Tuner for 07 Toyota Tundra 5.7?

Post by **mikel** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:00 pm

FWIW, the 5.7 Tundra motor is the most powerful 5.7 I have ever seen on our dyno.

311 rwhp bone stock.

Mike_Levy · Post by **Mike_Levy** » Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:58 pm

But what was the torque on that? Probably far less then the pushrod 5.7s.

Also curious, what did the new VVT Hemis do? They're rated higher, are they losing more through their drivetrains?

Post by **mikel** » Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:53 am

Mike_Levy wrote:But what was the torque on that? Probably far less then the pushrod 5.7s.

Also curious, what did the new VVT Hemis do? They're rated higher, are they losing more through their drivetrains?

Lemme dig up the dyno sheet...
(Edit, thats torque looks pretty healthy:) )

Prior to the 311 rwhp Tundra, my recollection says the most powerful gasser was the GM 6.2, which will lay down about 310 rwhp. The 6.0 is not far behind.

Most powerful stock HEMI truck I have seen was about 290 rwhp, stock.

Post by **mikel** » Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:55 am

Heres an 09 Ram before/after tune....

hiyt · Post by **hiyt** » Tue Aug 03, 2010 1:31 pm

Mike_Levy wrote:Knew that was gonna happen anyway. The Europeans are using bigger displacement too. The Hemi rubbed off on AMG so much that they released their own 6.2L V8. Its just the Asians with their screwed up way of doing stuff that can't agree with the rest of the world. Them and their damn 4 and 6 cylinder motors and tiny displacements. Hey, at least Toyota tried. They have their own 5.7L. Now if they would have just tossed the OHC and given it pushrods, they'd be all set.

Seems like hemi rubbed amg the wrong way cuz they're dropping the 6.2 for a 5.5 twin turbo. in fact most European performance cars are decreasing displacement and getting turbos. Bmw's 335i 3.0 twin turbo (with only tuning) beats the 4.0 v8 m3, which is why most of the new bmw Ms will probably be smaller displacement with turbos. Even gm plans on replacing the 6.2 ls3 with a 5.5 too and there are more asian v8s than you imagine. Off the top of my head toyota: 4.0 4.3 4.6 5.0 nissan: 5.6 4.5 . Why would you even suggest pushrods, pushrods=more moving parts=less reliability, more friction=power loss. both the m5 and the s63 use ohc. if toyota needs v8 tricks why would they learn them from worst performance 6 litre engine(SRT8). i know some have been making 800whp but any engine can be made fast with enough boost and it's no comparison to the power some supras and skylines have put down. the ls3 can make over 500 rwhp n/a with full exhaust cams intake tuner. Were as the srt8 only 410-430 whp with the same mods. Don't be surprised if hemi decide to use ohc, I wonder where hemi got the idea for vvt in their v8.

Mike_Levy wrote:But what was the torque on that? Probably far less then the pushrod 5.7s.

Mike_Levy wrote:On current vehicles a second computer changing stuff fucks with the main ECU because it doesn't know whats going on. And with everything, including the throttle (which can decide if you live or die), being controlled by the main ECU, it really needs to know whats going on.

You couldn't be more wrong about anything you've said. You should find a forum or topic where you don't need to know what you're talking about and troll there.

Mike_Levy · Post by **Mike_Levy** » Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:12 pm

I'm not gonna argue with you dude. The fact remains, my truck runs 11's with stock displacement, natural aspirated. No Toyota will ever be able to do that, so obviously the Hemi's got something right.

imcougar · Post by **imcougar** » Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:39 pm

definitely interested! hopefully it will be available soon

Leave3 · Post by **Leave3** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 3:52 am

I think I figured you guys out, your waiting for the so called black box legislation which should all but eliminate the secrecy of Toyotas codes. Correct me if im wrong.

redneck47441 · Post by **redneck47441** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 7:39 am

Where do I place my order??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

hiyt · Post by **hiyt** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:38 am

Looking at the tundra's dyno graph i noticed the torque and hp intersect at a little over 5050. the standard equation for calculating hp is ((torque x engine speed) / 5252) like what is used in calculating hemi's dyno hp. which means the stock tundra is making around 320rwhp. I'm interested in comparing it to 6.2 gm l92, so did you use the same equation as the tundra or the same equation as the dodge?

Post by **mikel** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:55 am

Leave3 wrote:I think I figured you guys out, your waiting for the so called black box legislation which should all but eliminate the secrecy of Toyotas codes. Correct me if im wrong.

Never heard of such a thing...?

If that was the case, wouldn't everyone be able to do it at the same time? Not much point in doing the same thing everyone else is doing, thats why we were looking at this market as a home run, since there is no other tuning solution.

Post by **mikel** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:56 am

hiyt wrote:Looking at the tundra's dyno graph i noticed the torque and hp intersect at a little over 5050. the standard equation for calculating hp is ((torque x engine speed) / 5252) like what is used in calculating hemi's dyno hp. which means the stock tundra is making around 320rwhp. I'm interested in comparing it to 6.2 gm l92, so did you use the same equation as the tundra or the same equation as the dodge?

The values are scaled differently for HP and TQ, look down the left and right sides of the graph and you'll see.

If they were scaled the same, it would have crossed at 5250.

Post by **mikel** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:58 am

Heres a GM 6.0 for comparison.

I cant find a 6.2, but they are a bit healthier.

Mike_Levy · Post by **Mike_Levy** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 11:05 am

That Torque spike at 3200 is weird. What could possible cause that?

Post by **mikel** » Thu Aug 05, 2010 11:51 am

He started the sample early, thats when he went WOT.

You can see how long it takes to bring fuel in on the stock pull, thats the stock PE delay.