Mike Sweers Interview - He wanted a Diesel Tundra (and to keep the 5.7 as an option)

My bad. I must have misunderstood what you meant below. Totally my fault.

 

I don't think enthusiasts are really suffering. Power keeps going up, and it's reasonably cheap and easy to hotrod the TTV6s. In the real world the Ford 3.5 doesn't get any better MPG than the 5.0, but soundly beats it for torque, matches it for HP, and it's much cheaper to squeeze out even more power. Heck even the stock 2.7 beats the 5.0 at the drag strip. And if you go to high altitude, the turbos really shine. Ford has a both a NA V6 and V8 available, but most customers opt for the Ecos.

"Safety" regs are responsible for a bigger hit IMO. Lots of weight and complexity get added so that people can play with their cell phones and slam into solid objects at high speeds and survive. The reason for the over-long (and empty) nose on the Tundra and lack of tow hooks is mostly to absorb shock. The structure keeps getting heavier because it has to serve conflicting duties of stability and stiffness while driving, and controlled deformation at impact. Plus all else being equal the occupants of a heavy vehicle will fair better in a crash with those in a light one. Basic physics. So we have an "arms race" in which everyone needs a big vehicle to be safe... but this just puts us all on equal terms again! The lightweight bandaids like composite and aluminum parts just keep the weight from getting crazy.

And all those fucking nannies! I'd like to know precisely who the idiot was who decided that in the name of safety, your vehicle should just sit there (and wait for a tow truck, or spring thaw?!) if all your tires have poor traction. To move you need to spin the tires faster, not sit and wait. I wish there was an easy way to select just which nannies I want to work, and save this on the next startup.

The biggest losers are people who want a simple, reliable, inexpensive truck. But we can still buy low trim models for a good price that aren't too bad, we can get around most of this stuff and mod like crazy to our heart's content. Steel bumpers (with tow hooks!), big tires, better suspension, and a million other things. With the Tundra specifically the lack of a NA engine option puts me off, but we'll see how the TTV6 does long term...

 

Enthusiasts aren't just HP/TQ nuts. Power is not the end all be all. If it were then there'd be no enthusiasts caring about anything but electric. It's about choice, and customization, and those are sorely lacking in new vehicles. Want a V8? Too bad. Want manual transmission? Too bad. Don't want a moonroof, but do want anything else above base? Too bad. That's all bad for enthusiasts, and it's the norm for new vehicles.

 

While I wouldn’t say at this point that the 5.7V8 would last longer than the TTV6 or vice versa. However I think his point may have been that it is well known fact that a naturally aspirated engine will last longer in normal conditions than a turbo driven engine. My personal experience is in the marine industry where it is well documented. Time will only tell in the Tundra scenario.

 

Devil's advocate here: Do they consciously opt for it or do they walk on the lot and point at the red one with massaging seats and a 45" screen that also happens to have the EcoBoost because that's what Ford wants to build and ship to the dealers?

 

I hope it won't be but it looks like we are hitting a big recession we have few auto auctions out here and the amount of increase repossessions are filling up the lots. Looks like the first thing around here people stop paying is their car. This will actually hit EVs more than ICE due to the higher prices of EV. I actually expect cars like Honda Civics/Toyota Corollas to go up in sale due to affordability over EVs. My mother called me earlier today to let me know that her financial advisor said to brace and sell things now. Not good signs.

Yeah the prices are getting pretty bad kind of sad how I can build a LT or Custom 2500 Chevy (Maybe even 3500 SRW Gas too) for the same price as an SR5 Tundra or equivalent trims of Rival 1500 brands that I wanted to see price of as well with what I would buy. If this keeps continuing people who want a simple reliable inexpensive truck can get a gas 3/4 ton for less money than a 1500.

 

But they aren't really that simple are they? Don't all the 3/4 gassers use cylinder deactivation? That's a known extra thing that can result in issues far sooner. Like I said earlier, MPGs are being prioritized over reliability. The hilarious thing about the green movement is that it's all short term gains that get overtaken in the long term life of the vehicle. EGRs are a prime example. For the first 50k miles emissions are lower, but after that it's crudded up the valves and such to the point that the engine runs flat out dirty, burns more fuel, and over a 200K mile lifespan it will pollute more than the same engine without the EGR. Ethanol was just found to result in more carbon emissions than regular gasoline. DEF is an absolute joke as the production of the plastics, the packaging, shipping, and the fuel consumption during regens completely overshadows the "clean" burn.

Ideological shitwits are bringing the old saying "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" to fruition.

 

Only the Ram 2500 has cylinder deactivation. The Chevy 6.6 gas is a Cast iron block with none of that stuff and have N/A for City and Hwy mpg readouts on stickers and I was more referring to the Gas engines of the 2500 than diesels. The Chevy 6.6 and Ford 7.3 Gas engines don't have the mpg stuff in them they are just trucks that want to work by hauling and towing well a far as gas engines go. The diesels as mentioned before by @ColoradoTJ are something you don't really want to DD unless long distance commutes or if you tow a lot due to emission equipment on them. EDIT: Basically unlike the 1500 Gas trucks the HD Gas trucks seem to sliding under the radar due to not being heavily regulated as the diesels and not having the CAFE requirements of the 1500s. Ram added the 6.4 with Cylinder deactivation years before Ford and GM came out with the 6.6 or 7.3 gas engines and when Ford and GM did release those engines they didn't add any of that.

 

Tje Ford 7.3 does not have cylinder deactivation. It’s a fairly simple engine and works quite well. I’m not a big fan of Ford, but I do think they got that one right.

 

Ah, that's good info on the non cylinder deactivation. I didn't research super hard when truck shopping because HD trucks were way outside my price range.

 

Size, power, safety, creature comforts, ride, gizmos, styling, tow rating, and MPG are prioritized over reliability... because that's what new buyers want. They buy the extended warranty and sell before it's over.

You can get a F150 with a 3.3L V6 that gets the best MPG. It's probably the most reliable engine as well... but no one buys it.

 

I wish Toyota would take advantage of this with the HD segment and give us a Tundra HD with a V8 and payload over 2k lbs. They won’t of course, but it would be awesome and I’d buy one right away. I truly think they would be surprised at how many people would buy an HD tundra. I don’t think it would flop like the Titan XD but maybe I’m wrong. I’ve had multiple domestic HD owners tell me that if Toyota made an HD they would buy one, but since they don’t they’re forced to buy a domestic option due to the work they use the truck for.

 

I don't. I think all we will be left with is Mustangs and Camaros and cars that people want big burbling V8's in them that still make lots of power. And I don't think many trucks will go electric for a while since the range is a real problem for anyone who's not using their truck as a grocery getter.

I wouldnt. Even the fabled 22R/22RE in the Toyota trucks is worn out and tired by 200k miles and probably needs a rebuild. Sure you can limp it along but it probably drinks more oil than fuel. It just was less crappy than other engines at the time.

People werent casually hitting 200k miles back then like it was nothing, which I would say is pretty normal today short of a fluke or neglect of your car.

Cars are absolutely more reliable today. They still have issues, and those issue may be foreign and undiagnosible to some people, but I wouldnt say a 1990's F150 is more reliable than a current F150.

Yeah I guess. I think technology and the quest for MPG's have also resulted in engines that can produce lots of power as a byproduct. I don't think that is going to reverse course, and certainly not in trucks which will continue to need to tow and haul and do stuff requiring power.

 

I very consciously opted for a 2022 F-150 Platinum with the Powerboost to see what their entry to hybrid engines was going to be like. And it was a phenomenal truck and power plant. I would get 25-27 around the city with lots of all electric miles, and around 20 on the highway. Toyota really missed the mark with work trucks by consuming the entire area under the back seat with the nickel battery. I really wish they could have gone with lithium battery and stored in somewhere in the engine compartment or hidden elsewhere as it ruins the back seat utility for a duty truck. The I-force Max seems like a decent engine overall so far, but fuel economy and available electric driving miles are dismal at best. I hope to see this platform more refined in coming generations.

 

And the performance doesnt seem to be there. The 1/4 mile times I've seen for the Max are the same or slower than the regular engine. Its just not doing what it was supposed to.

The lack of generator, the lack of performance, and the minimal MPG gains make it me wonder where they were going with it.

 

I agree, I had actually forgot my Ford had the 7.2 kW onboard generator. So Toyota has made an entry into the hybrid arena, but it certainly isn't there yet, except in name.

 

And yet, Dodge is abandoning the V8 for electric in their performance cars. Ford is already testing the Mustang label on an EV, and the HP wars will force others into EV here as well. IMO The V8 will be the new V6 as far as muscle cars go.

Longevity and reliability are linked, but different. A car that's easy to work on may get to 200K-300K+ miles, but that doesn't mean it was reliable/problem free. Sure, you can keep paying the repair costs and keep most modern vehicles moving down the road, but some have much lower costs to own, and that is significant.

My statements were made more broadly about the auto industry in general. I think you are mostly correct regarding HD trucks being less affected as they are not the majority of sales and can get by the ridiculous "green" laws that go off of total vehicles sold by a manufacturer. 1/2 tons on the other hand do make up a significant chunk for one brand in particular, and thus they were the first to pursue "eco" engines as the mainstay while also rating them extremely high in payload and tow numbers by providing a single, extremely stripped down trim to get those numbers. You never see that basic truck in the towing commercials claiming the highest in class ratings, though. It's always a luxed out crew cab that can't approach the advertised numbers. Marketing is just lying as legally as possible, after all, and with them marketing that way the idiots buy it. This forces other manufacturers to play the same game in order to compete.

1/2 tons will get the same treatment as everything else in the auto industry, and that will force those who want a work truck out of the (formerly) budget friendly 1/2 ton market and right into the exorbitant cost of an HD. The diesels of the HD trucks are already getting regulated out of reliability, though. Regulation is the death of innovation.

 

The Powerboost they had on TFL was a King Ranch with 20" wheels. If it was less than 5900 lbs I would be surprised. Even XLT's are a bit over 5700 and a guy on the F150 forum had a 2021 Platinum and now a 2022 King Ranch and both were ~5950 lbs. I thought the TRD Pro was like 6200 lbs but the Toyota website says 6015.

It wasnt even close though. Tundra even gets a better launch and the PB just pulls away like nothing.

https://youtu.be/yWF0Ln7DG5w?t=968

 

thx it wasn't planned as far as the price appreciation.
Have owned it for years before they took off on price.
After going through most of the Z cars 240 - 260 - 280 then the 300zx turbo and then the first Infiniti g35 brembo 6mt coupe
I decided to sell the practically new G35 coupe and bought the 993 - my dream car.
have no intention of selling it.
My wife says its one of the few things left that puts a smile on my face. lol
maybe coincidence but I seem to be the owner of lasts
as I have a 2018 Tundra with a V8 (and it has a factory transmission cooler)

 

so they do say the Tundra is the heaviest and Ford was run on 4 auto.
if the Tundra was run in part time 4wd straight there would have been more drag.
But it was probably run in 2wd ?

 

Last of the V8s... RIP...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EK2ijfxqlnY

 

"you've seen it, you've heard it, and you are still asking questions ! "
visions of Toyota installed Supercharger go through his head......just for a moment.
hah hah

 

A 7000+ lb HD truck on 32-33" Load range E tires probably doesnt need the "MPG stuff" since its already so big, heavy, and difficult to move down the road. The amount of time it could spend running on 2 or 4 cylinders is probably minimal.

 

They are exempt from CAFE and don't even have MPG ratings.

 

Correct. Even if they werent, it would serve little purpose to have DoD. The bigger and heavier the vehicle, the less those things help.

Same reason an Ecoboost probably wouldnt do well in a superduty. It would be in boost the whole time just trying to move the truck never mind a trailer too. All the benefits of the small displacement turbo engine would evaporate.

 

But dammit, I want a 7.3L EcoBoost…..

OK, not really. Hold the Eco and give me BOOOOOOOOOOST!!!!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i09XYiXOfaI&ab_channel=HarropTV

 

HD trucks do not have to have absorbent costs, if your only reference is a top trim 3/4 truck with all the bells and whistles I can see how one might think that, You can spec HD trucks from all of the big 3 and get the capability under or around 50K. The. 1/2 ton market is actually the segment that is way way overpriced for what it delivers IMO.

 

The Ram 2500 with the 6.4 Hemi might surprise you with the fuel mileage. I had one in 2014 and my average was 15-16 around town and if I was frugal with the pedal I could see 18-19 or more on a highway trip. From what I read and hear, they are getting even better mileage now, I think the average is 16 or better. Which is pretty good for a truck with that much capability. Mine was a crew cab bighorn 4x4 sitting on 20 inch factory E rated tires, with, If I remember correctly 3-3200 lbs payload. It had the 4:10 rear end as well, and the mileage was still about the same as most of the guys with 5.7 Tundras.

 

You must be an outlier because Fuelly.com puts the 2500 6.4L at like 11.5-12 mpg, far worse than the 2nd gen Tundra which was already pretty bad by half ton standards.