Hemi lol,

Thanks for proving my point.

Anybody can Google iForce V8 and AB60 transmission and copy and paste what you just posted. But just because you finally posted some facts doesn't mean that the rest of your posts aren't total B.S.

If you can tell me why the DOHC 5.7 liter iForce V8 with 32 valves, Dual VVT-i, and a longer stroke has lower torque numbers (at EVERY RPM) then a OHV 5.7 liter Hemi V8 with 16 valves, VCT and a shorter stroke, I might start taking you more seriously. But until then, IMO you are no better then Hemi V8 and his other names; when you post facts, it is copy and pasted, and the rest of your opinions are illusions.

Hasn't it already been stated that base V6 will be the venerable 4.3 but completely re deigned with VVt ?

Hey guys,
1. The reason why most of the V6's have a lower towing capacity is due to the transmissions. Transmissions are rated for the amount of torque they can handle, not HP. If you install a heavy transmission behind a V6 with the correct gearing it will move as much as a V8. Not as quickly. Base model pickups will not have a "heavy" gearbox.

2. Oversquare engines (primarily gasoline fuelled) will develop more horsepower. Diesels are undersquare and here is why.

Diesel combusts at a slower speed, hence to extract the most energy from the combustion process a longer stroke is used, this also provides superior torque to a gasoline engine as the longer stroke applies more leverage to the crank for a longer period.

A gasoline engine's combustions process is more violent and quicker, hence the energy from the combustion process is quicker and there's a limit to the length of stroke, once that length of stroke is exceeded inefficiencies become apparent.

If a longer stroke is used on a gasoline engine then you will want to "slow' down the combustion process, this could be deemed inefficient and increase fuel use (like "old fashion" gasoline engines).

The trend in gas engine characteristics of increasing power much quicker than torque has been around for a long time. The problem now is gasoline engines are about at the limit technological advancement.

Hope the interiors have been re-designed with the truck buyer in mind this time...instead of the car buyer.

Even though they are 1/2 tons I hope the suspension has been beefed up so they are not so squirmy on the road.

Make it more truck like and not hideous lines.

all I've learned from this article is the time of the reveal and they have added front grill model badging. The tease pic is an LTZ.
It's Christmas Eve for GM fans.
Not so much for the Grinch's but I'm betting they are antisipating great joy in ripping GM a new one... AGAIN!

hemi lol is having a harder and harder time bashing everyone but toyota. He's starting to look like the toyota version of BOB or HEMI V8. You can slice it and dice it all you want. You can say a "ford won't last more than 100,000 miles" or other ridiculous things(i've never had one that died with less than 200,000 and I've had four with over 250,000 on the original engine). My point is you are starting to look like a fool. Just accept the fact that chevy, ford, and dodge make some great trucks that the vast majority of people agree are better than your precious toyota.

After looking at the pictures, they look about like the same truck to me. Like whofan, I haven't liked the Silverado since 2003 either. And like Lou, the bed bulges on this current Silverado looked just horrible. It's like they tried to seperate the two trucks but the Chevy really got left with the ugly stick beating this last time. So maybe it's a good thing they just went back to looking more the same again so Chevy can be more competitive against Dodge, Ford etc. I disagree with the article though, I don't see why Dodge, Ford, Toyota, Nissan etc would want to have the problem of two trucks. If they did, they would start sticking badges on their trucks with some different names. Maybe change up some metal stampings. Judging by sales, they seem to do better in most cases with their one truck than GM does with two trucks. I think having two trucks dilutes brand value.

I have looked at both pictures, and have noticed something no one has noticed, the Chevy has dual exaust! that is someting Chevy has not had in a while, granted just because they come,out under the bumper does not mean there is true dual exaust, but there it is, that and the back-up lights are bigger on one than the other> Oh and hemilol: trq is what moves you, h/p is how fast it can go, and that also means when loaded or towing! and the 4.0 toyota engine has the les h/p that all the rest of the engines you listed, and has 1/2L more than one and .3L more than the other, in metric terms is does not seam like much, but in c/i it is 30cid in one and 18cid the other, and 24cid in the last one, and in % of displacement it seems like even more! so your great stupendous, amazing, none-better 4.0 is NOT better than any of them! and the engine while it might run longer, the toyotas I see on the road running a long time sure look funny with their home made flat beds! because of all the rust! at that seems to be a trucks that arenot even 8yrs old! and some of the late model tacomas and tundras I have seen have rusty bumpers, and beds along with tailgates that have rust or are bent up!. There is no question toyota makes a fine trucks, but they are not the end all, as a matter of fact, even Ram outsells BOTH tacomas and tundras, why? I think the hundreds of thousands of folks that spend their hard earned $$$$ know why, but some of you have to be different.

sandman4X4,
Good catch on dual exaust! I wonder what this will lead to?

@ doug

you are delusional. the hemi 5.7 doesnt make more torque than the iforce 5.7 at every rpm. Matter of fact the hemi only makes more torque right at its peak than the 5.7 iforce. the Hemi is a piss poor design that uses overly large 2 valve setup and now has to use 2 spark plugs just to meet epa smog requirements lol.

http://www.toyota.com/tundra/ebrochure.html go here and download the brochure which shows you the torque curve on a sheet. i CANNOT FIND one for a stock Hemi 5.7..... wonder why.

the hemi engine is lacking majorly in many design areas. its interesting to me that you pick a cheaply built pushrod engine to pit against the DOHC 5.7 that Toyota builds. Why would ANYONE want an engine that you have to replace 16 spark plugs every 40k miles? An engine so antiquated that it must use cylinder deactivation to get the same type of fuel economy as an engine that never shuts off a cylinder? (theres obviously more to that story, trans, gearing ect.). so starting with the block the 5.7 iforce has 6 bolt mains a large reservoir in the valley pan area where several quarts of antifreeze run through to help everything get to and stay at the desired temps. a oil/antifreeze heat exchanger that helps get the two fluids to operating temp an keep them there, and the cooled oil flows down spray lines that spray the cooled oil on every cam journal, not to oil it but just to cool the contact friction point. the engine has a variable intake that has long/short runners. the intake tubes on the long runner path decrease in size to increase air velocity which helps promote low end toque and when the 8 baffles open at higher RPM the air volume potential doubles. the engine is also THE ONLY one built with a factory built Stainless steel 4 into 2 into 1 tube header STANDARD. the hemi still has a POS cast iron manifold. cheap and power robbing. There is also a spray head that sprays cooled oil onto the bottom of each piston as it drops to BDC and the pistons have little cups in the bottom to pick up that cooled oil to control piston temp. It also has this expensive but neat idea about using 2 cams on either side with 4 valves per cylinder which happens to increase volumetric efficiency and then only needs 1 spark plug (Toyota uses irridium so they need only be replaced once every 120k) so you dont cause uneeded waste and maintenance cost. I already mentioned the fact that the intake cam can advance or retard 30 degrees and the exhaust cam can advance or retard 15 degrees and i want YOU to provide just ONE single link that can show that information let alone show that copy and pasted it. I can keep typing but i have things to do other than type back to some fool who seems to think that i'm some kid who doesnt know what he is talking about. i believe i have proved my point because I AM CERTAIN you cannot google all of what i just told you. THanks for proving MY point

Perfect example of a thread that gets high jacked by another topic. Talk about the Silverado! Is the new V6 a 4.3 VVT?

so is gm doing what ford did, give it a refresh n call it new?

They're doing more than what Ram did and Ram called it "all new." Ford has done more over the years than just a refresh.

@hemi lol
I think your missing the point you keep talking about toyotas engines but are ignoring the rest of the truck. people buy their vehicles on a complete pakage of what it offers not just the engine, which can be argued is not the best, as it is the only one with 4.30 rear end, Ford comes in at 4.10 on the raptor and optional on ecoboost fx4 with max trailer tow and 20' wheels. so how much is that 4.30 ratio helping your iforce. The fact is most people in the half ton market tow ocasionaly and use the vehicle for comuting, My f150 goes off road and hauls things in the bed but has never towed a trailer. Ford offered the features i wanted a a fair price, i had no desire to get the 6.2 , i dont care if a iforce or hemi beats my 5.4l Raptor at trafic lights, if i wanted to drag race i would not have bought a truck with 35" tires. Think about it this way even with the 5.4l which many people will say sucked ford still out sold the other brands. By your argument people should have swithed to tundra in droves b/c the iforce came out in 2007 when the 5.4l only had a 4 speed trans. Or it would have out sold the GM 5.3l. the fact is it hasent because
1. the Tundra is a pig in the milage department, if your towing occasionaly you dont need that big v8 for your daily driver, infact i know several tundra owners that rarly drive them to work, one even regrets buying it b/c the MPGs are so bad.
2. Rust problembs lots of the toyotas have been haveing rust problems.
3. lach of substanital off road pkgs the tundra is in last place for half ton off road pakages, Ram has the aguatable air suspension to increrase clearnce, GM has z71 with a locker, and skid plates, diffrent shocks, nissan has the Pro 4x with elocker, Ford has put elockers as optional with all motors execpt the 3.7 including 2wd models, addtionaly Raptor, Fx4, and xlt, Lariat, and King Ranch with off road pakages have things like hill decent control, they might not be as fast as the tundra, but they meet peoples needs better thats why they out sell toyota. you can get the 5.0 on all but 2 trucks in the f150 line (raptor and limited) and the ecoboost in all but two (Raptor and stx) people like that with Fords you have alot more configurations to choose from than toyota. that is why they are the sales leader.

As a one-ton diesel truck (Ram) owner I think the torque and hp numbers have reached the point that more is not necessarily a selling point to me. The current level is plenty in this market segment (3/4 and 1 ton). Now I'm looking at the rest of the truck as the purchase decision point. Engine features other than power are still a factor, like the need for DEF (in 2013 it appears they all require DEF), oil change intervals, etc. But exterior and interior as well as ride and driveability factors are what I'm looking most at these days.

so is gm doing what ford did, give it a refresh n call it new?

Posted by: uh huh | Dec 12, 2012 10:44:53 AM

This is supposed to be a total redesign, unlike what Ford typically does. They like to give it a new grille and dash then call it an all-new model.

@s you put it better than i could your spot on.

Hemi lol,

The fact that you have never dyno'd the engines proves that you shouldn't be posting about the subject. I have put both engines on a dyno and the hemi's torque curve was superior at EVERY RPM. Let me reiterate, I dyno'd the engines, not the trucks; the tundra puts more power to the ground then the six speed ram (I'm sure the 8 speed ram will put more power to the ground then the tundra) At one point Ford's website had an overlapping dyno chart showing the torque curves of all of the EB's competitors, it also backed my results.

I purposely chose the low tech ohv hemi to compare to the "high tech" DOHC iForce, to show you that over complication does not make the better engine. The more moving parts something has, the more unreliable it is, I believe this is true when looking at these two engines as well.

Btw it looks very desperate when you are trying to bring down the hemi because of its sparkplugs.

This will be an all new model but it will be more like a major refresh. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

Ford is the truck leader. What Ford usually does is set the standard. The GM is rumored to meet the standard, not necessrily exceed it. GM usually needs "total" redesigns because they didn't get the design of something right the first time, for instance the bulging fenders and square wheel wells, interiors, etc. Instead of focusing on all new vs refresh, ask if it meets or exceeds the standard.

hemi lol,

The premise your stating, an engine with more torque than horse power is better.

Follow me here. Horsepower is derived (calculated) from torque. It's basically torque over time. Increases in horsepower indicate there's torque available over a greater amount of time (RPM).

All other factors being equal, pick the better performing engine A or B:

A. 381HP / 401TQ
B. 405HP / 401TQ

@ Sandman, I think where you noticed the dual exhaust, the pic was mirrored or somthing, look at the pic from the back, its a single pipe on the same side as the GMC's. I saw that too when I looked and wondered....but alas.

@Lou, I agree with you on the Silverado bed. A few others too on the Silverado as a whole. It seems like once GM made a decision to seperate the 2 trucks design wise, the Chevy really took a hit. They were both really attractive trucks all the way through 2002 but then the Chevy took a nosedive and never recovered while the GMC still stayed attractive. I can't imagine how this must have hindered Silverado sales at the Chevy dealers. Hopefully this will be the truck that sets Chevy back on the right design track. GM would have been better off keeping both trucks looking the same and attractive. It worked for decades.

The interiors won't save them. Those square wheelwells need to take a dirt nap. The inside of the truck won't matter much if the outside still looks bad. In the pic above it looks like they took the current truck and just cleaned up the bulges on the sides. It's better but not enough.

Ford is the truck leader. What Ford usually does is set the standard. The GM is rumored to meet the standard, not necessrily exceed it. GM usually needs "total" redesigns because they didn't get the design of something right the first time, for instance the bulging fenders and square wheel wells, interiors, etc. Instead of focusing on all new vs refresh, ask if it meets or exceeds the standard.

@Don, Yep. Agree with all the above. Ford leads, Chevy follows. It didn't used to be that way but it sure has been the last 10-15 years. Maybe Chevy needs to follow a little more closely this time and get some of their sales back. It's worked for Dodge. I'd like to see Chevy with their own Super Duty. Make it with high center frame rails and a straight axle out front like Ford does them. They need to ditch the low slung frame-torsion bar set up on the HD's. Then maybe get after a Raptor fighter too. I think Chevy would do good again if they'd just fix the obvious stuff nearly everyone has griped about for years. Building a truck isn't rocket science.

tundra what a joke: I knew someone would say that, so go back and look very carfully at the pictures, if one was a reflection, the words on the tires (goodyear) would be backwards, because that is what I thought also, but alas, the names on the tires in both pics were not reversed as they would be in a reflection, or negative turned over, both pictures show the same truck from different sides.

tundra what a joke: actualy in the 1st pic, it shows the driver on the correct side, with a tailpipe on the same side as the driver, and in the second pic you could make out the lic plate, and the #'s of the test truck on the rear window, so yes there is dual exhaust coming out from under the bumper! There is no reflection, or negative turned upside down! or in the digital world of pic. a reflection!

TWAJ: with the same reasoning you can tell the GMC has only one exhaust!

tundra what a joke: I think I may be mistakin after all, after looking at the pic more than I should? I have over looked one thing! in the 1st pic, 1) it might not be the driver with a thumbs up, but 2) there is no GAS CAP in that pic. and the gas cap is on that side of the truck! ooops sorry! my mind sees what is want to see;(

the side veiw is a reflection for the silvarado, if you notice on the rear shot there is one tail pipe per truck. addtionaly in the side veiw you can see that the driverside does not have a grab handle but there is one on the side of the chevy closest to the camera. Addtionaly you can tell that the silvarado is traveling down a divided highway there is a car going in the opisite direction behind it so unless the pic is a spie shot from a right hand drive country its a reflection

I'd guess the last GM leapfrog event was the new 6.6L duramax and that was like lightning striking the same place twice. I doubt GM has any big surprises coming.

not to troll, or start an arguement, but the hemi is one cubic inch less than an i-force, 2 valves per cylinder less, has the same redline (5800 rpm), and pretty much the same horsepower and torque except the hemi puts out 14 more horsepower and 6 more lb-ft of torque. the hemi is also iron block, while the i-force is all aluminum. the hemi also gets better fuel mileage. so what is my point? the hemi in every way should be not as good as the i-force, but it is the better deal for several reasons. futhermore, if you want a truck motor to be differentiated, wouldn't you want an iron block? and something else, just because a motor has 407 lb-ft of torque at 3950 rpm, do you really think it has no power until that point? regardless of if it has more horsepower or torque, how much torque is it making at 2000 rpm, 3000 rpm? the hemi never gets under 300 lb-ft of torque throughout its rpm range. so it only has to produce a 1/4 of its power throughout the rpm range. torque that is. torque is relative to engine size and is the physical strength of a motor, while the horsepower is relative to the engines vaccum effect, the technology, design, efficency and flow of the motor. you can have a giant big block with only 250 horsepower. and you can have a micro motor with 1000 horsepower. sometimes you can have less power, but more usable power throughout the rpm range, like gm performance's high torque big block crate motors. they actually have less torque than the high output motors but have more torque at 2000 rpm or less and about the same throughout the rest. its about constant and consistant torque throughout the entire rpm range. but back to the hemi, yes there are fools that over talk the hemi, but it still derserves some respect, no trolling intended. i own a hemi, but my favorite motors are, the hemi, the i-force, the coyote (ford 5.0). the 6.2 ford and chevy are both too exclusive and not lean enough to me. the ecoboost is too lean, meaning it has good tech but not what i am in to (small v6s). i actually like the endurance 5.6 but it doesn't have a limited slip to handle its power, and the rear ends look too small to give me confidence, dakotas had 9.25 rear ends.

@ doug

I'm SURE if you had an i-force and a hemi on an engine dyno i'm CERTAIN you would have pictures so post them.............. Your full of it and you know it.

BTW i LOVE your argument about more moving parts! LOL an OHV has a 1. cam rotating to a 2. lifter seated on a 3. pushrod which is seated against the 4. rocker arm which pivots and pushes the 5. valve open. so 5 moving parts. A DOHC has a 1. cam that rotates against a 2. valve. Doug your so smart tell me how 5 moving parts are better than 2? also, the i-force is FAR FAR more reliable than the hemi. good luck arguing that one.

Clearly, from the spy photos, frame/suspension on the 1500 4x4 is hardly changed...this will be more like GMT-900 version 2. That certainly saves GM a lot of money.

Body:
Less overhang off the front, higher roofline, better looks, better interior, and much improved engines should make these more desirable vehicles.

I think GM has maybe taken a too conservative strategy.

Tomorrow will tell.

- The Prophet.

Clearly, from spy photos, the chassis/suspension of the 4x4 1500 has hardly changed. These will be more like GMT-900 v2. That certainly saves GM a lot of money.

Body:
Less overhang off the front, higher roofline, better looks, better interior, much improved engines should make these more desirable trucks.

I think that maybe GM has taken too conservative an approach.

Tomorrow will tell.

- The Prophet

Hemi lol,

That fact that you think a DOUBLE Over Head Cam has One cam, proves you know nothing (if it had one cam it would be a SINGLE Over Head Cam SOHC), and you copy and paste most of your intelligent responses; just like Hemi V8.

Every post you have posted hurts you more and more, some people thought you had credibility when this thread started, now look at it, everyone is calling you out for your BS.

BTW the charts were on a monitor at work, and I don't take pics of every engine dyno'd, sorry.

But I'm out, not going to try convince a person otherwise, when he is trying to argue FACTS.

" A DOHC has a 1. cam that rotates against a 2. valve."

WTF! It has 2 cams and 4 valves.

Good one Shaggy!

hemilol: how come then if the i-Force 5.7 is so much better than the Hemi 5.7 does the Ram sell 280% MORE trucks than tundras? why? I mean you say the i-Force 5.7 is stupendous, great, amaizing,the best, fabulous and all that, does Ram sell so many more? like to the tune of 263,156 Rams, to 91,367 tundras! why? can all those people be wrong? can they be that stupid? can they be that ilinformed? come on I need an answer! if there is a hemi in 1/2 the Rams and an I-Force in 1/2 the tundras that means that there are 280% MORE hemi's! how can that be? and not to mention Ford! or Chevy! I mean that means the domestics sell what, 18X as many ehgines the same size, why?

@ carilloskis

First of all its ashame that i even have to typ all this stuff. it makes me look less than normal because i'm constantly defending attacks from other people.

Really the 4.30 arguement against the ford 4.10 and you think the Tundra has an advantage? Ford's 1st gear 4.18;1 and the tundra is 3.33;1 now who would have the advantage? and yet the tundra STILL puts more power to the ground.

The Tundra is a pig in the mileage catagory?? really its funny that consumer reports shows it being tied with the ecoboost at an average of 15 overall in their tests. OH and those are the two highest! lol

Rust problems? the only reason why you hear of them is because Toyota is FIXING them. i just yesterday had a 2002 ranger that had a bed of swiss cheese, cab corner rusted and the frame perforated and guess what............. the guy is stuck with it! Ford WONT stand behind it so nothing gets done. Meanwhile another customer has a 98 tacoma with a frame (built by the same manufacturer that built the ranger frame) has his truck bought back from Toyota with 171k miles for $13,500! thanks i'll take the Toyota EVERYDAY because they STAND BEHIND THEIR PRODUCT UNLIKE THE OTHERS.

and finally how is Toyota behind in off road packages? The approach angle on a STOCK Tundra is the same as a Raptor and the Tundra has a better departure angle. True the Raptor has a locker in front and rear but a stock Tundra isnt supposed to compete with that. the FX4 doesnt nor the Z-71 or Pro X or any of the other trucks on the front and they have a much worse running ground clearance worse approach, departure, and breakover angle than a Tundra. The TRD Off Road Package has Bilstein Shocks tires and extra skid plates and NO JUNK HANGIN UNDER THE FRAME unlike some others. The TRD Rock Warrior package has the same Tire the raptor has in just a bit smaller size and Bilsteins that are also Off Road Tuned and the Auto LSD on the rear of the tundra is the next best thing to a locker and really works under much better control than the GM G80 locker. the G80 has to have 2500 rpm more on one side of the axle before it locks and you lose control of the truck. The other thing the Tundra has THAT NO OTHER TRUCK HAS is an Auto LSD on the FRONT AXLE STANDARD FEATURE. so your best traction tire on the front is pulling you while the other is a pivot wheel to steer around.. In alot of cases that would be BETTER than a locker on the front axle. OH, did i mention that the Auto LSD and A-TRAC (auto lsd on the front axle) IS A STANDARD FEATURE ON EVERY 4X4 Tundra WITH NO UP CHARGE.

@ doug, sandman, and frank

I REALLY DIDNT THINK THAT I NEEDED TO POINT THE OBVIOUS OUT THAT A DOHC HAS 4 CAMS, ARE YOU REALLY DAM STUPID? I WAS NUMBERING THE MOVING PARTS RELATED TO EACH VALVES MOTION!

DOUG specifically you have posted ZERO fact about anything. Your words are no different than mine. Your monitor in your playland is where you saw these two engines on a dyno together and you are the one with no credibilty.

FRANK you know better than to say i dont how many cams are in an engine after all the debates we've had. Notice the period after the number 1 and the number 2 labeling the parts..... geeze your reachin

SANDMAN really dude 280% more rams? your adding 1500,2500,3500,4500, and 5500 together against the Tundra which is ONE FN HALF TON!! add total Rams at 263,156 Vs. Toyota's truck sales at 218,702 now the number isnt so different. that 120% and that gap has closed considerably from the past and that all new ram is out there now so it should be increasing against a 6 year old Tundra platform and a 8 year old tacoma platform right? We'll see in a few more years as people realize how good the Tundra is those numbers will change more and more. Tundra has been named most dependable FULL SIZE truck the last 7 years in a row. you say numbers dont lie, well theres one for you to chew on. Selling more doesnt mean a thing, its an age old argument. Mcdonalds isnt the best cheeseburger out there by a LONG SHOT but it sells the most by a long shot.

NOW CAN WE PLEASE GET BACK ON TOPIC!

I for one hope that GM comes out with something really special because it pushes the competition farther.

@hemi lol
When i compare trucks on toyotas web site
Toyota Tundra
4x4 CrewMax Limited (FFV 5.7L V8)
2013 CHEVROLET SILVERADO 1500 CREW CAB 4WD
LTZ Short Box (5.3L V8 6A)
2013 FORD F-150 SUPERCREW 4X4
145-in. WB Lariat Styleside (5.0L V8 6A)
2012 RAM 1500 CREW CAB 4X4
LARAMIE SWB (5.7L V8 6A)

I see that the Ford 5.0 is 87% of the size of the Iforce produces 94% of the power at 100rmp less and 94.7% of the torque at 650 RPM more. and accives better gas milage the toyota cost more than the comparbly equiped ford.

Both Ford and toyota have 32 valves thats 4 per cylinderand Dual over head cams (DOHC) means 2 cams per bank of cylinders not the one that you stated earlier for a total of 4 cams. each can is connected to 2 valves per cylinder on the iforce and coyote

Yeah, cause we all know that manufacturers never post BS ratings... .

@ carilloskis

what exactly are you mumbling about? achieves better gas mileage at its standard option package with 3.31 or 3.55 gears. The Ford is HIGHER priced if you compare apples to apples at a dealership. maybe you can get 7000 in rebates or somethin on a ford but the price is higher when you compare them apples to apples dont fool yourself. the 5.0 is NOT comparable to the 5.7 at all. you would have to option for the boat anchor iron block 6.2 with SOHC (this stands for one cam a side or single overhead cam) since your so smart i have to explain each detail to you or you somehow think that me ommitting the obvious means i dont know info. and the Ford now cost ALOT more and gets MUCH worse fuel economy and is SLOWER still than the 5.7. SOOOOOOO where exactly were you going with that?

Okay I normally try to stay out of fights with the Ram people until they pick a fight with the Tundra guys and I can stand no more. Plain and simple if you want good V8 power with better gas milage get a 5.7L Hemi if you want big power and longevity get a 5.7L iforce. Even Hemi V8 had to admit what I told TRX4 Tom and Lou that the the Hemi had to be strengthened for SRT useage. Chrysler has never been able to pair the Hemi to a worthwhile tranny because either it was geared wrong, unreliable or now just can't hold to much more power than the stock Hemi. I am going to continue to by everything but a Hemi until Chrysler addresses these problems. I want a 5.7L version of the 6.4L Hemi with the 8-speed that can handle more power.

Please would a real mechanic other than myself explain that unless you tow 100 miles or more per day you dont need a diesel. Unless you are mechanically inclined its not cost effective to buy one. Yes diesels get good mpg. The regeneration process happens often if you dont drive 60 plus mph for 20-45 minutes. When this happens it makes the vehicle drive like a underpowered pig. That gets bad fuel economy. People that own diesel repair shops usually drive gas powered pickups, Especially the busy shop owners that dont have time for a breakdown, cause they are busy making money. The new diesels are very clean and dont smell like fuel at all. That is the only good thing about them quiet too. Soon as you delets all the emission equipment dpf, screen, urea, etc. You make a clean vehicle dirty and literally are contributing to global warming. You dont, we dont need diesels! We need new alternatives that mimic diesel power. To many people on this earth now, overpopulation is the bottom line. California has serious smog issues now! Do you think they are going to let it get worst? Until New technology can make diesel fuel so clean burning we dont need the emissions, dont bet on diesel.

@diesel was great
You sound almost like DenverMike.

Why do you want to remove the emission controls? If you remove the emission controls from a gasoline engine you will increase its pollution output.

On global warming. Diesel produces less CO2 than a gasoline engine. From what I've read CO2 is the major cause of global warming. Don't confuse particulates and NOx with CO2.

How many oil heaters do you have in the US? These heaters are contributing much more pollution than diesel vehicles.

25% of your crude oil goes to oil heating and I think only 13% goes to diesel for tranport and industry. It would be better to use natural gas for heating.

New York state was the first state this year to regulate oil heater emissions, they have to run on 15ppm oil, just like motor vehicles do.

To improve gasoline powered vehicles much research is needed. The NA manufacturers are now looking at ways to improve performance other than improvements to gasoline engines, because gasoline engine technology is nearing its zenith. Weight reduction, aerodynamic aids etc will cost more than improving diesel performance.

The reality is much of the technology used in your gasoline engines has been around for a while. Can you imagine 15 years ago being offered a V8 or turbo V6 in your pickup, this change is almost as radical as offering a diesel.

Diesel technology still has some time to go to reach the stage of gasoline engine technology. Diesel technology right now is producing much more effiecient engines than gasoline.

I have predicted that diesels will eventually replace many of your gasoline powered pickups in the future, I think this still will occur. The costs of your pickups has to rise in the future. Why use exotic materials when they aren't needed and will cost more than converting to diesel.

I think the ironic outcome of your EPA and CAFE standards is that they started out to protect Detroit's gasoline dependence and may now have killed it off and the Big 3 weren't and can't afford to make the necessary changes and must import the technologies required.

Hemi lol,

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/09/2011-ford-f-150-ecoboost-v-6-photos-and-additional-engine-details.html

Found a chart showing the hemi spanking the iforce.

Glad you stopped digging yourself deeper into that BS hole.

this is a great redesign, looks like it would be terrible on gas though!

Looks like Chevy is coming out with a truck that everyone will love! Service truck repair, fleet truck repair. service truck repair