher ratio shortens all the gears and provides better acceleration, and vice versa for a lower ratio. Shorter gears and faster acceleration also builds boost in the turbos more quickly. The benefit of a lower ratio is a higher *theoretical* top speed and lower engine RPMs at a given cruising speed. hence why Toyota went with the lower ratio - lower cruising RPMs on the highway for better fuel economy. Not saying that's what truck owners want, just the reality of how Toyota does things. The fact there is no alternate gear ratio option for the Tundra doesn't eliminate the fact that the Ford still benefited from its own higher gear ratio in the acceleration figures. That's not comparing apples to apples.

@@Kenny31190 it is comparing apples to apples, because both truck’s were equipped with the highest (numerical) available gear ratio’s. My point is that rear end gear ratios aren’t everything, transmissions gear ratios also have an effect on final combined gear ratio’s. The previous Tundra had an available 4.30 rear end gear ratio, yet it had considerably slower acceleration then the current model. The previous generation Tundra’s had lower (numerical) transmission gear ratio’s, compared to the F150, but with the 4.30 rear end ratio, the final combined ratios were similar. I’m not aware of what the transmission gear ratio’s are on the current generation Tundra, with the new ten speed.

Thanks for the kind comment

I think it just needs a better read end. Put the 3.73 on to match the PowerBoost

The torque of a turboed gas engine is unreal..espe

The tune on the ecoboost is insane. I run a 5star tune on mine with 93 octane always.

No one has a tune yet for the duramax, and it's much harder to tune these new diesels with tons of restrictions without doing a delete.

@@vincentlee9638 ya that’s kinda what I thought, the older (2000’s era) turbo diesel’s we’re definitely a ton easier to tune/open up legally. My 99 7.3 passes emissions every year on the stock tune even with turbo back exhaust (with cat), fuel mods and stage 2 CAI. It’s unfortunate the same can’t be done with these newer diesels.

It will use both engines for more power. So the you need to power torque to get the gas engines to start.

The fast lane truck Is one of the best platform that's sell And deliver cars on a cheap rate Give away

The first race , Tundra vs F150 was with the Tundra in 2wd.

Toyota runs a crazy amount of torque management in their cars which really slows them down

@@ITh4n4tosIlmao ya ok

Don't forget the Etorque

All four trucks would smoke the slow 5.7 Ram.

The ram is a pos

When they get one from the press fleet. They can ask for it, but if GM doesn’t have one in the press fleet they can’t get it and if there is one, they are in line after the previous requests. Many have asked for it, so maybe they will get one soon, but it’s really up to GM to have one available.

Yeah it is

That's just it The fast lane truck Is one of the best platform that's sell And deliver cars on a cheap rate Give away

Guarantee a ram 5.7 with 3.92s would smoke that duramax at the very least. Would give the 6.2 a run for its money as well!

Unfortunately Ford killed it for 2022 so it’s not getting much press.

@@robertwotring7318 go figure

That's only because tire technology was awful they used truck tires shaved down as a slick in the 60s

most of these trucks have a 4.7 first gear ratio. most cars in the 60 had 3 speed and 3.0 first. keep in mind there where plenty of cammed old buick ford dodges and chevys running 10s with racing slicks on pump gas. but i think most muscle cars of the 60 would struggle to turn 14s at a mile above sea level on street tires of the day

@@jeffforbes70 actually most fast cars of the 60s ran a 4 speed manual with a 1 to 1 final drive and 3.23 axle ratios. Cars also weighed less a big block 396 camaro only weighs around 3250 and that's with a 800lb big block.

@@fl_atv_riders4455 for the ratios i was referring to first gear. but as andre has found getting traction in a rear wheel drive car takes skill. all wheel drive makes it easy

@@jeffforbes70 whatever you say bud clearly can't argue with a expert tfl enthusiasts.