Be terrible to buy a vehicle that you have to baby around to get somewhat ok mpg lol Even these little TT V6 just can't compete with a diesel

@@logut80 competing with effectively a different thing all together doesn't really matter. A truck with a diesel engine with current gas prices would cost about $0.165/gal and the 2022 Tundra is $0.184. So if you're going to compare items that are entirely different atleast compare them where they can actually show how they match up. Edit: fixed typo

@@ryannelson8717 I know my Cummins still gets like 18mpg towing but it's pre-epa bs. Take the epa crap off of newer ones & they will get way better mpg. The 1/2 diesels are getting 30mpg empty which is great & a lot better than the gas versions

@@logut80 The half ton diesels are not getting 30 mpg doing 75 mph though. Maybe 25-27 at that speed. And if your diesel prices are ~18% higher than gasoline like AAA is reporting right now, a gasser engine only needs to get 22-23 mpg to end up costing the same, which isnt impossible. The difference is not as much as people want to make it seem.

@@Jay-me7gw I'm just going off the test they did on a 1/2 ton diesel.

And what do you get without that trailer? That's how this works. Old engines were about as efficient with a trailer as modern engines. Where the modern engines have improved dramatically is their unloaded MPG's. Thats why you always hear people say things like "My old Ford 460 used to get 11mpg unloaded and 10mpg towing". The engines were so wildly inefficient when not under load that they were barely any better without the trailer. Unless you are towing more often than not, a modern engine will save you on gas overall.

How fast do you usually tow on the interstate?

@@tylough I tow at 65mph when pulling our 5th wheel. Unless we need to pass or the speed limit is under 65. I also forgot to mention it is 32 feet long with tandem axle.

That's pretty good economy but stinks that fuel is $5 a gallon.

@@tylough No kidding! We're sitting still right now😕

Oh great let’s turn an old truck into an electric toy!?

@@michaelbassett5105 I know, right? It'll be cool to see what kinda power it will put out and how far it will go on a charge.

Ford actually did the same thing to a f100. It’s grey with an orange strip. Looks pretty cool, there are also videos on yt of it.

@@derwinevans6751 yeah I saw that. I wondered what would happen to all these gas cars when the oil runs out. Depending on what it costs, retrofitting a gas vehicle with electric capabilities might be an answer.

@@dalejones4322 when oil runs out every single vehicle on the road right now will be either in museum or recycled.

Do you tow at 75mph? Thats why he got 9.3.

@@Jay-me7gwyeah 75 mph the whole trip. Sometimes 80 if the highway is super clear.

Up and down hills and mountains against wind?

@@artemusburton4824 yupp in New Hampshire

What speed is that at? My 2014 F150 Ecoboost will tow my travel trailer and get anywhere from 6.7 to 10.9 mpg depending on the conditions. I typically tow at 70mph and I have had to face 30+ mph headwinds. It's highly variable so its almost impossible to compare any two trucks and trailers unless they are towing on the same road at the same time.

And did your 1987 do all of this at 75 mph without breaking a sweat, or were you foot on the floor doing 50 mph?

@@Jay-me7gw i was at 65 the most way and probably about a quarter or so throttle as the truck makes its peak tq just under 65 so it was barely noticing, on big inclines was able to maintain 45 and up to 6 to 7 percent from alamagordo to ruidoso maintained a healthy 40mph

@@Jay-me7gw normally at 65 i get 16 mpg and normally at 75 get about 14 ish Empty and with no wind

@@Project-gr6zy Well there you go. If the tundra had slowed to 65mph on the flats and 40mph on hills it probably would do substantially better.

@@Jay-me7gw when i towed at 75 from tucson to las cruces i managed about 11.8mpg which is not bad and is still nowhere near the tundras, and leaving tucson heading to lordsburg there a lot of hills that i did have to go heavy on the throttle to maintain 75

It's up to 75 in CO and AZ.

Right, I'm in Corpus Christi were the tallest things we have to climb is an overpass lol, mostly flat farm and ranch land around here.

Noob here, is MPG supposed to decrease as you increase in speed?

@@Kevinator1996 Yes, higher speed means more throttle, more throttle means more air, more air means more fuel, more fuel means lower mpg.

@@Kevinator1996 no not always. More rpms means more fuel. Higher speeds can have low or high mpgs depending on the transmission. Typically at 70 mph you are less efficient due to higher rpm and more drag on your vehicle. But with better aerodynamics and 8 or 10 speed transmissions you can get 20 to 25 mpg in a truck even at 70 mph.

@@Kevinator1996 Stop and go you use more energy from the engine which drinks more gas, while cruising at a speeds dont waste as much

@@miltcoronado3392 unless you’re towing a heavy trailer 😉

I tow a 28’ AS and when I go 60 to 65 I get 11 to 12 mpg with a 3.5 Ecoboost (2020). When I went to S.D. and we went 70 mph it went to about 9.5 to 10 mpg depending upon wind conditions.

@@douglasquenzer9361 that’s close one to what I find with our 27FB and a 5.7 Durango. Hopefully the 2023 Sequoia is a bit better.

No it wouldnt. The V8 tundra was WAY behind in MPG's. If you put the 10 speed in it, it might do a little better but I bet it would still be worse than the current Ram, which is worse than the Ecoboost and GM V8's . It would need cylinder deactivation and possibly direct injection like GM and Ram are utilizing to get close. Even with that technology the V8's can only match a TTV6. Toyota probably realized that the V8 was not a better solution from a complexity, reliability, or power standpoint. So, pick your poison. TT V6 that makes 480 ft-lbs of torque at 2400 rpm and gets good MPG or a 5.7L with displacement on demand, direct injection and 410 tq at 3600 rpm. Both are complex.

@@Jay-me7gw 5.7 V8 is multiport fuel injection. If Toyota added direct injection with multiport, like some of their other engines, would definitely increase horsepower. 20 - 21 MPG is realistic with a 10 speed and adding direct injection. My preference, would opt by far, for a non turbo engine. Wait & see what it will cost to replace those turbos. Definitely will not last as long as many reporting 700k - 1,000,000 mile V8 trucks with regular maintenance. With No major repairs!!!! Dealers are saying cab needs to be removed to access turbos. Probably going to cost owners 10k for those repairs outside of warranty. I don’t consider 23 mpg significant improvement on the new V6. I’ll take any day a V8 with 10 speed & only get 20-21 MPG Toyota needs to give customers options.. Let the customer decide what is the best fit. Other manufacturers are still offering different engine options, like Diesel, V8, V6 twin turbo

Fuel economy will come down to how much power you need to do the job it takes x amount of fuel to do x amount of work and overall efficiency of design. Would come down to long term durability more than anything else less stress on a large displacement V8 than a small or any displacement for that matter with power adder. It's really quite simple more boost is more air and fuel and more cylinder pressure to get more or the same output of a Naturally Aspirated large displacement engine, your just putting around town not loading your truck much you'll likely see pretty significant MPG gains and decent long term durability by forced induction smaller displacement engines. It's pretty tough to successfully make gains in all areas better off just picking the right tool for the job. The EPA has destroyed diesels mpg, durability and reputation now their on to gas engines sad 😔. Realistically your best option for overall performance is a stripped down base model new vehicles are stupidly overweight with all their features and that takes energy to move. 👌

I dont. I think this engine gets exactly what it should for the conditions. So far, no V8 has beat its MPG's with the same trailer behind it. It beat the Ram with 3.92's towing the Black Series trailer on the same day by a considerably amount, and it beat both the Ram and Grand Wagoneer by a healthy margin when they did the MPG test towing this F100. It also has beat the Powerboost towing the same trailer on the same day. I don't think you can pull much more energy out of a gallon of gasoline than the tundra is. The only way to get better MPG's is diesel, and then you are looking at a higher cost of fuel, so it doesnt really save you much.

Not everyone wants to run granny speed & get ran over on the interstate lol

@@logut80 towing at 75 isn't granny. It's simply not recommended for safety, and many states limit towing speed limits below that for a reason.

@@keithpassthewhiskey8323 I know 75 isn't granny but ppl saying he should drive slower. 60-65 is granny when everyone else is running 80-90

I get better mpg with my 2012 RAM 1500 while towing better than unladen. If you on the interstate 70 mph is very ideal for towing, but you must activated the tow/haul mode and cruise control to achieve that high mpgs even on declines and inclines.

This tundra did better than his in the towing loop they did so hopefully the hybrid is even better

@@hiphophead9059 It's an interesting question. The tundra did better than the F150 hybrid towing, but the tundra hybrid only gets 1mpg better than the non-hybrid when not towing. And the F150 does a lot better mpg wise empty. So I'm curious if the toyota hybrid improves towing, is the same, or is worse. I think it might actually do worse. Tundra hybrid adds a lot of weight and not much energy because of the small battery. So I think it's very possible the toyota hybrid will do worse towing than the non-hybrid.

It looked pretty level to me.

thisclose! 🙂

How will the truck be ruined? It will have more power and significantly better reliability. And being the truck is more of a weekend cruiser than a work truck, any range differences will not matter. Plus, that truck has already had an engine swap, axles swap, frame swap, etc.

The frame and body will not be able to handle much torque without some beefing up?

@@carmendangelo715 Possibly. But electric motor torque acts very differently to an engines torque. An IC engine is always running. When it engages (via clutch or torque converter) there is a lot of inertia that gets transferred to the chassis. This is what causes chassis twist. A electric motor starts from zero rpm. There is no transfer of inertial energy.

@@Stuka87 It starts from zero rpm but makes max torque as soon as it starts to spin. they are also direct drive so there is no "cushion" when it starts, so it's actually twists on the frame much harder.

Let's hope they do, it's been long over due but at the same time they didn't want to deal with the DEAF bs

Never going to happen here in North America.

There’s no diesel option coming, Toyota already said the cost of the pollution control system is cost prohibitive.

Never going to happen. The stats on the hybrid blow away the stats diesel out there. Yes , more HP and More Torque.

@@Edgarrasconurias I expected a bigger hybrid drive and battery to help with fuel economy.

Huh? What truck is this, Standard cab 2WD with an aluminum body? The 7.3L is a good diesel for mpg but its not that good. I have a 03 F250 Lariat crew cab and 15mpg combined empty. I get 9 mpg towing a 25ft TT that weighs 5K lbs at 65 mph. Just curious.

@@RocHopn Yeah, two wheel drive crew, dually with an auto. 100k, full 4” exhaust, 6637 air filter and a tuner. 1800 rpm running 60 mph, uphill or flat, it never revs higher or downshifts. Now in Texas running 85 mph it got around 10ish mpg but, that’s extreme with 14k gross weight.

@@OzarksWildman kinda figured. Mine is SRW crewcab 4WD. Still love it though! Cant beat the 7.3L trucks!

unhook that trailer and see how the F250 rides vs this truck or any other 1/2 ton. the F250 rides like a brick.

Not a solution for everybody but the seats in the platinum and up have an adjustment to make the under leg portion longer.

Towing at his speeds with the turbos spooled up the whole time is going to suck down fuel. I really don't think the new engine is going to be much better fuel wise than the old 5.7 V8 towing heavy loads. Normal unloaded driving yeah, it's going to be significantly better. Just like with a compact car with a small turbo 4 cylinder, if you keep in the power band it's going to go through just as much fuel as a larger naturally aspirated engine.

@@jblyon2 I Agree. It's not much different than an Ecoboost, where you either get the eco or the boost, but not both at the same time.

That's pretty good mpg considering it only dropped 4.5 mpg from normal fuel economy pulling 6k.

@@fl_atv_riders4455 normal fuel economy for this truck is 22 MPG at 75 mph. Where are you getting 4.5 from?

I don't tow often but my 2018 Sequoia 4x4 gets 12ish mpg towing a 3,500 lb enclosed single axle cargo trailer at around 65-70 mph. At 80 mph it gets around 10 mpg. Not really impressed by the new v6 turbo but I wasn't expecting much after seeing how useless the other gas saving features on engines from different manufacturers have been with cylinder deactivation, start/stop, and even variable compression.

Empty maybe ;)

@@Jay-me7gw I think they did the same test a while back and while it averaged 14 not under tow, while towing it only dropped down to 12

Andre was towing at 75 so you'll see better mpg at lower tow speeds.