mmarshall

You can at least partly blame the proliferation of huge vehicles on the Instructors of the Defensive-Driving and Over-55/Senior driving courses that many people take to get lower insurance-premiums. They have, for years, in addition to the other well-known defensive-driving tips, emphasized one basic law of physics.....that, all else equal, more vehicle size/weight and metal around you means more potential protection in a crash, where the smaller, lighter vehicle often ends up in second place. That is also one of the reasons that seniors tend to drive large vehicles....including large sedans, but, of course, an additional factor with large sedans is ride comfort.

Och

iTrader: (3)

Trust me, I run a construction business, and pick up trucks are utterly useless when you're actually doing work. They are only useful for towing and landscaping, and maybe if you're offroading a lot. I once had a Dodge Ram pick up, and it proved useless very quickly.




Instead of regulation, we get this CAFE loophole for "light trucks", which was probably intentional, so they can avoid gas guzzler tax, CAFE standards for fuel economy and emissions, crash rating, etc. We were supposed to get more efficient vehicles, and instead everyone is driving an SUV or one of these monstrosities.

Toys4RJill

I 100% agree. If anyone is in any sort of commercial business, a large Ford Econoline, or large Ford Transit will be far superior than a truck. A Dodge Sprinter or MB sprinter as well. In the 70s and 80s, my husband and I (more his project) owned a theater exhibition film projection repair/maintenance company, at the time he had a Ford van. That van had to travel all through upper New York state and southern Ontario carrying supplies and repair/maintenance equipment for film projectors. It had a lower step in so you could inside. It was secure 24/7 as long as you locked the doors. Weather proof. I distinctly remember all the equipment in the back.

The new vans can tow as well.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

A CDL is required for a gross vehicle weight rating of 26001# or more in Texas. These trucks dont weigh anywhere near that even with a full payload

because you live in congested NY of course a truck is useless there. They are more efficient, 10 years ago trucks used to have horrid mpg, my Ram can do 20-21 hwy. Some of the 6.2 V8 GMs can do 23 hwy

gas guzzler only applies to vehicles whose combined mpg is 16 or less. Mainstream trucks exceed 16 combined

mbarron37

Much better than Tundra, Sequoia, LC and LX. Need replacement for the tried and true 5.7. Time to move forward.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

those trucks still have 6 speeds too, the big 3 have moved onto new 8 and 10 speeds

JDR76

I thought the Land Cruiser and LX were 8 speeds.

Toys4RJill

When you start getting into 4WD trucks, all the American brand V8s do not exceed 17mpg combined. A Toyota Tundra V8 4WD is 15mpg combined. Further, Dodge 5.7 V8 Hemi 4WD models are rated by EPA using midgrade fuel, Tundra uses regular fuel. The annual costs for a RAM are $2700 using midgrade while the annual costs of a Tundra V8 4WD are $2650 using regular.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find...39941&id=40542

EPA rated on premium fuel. So the annual costs are $2950 for the 6.2 GM trucks.

Toys4RJill

If you look at the cost to fuel, a Land Cruiser V8 costs less per year than a Cadillac Escalade V8. From US EPA

mbarron37

Doesn’t matter. This is 2019 and you can’t have four models with a 5.7 getting 15-17 mpg. Needs to be low/mid 20’s and preferably high 20’s to 30. Whatever they decide on for an engine will probably be around for the next decade plus, so it better be much more efficient. I love the 5.7, but not the mileage it gets.

Toys4RJill

So it costs the Tundra owner less $$$ to go the exact same distance as the Ram owner. But does matter? What eves.

FrankReynoldsCPA

Gonna have to keep disagreeing here. I grew up installing cabinets. Truck worked great for that. Especially on new builds where you were often driving through dirt and mud and often needed 4x4 to get to the job site.

I think NYC is a very VERY different setting to the rest of the country.

mbarron37

1-2 mpg max if using premium. 5.7 is past its prime. What don’t you understand? Toyota needs a new motor or combo that can achieve substantially higher mpg now and for the next decade. What’s not to comprehend?

Toys4RJill

Wow. Pretty nasty response. Have a good night 👍

mbarron37

You are the instigator in this thread and most threads. For some reason you enjoy arguing for no apparent reason. Mind boggling.

All i I said was the 5.7 is a dog well past it’s prime. There should be zero argument on that. The next motor that presumably will make it into the Tundra, Sequoia (if not axed), the LC and LX better achieve substantially better mpg. Again, what is the argument? If someone puts 93 octane in the Tundra the best one can hope if for 1-2 mpg gain. Not good for 2019 and beyond...........

Good evening to you as well. 🙏