''VIDEO'' 2011 F-150 5.0L vs Tundra 5.7L Drag Race - Page 3 - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums



2009 - 2014 F150 Discuss the 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Ford F150

''VIDEO'' 2011 F-150 5.0L vs Tundra 5.7L Drag Race

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #31  
Old 07-17-2012, 04:54 PM
2ndStroke's Avatar
2ndStroke 2ndStroke is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 9,243
2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rompeculo5.0 View Post
Well I have a 2012 f150 fx2 5.0 screw with 3.31 gears and I just got home today from the track and I raced a 2012 tundra 5.7 and raped him by like a truck or two. Both bone stock. Let me see if I can upload the video. Sorry I'm new to this
Ya I would say you spanked the tundie lol
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07-17-2012, 08:23 PM
NASSTY's Avatar
NASSTY NASSTY is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: ME
Posts: 2,097
NASSTY has a great reputation on FTE.NASSTY has a great reputation on FTE.NASSTY has a great reputation on FTE.NASSTY has a great reputation on FTE.NASSTY has a great reputation on FTE.NASSTY has a great reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tseekins View Post
Unless you sit there and spool the turbos while waiting for the green light, I think the 3.5L may be a little slower on launch than the 5.0L / 5.7L.
If they aren't boost launching in a drag race they're doing it wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by parkland View Post
6.2 vs ecoboost - YouTube


The 6.2 makes a little headway at first, but really the eco boost holds up pretty close.
That's because they were doing it wrong. This is what happens when you boost launch.
6.2 vs ecoboost - YouTube
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07-17-2012, 11:48 PM
parkland parkland is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,099
parkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud of
That is a very very close race to the 6.2, as was the previous....

Boosted launch or not, the 3.5 ecoboost is awesome for what it is and what it does, and certainly out performs the 5.0.

I would even go so far as to say it out performs the 6.2..... Very close performance and a ton better mileage, worth something.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 07-19-2012, 11:23 AM
muddripper muddripper is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1
muddripper is starting off with a positive reputation.
my ecoboost beats my cousins 5.0 bad and he has a superchips programer and dual exhaust and mine is stock. i also raced a reg cab 5.7 tundra and beat it.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07-19-2012, 05:26 PM
640 CI Aluminum FORD 640 CI Aluminum FORD is offline
Posting Guru
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,140
640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by muddripper View Post
my ecoboost beats my cousins 5.0 bad and he has a superchips programer and dual exhaust and mine is stock. i also raced a reg cab 5.7 tundra and beat it.
The 5.0L and Ecoboost are actually pretty close as seen here...

2011 ecoboost vs 2012 5.0 F150 race 1/4 pt 2 - YouTube

And here...

2011 ecoboost vs 2012 5.0 F150 race 1/4 pt4 - YouTube

In the first video the Ecoboost wasn't spooled properly, however it was spooled properly in the second one. Both trucks are crew cabs and the 5.0L has 3.55 gears to the Ecoboosts 3.73's. If anything comparing these video clips to the 6.2L vs Ecoboost clips, I would say that at the very least the 5.0L performs just as strongly as the Ecoboost and 6.2L, sure the Ecoboost might tow a little better because of its Turbo's and the 6.2L might tow a little better because of its sheer displacement, but I'm talking about regular unloaded and/or lightly loaded driving.

Also here's another clip of a 5.0L racing a Hemi Ram and a 5.3L Chevrolet Silverado. According to the description the 5.0L has a K&N drop in air filter and duel exhaust, The Hemi has a K&N CAI and duel exhaust, and the 5.3L Chevy is factory stock. It should also be noted that the Hemi Dodge in this clip is a 2012 model with the 6-Speed auto.

2011 F-150 vs 2012 Ram vs 2012 Silverado - YouTube

And here's a clip of a lightly modded F-150 5.0L racing a stock (I beleive) 5.7L Tundra.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y83Fq4BI4iM
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-19-2012, 05:55 PM
2ndStroke's Avatar
2ndStroke 2ndStroke is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 9,243
2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation
lol that chevy should stay home next time
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 07-20-2012, 12:50 PM
640 CI Aluminum FORD 640 CI Aluminum FORD is offline
Posting Guru
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,140
640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ndStroke View Post
lol that chevy should stay home next time
Yeah, its kinda like picking on your little brother.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 07-20-2012, 08:01 PM
King Ranch's Avatar
King Ranch King Ranch is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,112
King Ranch is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I'm sorry but these videos are useless
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 07-21-2012, 02:19 AM
stephen.osborne1's Avatar
stephen.osborne1 stephen.osborne1 is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington State
Posts: 1,190
stephen.osborne1 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.stephen.osborne1 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
That Chev 5.3 is a gutless turd. Not even in the same ball park as the competition. I'm happy with any of the new Ford motors, though I'd hate to pay the gas bill for the 6.2.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 07-21-2012, 02:01 PM
2ndStroke's Avatar
2ndStroke 2ndStroke is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 9,243
2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by stephen.osborne1 View Post
That Chev 5.3 is a gutless turd.
I'm kinda surprised, 5.3 is a decent size! I don't know much about chev, I think I will keep it that way
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 07-21-2012, 02:35 PM
parkland parkland is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,099
parkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud ofparkland has much to be proud of
The 4.8 chev motor is tougher that some people realise.

Theres an article somewhere and they got 1000 HP out of it with turbochargers and the engine was basically stock.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 07-24-2012, 03:56 PM
640 CI Aluminum FORD 640 CI Aluminum FORD is offline
Posting Guru
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,140
640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Ranch View Post
I'm sorry but these videos are useless
Useless in the sence that these trucks aren't designed for drag racing outta the box? I agree 100%.

But what these videos do provide is a good visual representation of how one truck stacks up to another. At the very least the provide some entertainment value. The 5.0L vs Ecoboost clip is a good one for comparison though, The trucks are for the most part equally equipped and each clip shows a race with an improperly spooled turbo and a properly spooled turbo, vs the N/A 5.0L.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 07-24-2012, 04:04 PM
Pool Runner's Avatar
Pool Runner Pool Runner is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 722
Pool Runner has a very good reputation on FTE.Pool Runner has a very good reputation on FTE.Pool Runner has a very good reputation on FTE.
One person in this thread remarked on how much heavier an F-150 is over the Tundra. I've often wondered this as I have parked my F-150 next to a bone stock '07+ Tundra and was amazed how small the Tundra makes my F-150 look. It's almost like parking an F-150 net to a Ranger or Dakota Lol.

I agree about the weight though, as I've driven a newer Tundra, it's "feels" lighter than it looks like it should.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 07-24-2012, 04:14 PM
2ndStroke's Avatar
2ndStroke 2ndStroke is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 9,243
2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation2ndStroke has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pool Runner View Post
One person in this thread remarked on how much heavier an F-150 is over the Tundra. I've often wondered this as I have parked my F-150 next to a bone stock '07+ Tundra and was amazed how small the Tundra makes my F-150 look. It's almost like parking an F-150 net to a Ranger or Dakota Lol.

I agree about the weight though, as I've driven a newer Tundra, it's "feels" lighter than it looks like it should.
Maybe it is an illusion caused by the tundie's over-bloated body lines
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 07-24-2012, 04:37 PM
640 CI Aluminum FORD 640 CI Aluminum FORD is offline
Posting Guru
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,140
640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pool Runner View Post
One person in this thread remarked on how much heavier an F-150 is over the Tundra. I've often wondered this as I have parked my F-150 next to a bone stock '07+ Tundra and was amazed how small the Tundra makes my F-150 look. It's almost like parking an F-150 net to a Ranger or Dakota Lol.

I agree about the weight though, as I've driven a newer Tundra, it's "feels" lighter than it looks like it should.
Its simply an illusion as stated above.

Got the spec's right here.

(Tundra Crewmax 2X4)
Overall height - 75.6
Overall width - 79.9
Overall length - 228.7
Wheelbase - 145.7

Curbweight = 5243lbs

(F-150 Supercrew 2X4)
Overall height - 76.7
Overall width - 79.2
Overall length - 231.9
Wheelbase - 144.5

Curbweight = 5345lbs

Pulled these off both manufactures websites. Of course its all circumstantial, but the point is that both trucks are practically equal in both size and weight when configured the same. I do agree that the Tundra's bloated looking body probably contributes to the illusion that its a bigger vehicle when its actually not.
Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Obligatory 2015 F-150 vs (Videos) 640 CI Aluminum FORD 2015+ F150 2 03-26-2015 06:10 PM
2012 5.0L vs 2011 Ecoboost (Drag Race video clips!) 640 CI Aluminum FORD 2009 - 2014 F150 68 04-17-2013 10:08 PM
Raptor trucks doing Raptor things ''Video Clips'' 640 CI Aluminum FORD 2010 - 2014 Ford SVT F150 Raptor 9 01-18-2012 11:52 PM
Built Ford Tough (Video Compilation) 640 CI Aluminum FORD Ford vs The Competition 1 01-11-2012 09:18 AM
Some video clip candy for us 5.0L owners! 640 CI Aluminum FORD 5.0L Coyote 4 09-22-2011 02:13 AM


Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums >

Tags
2011, 2011f150, 50, 50l, duty, f150, ford, forum, oil, race, review, super, toyota, tundra, vs

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:51 AM.


This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.