Tundra 4.6L vs. 5.7L - TundraTalk.net - Toyota Tundra Discussion Forum
User Tag List

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 12 (permalink) Old 03-30-2018, 02:36 PM Thread Starter
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Florida
Posts: 1
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 1 Post
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Tundra 4.6L vs. 5.7L

Hey everyone,

After watching this forum for years, I finally decided to create my account. This forum certainly has tons of really useful information and plenty of fruitful conversations. The main reason I started searching this forum years ago (~2012) is I wanted to move away from the SUV world and get me a truck, but I wasn't sure if the Tundra was a good match for me. Now three Tundra's later, I'm still not sure... So, I'm going to get right to the point and I'm hoping some of the experienced Tundra owners can weigh in on my dilemma.

For reference purposes, here's a list of Toyota's I've owned:
Celica ('86), Celica GT ('88), MR2 ('91) - Jeep Laredo (1997) for awhile - Tundra V6 (2010), Tundra 4.6L V8 (2011, Tundra 5.7L V8 (2018)

(1) When I bought my Tundra V6 (2010) the dealer said, yah it can pull my boat, haul stuff, etc, etc.. Long story short it performed worst than my '97 Laredo inline-six in terms of pulling power and highway mileage. So that was dud..

(2) Within 6-months the dealer put me into a Tundra 4.6L SR (2011) to compensate for the V6 disaster. This truck was awesome. Pulled my boat like it was nothing, got 20 mpg highway, hauled tons of mason dirt, pulled 16-ft trailer full of furniture from Texas to Florida, whatever. It was an awesome truck, but I wanted 4x4 for some off-road action.

(3) So, after mining this forum for comparisons between 4.6L and 5.7L I decided to trade my 2011 4.6L for a 2018 Tundra 5.7L TRD. Mostly because the word on the street was "better to have more when you need it". In the past 6-months I've taken this truck once into the deep mountains of Colorado (4x4 through snow) and once into the backwoods of North Georgia (4x4 through mud and steep back gravel roads, and in those conditions it was a sweet ride. Unfortunately, most of my driving is on the highway (travel ~320 miles/week to work), so gas mileage is important.

With the 5.7L it seems that even a small payload drops the mileage. Wind drops the mileage. Driving a little above 2000rpn drops the mileage. Sure it has some nice power, but increasing the speed above 65mph drops the mileage like crazy. All of those things I could do in the 4.6L and the mileage barely changed. Long story short, the 5.7L feels like it's always pulling an invisible trailer behind it and of course that's easy money for the fuel pumps every week.

Although I have the newest, strongest version of the Tundra, I feel like I lost so much in comparison to the 2011 Tundra I had before. Of course I gained 4x4 and some off-road shocks and a bit more power, but it really doesn't feel like it was worth the jump. I wonder if the 5.7L folks have actually driven the 4.6L enough to really understand the difference, or if everyone just analyzes the tech specs and makes the assumption that bigger numbers equals way more power.

Note: Funny thing is, the best gas mileage I've seen in this truck is when driving on hills. I think because up the hill it gets 12-15mpg, but down the hill it gets 20-30mpg. Just simple physics... Of course this doesn't help me cause I live in Florida...


So for those new Tundra owners trying to figure out which way to go, let me just make these points:

1) If you're ALWAYS pulling something, then MAYBE you need the 5.7L. If you're always pulling something really HEAVY (5000lbs) then probably you need the 5.7L.

2) If you mostly drive around without a considerable payload, enjoy being able to get going off the light like an SUV, and appreciate good gas mileage most of the time, then go for the 4.6L.

3) 4x4 will drop your gas mileage regardless, so there's that.

4) Do you want the TRD upgrade, well maybe. I drove mine out to Denver were the highway roads are really wavy, and I just about puked with all of the bouncing caused by the TRD shocks. In comparison, my old 2011 Tundra SR was a smooth ride on those same roads. So, I think TRD is just for pure off-road conditions. In addition, the TRD wheels are heavy and reduce gas mileage.

At the end of the day, I got an awesome price on my new 2018 Tundra, so I really can't complain about the financial side of the deal. I stopped watching the mpg, have somewhat enjoyed the added torque, but for my routine days, the 4.6L would probably have been more suitable. I guess there's always another year and another trade.

Happy truckin!
Kevin Hulen is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Kevin Hulen For This Useful Post:
Mr. Creosote (03-30-2018), MtnClimber (03-30-2018), Skip C (06-12-2019), TOY33 (03-30-2018)
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 12 (permalink) Old 03-30-2018, 02:55 PM
Senior Member
 
CaptainMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 791
Thanks: 0
Thanked 430 Times in 260 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Hello and welcome, from the oil fields of west Texas.

Complexity is the enemy of reliability.

Semper Fi
CaptainMonkey is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to CaptainMonkey For This Useful Post:
Mr. Creosote (03-30-2018)
post #3 of 12 (permalink) Old 03-30-2018, 03:51 PM
Senior Member
 
MetalMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: The San Diego Bay Area
Posts: 9,285
Thanks: 5,251
Thanked 6,574 Times in 3,952 Posts
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 3 Thread(s)
Quoted: 369 Post(s)
Garage

Welcome aboard from the sunny Pacific South West.

A picture is worth a thousand words
But your smile is worth a million
MetalMonkey is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to MetalMonkey For This Useful Post:
Mr. Creosote (03-30-2018)
 
post #4 of 12 (permalink) Old 03-30-2018, 06:11 PM
Cereal Killer
Premium Member
 
Mr. Creosote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 20,309
Thanks: 278,863
Thanked 62,020 Times in 21,084 Posts
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 4 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1612 Post(s)
The math is simple. .. 5.7 > 4.6 .. You're welcome.

I don't care about the environment. Neither do you.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Mr. Creosote is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Mr. Creosote For This Useful Post:
mrmachinist (03-31-2018)
post #5 of 12 (permalink) Old 03-30-2018, 07:26 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Idaho
Posts: 164
Thanks: 72
Thanked 74 Times in 53 Posts
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Welcome to the forum. Having a 2012, which was the last year you could get a 4.6L in the Sequoia, I enjoyed your writeup.

2012 Silver Sky Metallic Sequoia SR5 4WD 4.6L
TRD Pro eng skid, Or-Fab trans skid, custom transfer case skid, RCI gas tank skid, 1.75" lift with 6112 on lowest notch, Wheeler's Superbumps (front), Revtek 441R & 5100 (rear), Michelin Defender LT275/70R18 on MB Chaos +25, 3rd Row Removed
MtnClimber is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to MtnClimber For This Useful Post:
Mr. Creosote (03-30-2018)
post #6 of 12 (permalink) Old 03-31-2018, 09:37 AM
Senior Member
 
mrmachinist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,486
Thanks: 554
Thanked 908 Times in 569 Posts
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 479 Post(s)
Garage
A buddy at work has a 4.6. Itís not as bad as I thought it would be, but Iíll give up 2mpg for the power, 4x4, and lift. I tow too much for the 4.6 anyway.

When buying a truck itís easy. Biggest motor and 4x4 are required.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
mrmachinist is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to mrmachinist For This Useful Post:
Mr. Creosote (03-31-2018)
post #7 of 12 (permalink) Old 03-31-2018, 11:24 AM
Senior Member
Premium Member
 
1lowlife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: The Great Lone Star State
Posts: 3,920
Thanks: 1,467
Thanked 2,067 Times in 1,448 Posts
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1266 Post(s)
I'll try to keep this short:
For the record I don't tow and rarely haul anything.

My 2005 SR5 DC had a 4.7 that I drove for 10 years.
It was fine, never thought it lacked power.
Think I got around 14.5 MPG.

My 2014 SR5 DC has a 5.7 that I know doesn't lack power.
It more fun to drive and goes when I want/need it to.
Need more fun, I push the tow/haul button.
I get around 13.5 MPG.

I met a guy locally that wanted to hear my BAM exhaust before buying one.
He was impressed with the muffler setup.
I let him drive the truck.
He was even more impressed with my 5.7 and how much more power it had than his 4.6.
He left seriously considering trading in his 2016 4.6 for another Tundra with a 5.7.

So when in doubt, get a 5.7...

Learn it, know it, live it.
2014 Tundra Double Cab TSS SR5 5.7
Official Magnetic Grey Club # 305
Texas Tundra Group #183
1lowlife is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to 1lowlife For This Useful Post:
Mr. Creosote (03-31-2018)
post #8 of 12 (permalink) Old 03-31-2018, 12:37 PM
Senior Member
 
McGovTundra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Burpinham, Babalama
Posts: 1,194
Thanks: 0
Thanked 528 Times in 360 Posts
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 281 Post(s)
So this is a thread about Tundra gas mileage. How am I doing so far?

And the relative disappointment of your older model Tundra gas mileage performance vs. this here 2018 Tundra. How am I still doing?

So. Let's see. Between you 4.6L Tundra and your 2nd 5.7L Tundra something has happened. And that something has you befuzzled. If not just flat out unhappy. O.K. I'm jiggy with that.

But what has changed? Hmmm. "I'll take ****ed up federal guvmunt initiatives for two hundred Alex." Some 4 or maybe 5 years ago the benevolent imperial federal guvmunt. Under the tutelage of a certain person announced that by 2025 automotive manufacturers, IF THEY WANTED TO SELL INTO THE UNITED STATES MARKET, would have to have a CAFE of............of..............of.................5 5 miles per gallon. That's right. What are the effects of federal stupidity like that? I offer that you're experiencing and living it. Oh. And you paid A LOT of money for the guvmunts benevolency.

Touche.

I'm not completely useless. I can always be used as a bad example.
McGovTundra is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to McGovTundra For This Useful Post:
Mr. Creosote (03-31-2018)
post #9 of 12 (permalink) Old 04-01-2018, 09:06 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Mattituck, NY
Posts: 324
Thanks: 0
Thanked 133 Times in 100 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Hulen View Post
Hey everyone,

Although I have the newest, strongest version of the Tundra, I feel like I lost so much in comparison to the 2011 Tundra I had before. Of course I gained 4x4 and some off-road shocks and a bit more power, but it really doesn't feel like it was worth the jump. I wonder if the 5.7L folks have actually driven the 4.6L enough to really understand the difference, or if everyone just analyzes the tech specs and makes the assumption that bigger numbers equals way more power.


Happy truckin!
Part of the reason you don't see a bigger increase in performance, is that your 2011 4.6L was geared differently, and was actually slightly faster off the line than a comparable 5.7. when they body style changed in 2014, so did the gearing. Some people think the new gen feels a little more sluggish, and people complain that the transmission hunts for gears a lot more in the mountains. Non of this is a power issue though, it is a gearing issue.

It seems like people just look at the specs, and run with how much better the 5.7 is on paper though. Or they say how much better it is, because thats how they justify the extra money they spent on it... Don't get me wrong, I have driven the 5.7 tundras and they are great. they have great power, pull and haul with ease. you can pass just about any one on the highway. But I can do everything in my 4.6L that I would do in a 5.7, I can do it just as good, just as fast, and I get slightly better mpg doing it. Only thing I can't do is beat a 5.7L in a drag race. I assume bigger tires and lifts effect the 4.6 trucks a little more than 5.7 trucks, but My truck is not lifted, so not an issue for me.

I'll probably get some thumbs down for this post, But I really think the 5.7L is overkill for a lot of people who buy them. Unless you tow a camper or heavy trailers, there is no real advantage.

2014 SR Work Truck Package Double Cab 4x4 4.6L Magnetic Grey Tundra.
Official tri-state club member #48
dforlenza is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to dforlenza For This Useful Post:
Mr. Creosote (04-02-2018)
post #10 of 12 (permalink) Old 04-01-2018, 12:43 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Idaho
Posts: 164
Thanks: 72
Thanked 74 Times in 53 Posts
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dforlenza View Post
Part of the reason you don't see a bigger increase in performance, is that your 2011 4.6L was geared differently, and was actually slightly faster off the line than a comparable 5.7. when they body style changed in 2014, so did the gearing. Some people think the new gen feels a little more sluggish, and people complain that the transmission hunts for gears a lot more in the mountains. Non of this is a power issue though, it is a gearing issue.

It seems like people just look at the specs, and run with how much better the 5.7 is on paper though. Or they say how much better it is, because thats how they justify the extra money they spent on it... Don't get me wrong, I have driven the 5.7 tundras and they are great. they have great power, pull and haul with ease. you can pass just about any one on the highway. But I can do everything in my 4.6L that I would do in a 5.7, I can do it just as good, just as fast, and I get slightly better mpg doing it. Only thing I can't do is beat a 5.7L in a drag race. I assume bigger tires and lifts effect the 4.6 trucks a little more than 5.7 trucks, but My truck is not lifted, so not an issue for me.

I'll probably get some thumbs down for this post, But I really think the 5.7L is overkill for a lot of people who buy them. Unless you tow a camper or heavy trailers, there is no real advantage.
Agree with your conclusions but not all the reasons. The gearing of the 5.7L did not change in 2014. See the specs attached (gear ratios on Page 2).

I could be wrong, but from what I've read it just "feels" like the 5.7L gearing changed because in 2014 the throttle mapping was revised so that you have to press the gas pedal farther (or engage tow/haul) to achieve the same "go".
Attached Files
File Type: pdf 2011_Toyota_Tundra_Product_Information.pdf (164.6 KB, 8 views)
File Type: pdf 2014_Toyota_Tundra_Product_Information.pdf (90.2 KB, 11 views)

2012 Silver Sky Metallic Sequoia SR5 4WD 4.6L
TRD Pro eng skid, Or-Fab trans skid, custom transfer case skid, RCI gas tank skid, 1.75" lift with 6112 on lowest notch, Wheeler's Superbumps (front), Revtek 441R & 5100 (rear), Michelin Defender LT275/70R18 on MB Chaos +25, 3rd Row Removed

Last edited by MtnClimber; 04-01-2018 at 12:46 PM.
MtnClimber is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to MtnClimber For This Useful Post:
Mr. Creosote (04-02-2018)
post #11 of 12 (permalink) Old 04-01-2018, 12:53 PM
He Has Risen!
Premium Member
 
RRzxter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Under the stairs
Posts: 6,476
Thanks: 349
Thanked 16,466 Times in 7,669 Posts
Mentioned: 113 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3622 Post(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Hulen View Post
With the 5.7L it seems that even a small payload drops the mileage. Wind drops the mileage. Driving a little above 2000rpn drops the mileage. Sure it has some nice power, but increasing the speed above 65mph drops the mileage like crazy. All of those things I could do in the 4.6L and the mileage barely changed. Long story short, the 5.7L feels like it's always pulling an invisible trailer behind it and of course that's easy money for the fuel pumps every week.
I get your overall point to the entire post. I appreciate what you're saying and for the most part agree that realistically, for what most people actually use their truck for, it wouldn't make much difference which size V8 they had.
But the above doesn't make much sense to me.
I agree that with the tow pkg gearing, fuel economy isn't great above 65 mph simply because of the rpm. (Kinda wish they would look into an 8spd option for the Tundra).
But if you took 2 identical trucks, the one with the smaller engine, that's geared more for hwy speeds will naturally get better fuel economy. But when taxed and loaded, the smaller engine will always suffer a higher % of efficiency loss than a larger engine with more torque.
If you took 2 identical trucks (let's say both are a base model 2wd with tow pkg) and towed the same weight with each, added the same payload and drove them on the same course, I highly doubt that the one with the smaller V8 would barely see a change in fuel efficiency.
You said that if you are going to be working your truck regularly, you might be better off with the 5.7. I agree with that.
But the section above contradicts that a bit.
Now, I've never driven a Tundra with a 4.6. I would assume it's a much better V8 than GM's and Ford's smaller V8s.
I know they are capable engines, as I drove a full size Ford van with a 4.6 and we have a small GM shuttle bus at work that's a lot heavier than a van or pickup and it only has a 4.8 V8. No problem doing work or moving. But neither were even close to being impressive with fuel economy. Especially when taxed.
As far as the 5.7 suffering more under any amount of stress,....that's also not exactly accurate. You have to load it up pretty good or drive it like a maniac. Pulling a lighter trailer or your typical load of crap from the hardware store in the bed is not going to kill your average MPG. I've had my 5.7 DCLB for over 3 yrs and for the last year, have heavier tires and the bed and cab have been completely filled with gear and tools 24/7. I've worked the truck harder over the last year and my average MPG went from 14.4 in the first 2 yrs to 14.1 over the last yr.
If I had a 4.6 V8 in my truck, I would have suffered a lot more than a .3 MPG loss under the same conditions.
Also, that sluggish feel in the 5.7 is the throttle response that they dialed back in the 3rd gen. My truck has it too and I hate it. My 2011 CM with the 5.7 was very zippy from a start.
RRzxter is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to RRzxter For This Useful Post:
Mr. Creosote (04-02-2018)
post #12 of 12 (permalink) Old 04-02-2018, 07:50 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Mattituck, NY
Posts: 324
Thanks: 0
Thanked 133 Times in 100 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by RRzxter View Post
Now, I've never driven a Tundra with a 4.6. I would assume it's a much better V8 than GM's and Ford's smaller V8s.
I know they are capable engines, as I drove a full size Ford van with a 4.6 and we have a small GM shuttle bus at work that's a lot heavier than a van or pickup and it only has a 4.8 V8. No problem doing work or moving. But neither were even close to being impressive with fuel economy. Especially when taxed.
.
This is a little off topic but.... My business partner has a 2008 ford E250 van with fords 4.6L V8. There is a drastic difference between the 4.6 in the ford and the one on the tundra. don't get me wrong, we have had no issues with the ford, and it handles 2000 + pounds in the back like there's nothing in it. But the tundra is much more powerful and faster, gets better mpg too.

2014 SR Work Truck Package Double Cab 4x4 4.6L Magnetic Grey Tundra.
Official tri-state club member #48
dforlenza is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to dforlenza For This Useful Post:
Mr. Creosote (04-02-2018)
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  TundraTalk.net - Toyota Tundra Discussion Forum > Member Area > New Member Introductions

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TundraTalk.net - Toyota Tundra Discussion Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome