2006 Toyota Tundra: 325 HP DOHC ! Can Nissan match?

[Armada]

No need to pull engines and use chassis dynos. It's rear wheel horsepower that really matters. Anything that gets lost between the crank and the wheels is just that -- lost -- wasted.

You can take our trucks and stack them up against the Hemi and the new 6.0 Chevy and see what is really going on. We can out accelerate those 345 horse engines. And there are very good, reliable conversion charts for converting rear wheel horsepower to crank power by estimating drive line loss.

No matter how you slice it, if we can compete against the Hemi trucks of equal weight and the 6L GM of equal weight and beat them, then that tells me what I need to know about being afraid of a 325 hp Toyota.

BTW, it is well established that the QX56 "315 hp" engine and our "305 hp" engines are exactly the same. Put premium in yours, let the ECU adjust and you will get 10 more horses.

So, Toyota can put whatever number on their engine they want. The proof will be not on chassis dynos, but at the rear wheels and on the strip. I think we'll do just fine without having to change a thing.

And if someone does really up the power so that they are smoking us on the strip, then Nissan can easily give us the variable valve timing already present in the 4.5L passenger engine. The technology is already there. The parts may even work.

I say, Toyota, bring it on. If it doesn't have substantially more than 270 horses AT THE REAR WHEELS, then it is not going to be anything to worry about.

Just one opinion.

[DallasTitan]

Originally Posted by devilpuppy

What would the MSRP for this new truck be?

When the 2006 Tundra prices are set, just add about 5%. The only problem here is that option packages are going to be different so that'll complicate pricing a bit.

[92TripleBlack]

Originally Posted by SupraTitan

A single turbo MKIV Toyota Supra is most definately a super car. Stock, I agree it isn't. The stock engine internals are beyond and above super car status, factory short block record is 952 RWHP LOL, thats stock crank, rods and pistons. Also Toyota still races and sells the MKIV supra in Japan. For 15-25K you can get a MKIV supra, install a downpipe, catback and boost controller and say hello to a viper eating 400-450RWHP with factory stock reliability. About $1k in mods nets 100-150 rwhp. A big single or HKS twins on a MKIV makes it just about unbeatable on the freeway. "Super cars" look like chevettes in comparison, beating a big displacement crotch rockets in the top end is actually rather easy. If you don't think the MKIV supra is a super car, your ignorant about cars PERIOD! I just wish my old MKIII supra went like a MKIV. I have way to much fun riding gun/ running camera in my buddies BPU++ MKIV. On the freewyay viper R/t's, Z06's, Mustang Cobra's and today's imports are zero match for a lightly modded supra, multiple busses 70-180mph. The supra is similer to the Titan in that superior engineering gives it the edge, near perfect gear ratio's and an engine that is that just makes you go hmmmm. Somebody show me evidence of another stock short block engine that can spin the dyno to 952rwhp, maybe the RB26DETT powered Nissan Skyline GT-R, thats about it. Guess the Skyline GT-R isn't a "super car either hehe.

Yeah, but you're putting stock cars against modified or limited production. Put a $5000 supercharger on a C5 vette and you would easily give a MKIV supra moded a run. This yields 11s in the quarter and 644 rwhp and 609 rwtq. A fair comparison to the Skyline would be the Lingenfelter TwinTurbo Corvette, which would crush it. 1100 HP, 950 tq, 0-60 in under 2 seconds, quarter in the 8s on a street legal car with a 2 year 24K warranty for under $70k.

In fact, a C6 would as it only goes 0-60 in 4.7 seconds. New vette pulls over 1G, and goes 0-60 in 4.1. The $65k '06 Z06, which is cheaper than the Skyline was years ago, is 3.7 and does the quarter in the 11s stock.

Don't get me wrong, the Supra was great, but...they don't make them any more and are no more easy or cheap to modify than any of the other "super car" contemporiaries of the day: C5 Vette, 3000GT, 300ZTT, RX7TT.

http://www.moreperformanceinc.com/cu...vette_c5_1.php
http://www.procharger.com/c5_press_release.shtml
http://www.jbskyline.net/R32/GTR/index3.php
http://www.lingenfelter.com/document...7TT_eprint.pdf

[skytop]

You're referring to essentially the same thing. Dynamometers measure power at the output location of the vehicle; the wheels. As measured, power will be highest at the flywheel, somewhat lower at the transmission, and still lower at the wheels. But as we all know, true rear wheel horsepower is what it is all about and all that really matters. That is the golden standard that is the basis for comparison. Whether more or less engine power, it is always accurately measureable at the wheels.

Crankshaft horsepower versus rear wheel horsepower is really the question you ask. First a quick explanation.

There are numerous different types of Dynos. Some dynos measure changes in water, oil, eddy-current brake or by a generator. The type I have always seen and used is an inertia-type chassis dyno. This type uses two large and heavy steel drums hooked accurately monitored by a computer. The wheels of a vehicle spin the dyno drums, and the computer measures the speed x time. As the vehicle accelerates under power, the computer calculates the acceleration of the dyno drums by speed over time. The dyno measures acceleration and time since that yields the holy grail: force. In engine and vehicle development, force really means torque.

Once you have the torque (force) measurement, it is an easy to calculate the horsepower with a standard formula of Hp = Torque * rpm / 5252. What you are really doing in the formula is relating Torque to speed and time and you can derive horsepower.

Now comes the question of how accurate is a chassis dyno in yeilding real crankshaft horsepower? Clearly there are factors such as tires and their profile, transmission and differential frictional losses, the efficiency of the dyno itself, and even the frictional losses inherent in the engine itself. Where do you stop? The short answer is that the Society of Automotive Engineers has determined a correction factor. This correction formula is modified by air temperature and barometiric pressure (altitute) present during testing. This correction factor is designed to reasonably reflect the loss of power from the crankshaft to the rear wheels. Different dyno companies apply varying adjustments to yield alleged engine power. However, one may go one step further to find the specific frictional losses of the test vehicle setup. This is accomplished by first testing the vehicle under power and then testing the vehicle with a known power source (electric motor) so frictional losses can be determined. As I mentioned earlier, the SAE has figured this factor to be about 15%.
Sure it sounds great to quote an impressive HP number but when all is said and done, it is rear wheel horsepower that is consistantly measurable and most important to the driver. Engine development facilities obviously will measure power output directly at the flywheel but for the purposes of this post, I am referring to real world end users like us.

[GO_VOLS!]

Ok, but my point is, as you said, all the car companies brag about their HP ratings. Our 305 HP is at the fly wheel, not the wheels. As the Dodge guys brag about their 345, I doubt anyone is going to be bragging about our ~275 HP at the wheels. I'd like to know the actual engine output, so I can say, "I have 325 HP in my Titan!".

[skytop]

Fill up the entire tank with premium and you can honestly say you have 325HP. Congrats!

[GO_VOLS!]

I wonder if this truck will be driven by electric motors or if it'll still have the drive shaft, rear diff, etc. It would be cool to have a completely electric drivetrain, like a locomotive. No gears and GOBS of torque.

[skytop]

Like a locomotive? Gears? Rods, Pistons? Lots of smoke?
Here ya go!

[GO_VOLS!]

Originally Posted by skytop

Like a locomotive? Gears? Rods, Pistons? Lots of smoke?
Here ya go!

Now that's definetely a special edition! It would be better if it had tracks on it like a tank though.

[racerx-s13]

When I looked at that I think I maybe threw up a little bit. Ya, I did, it made me puke just a bit.

[skytop]

Power does that to people, sometimes.

[TruckinTitan]

Originally Posted by consideringtitan

I heard with the new Hybrid Tundra we could be seeing 30 mpg with it. Not too shabby. If gas keeps going up I might have to consider that or a Hybrid Escape. Gas here today was $1.90 and I have a HEMI for the meantine. 3.184 gallons for $6.00

Jeez! I just read this from the beginning of this thread and thought wow we were complaining then!!! LOL If only we could see the days of $1.90 a gallon again... Wonder if he did get that Hybrid Escape. It's probably just as fast as his HEMI... J/K

[Blackbeauty]

^^^^^^WTF?!?!?!?!^^^^^^


Nice job Mods!

[rrtitan]

The bottom line is that truck is a street truck. No one is going to buy that truck and risk getting it dinged and scratched if they need a work truck.

That being said, it is a nice truck and it will sell. If it is truly hybrid and not like the GMC which just had an electric power supply, then it will really be a great seller. Hope the price is right though. You know Toyota, they are proud of their vehicles.

[FLfinfan]

if your a troll :