Official 2022 Tundra 3rd Gen Thread

I love this thread! I wonder where @elkhunter is when you need him!

 

Just drove by Mountain States in Denver based on a previous post - really like the blue color in person!

 

lol, because the manufactures never try to cheat the system either?

I’ll put more faith in the real world numbers from real people driving real trucks, than computer models / test tracks / hand picked vehicles.

The EPA rating system of ESTIMATED fuel economy is far less representative than that of the estimates on Fuelly.com.

https://www.consumerreports.org/fue...-special-software-to-exaggerate-fuel-economy/

https://www.ttnews.com/articles/ford-fesses-emissions-early-effort-limit-damage

https://amp.detroitnews.com/amp/3585639002


https://www.washingtonpost.com/ener...er-emissions-cheating-charges/?outputType=amp

 

Nice color

where is the tire sidewall ?

If I go tundra it will be same as last time , dealer keeps the 20”s, we add 18”s

 

Man that sport has a lot of rake. Do they only lower the front?

 

Toyota to build $1.29 billion battery plant for EVs in N. Carolina

 

Hope Toyota's battery technology charges in under 10-15 minutes. If you are towing using your electric truck you will be stopping to charge often.

https://youtu.be/HmH6j3tDczo

 

I really like em, waiting a couple years for a facelift or a 3.5 tho

 

Ever heard of the details of diesel gate? Companies making their vehicles 'know' when they're being tested and altering the ECU. Fuel mileage ratings are getting a similar treatment - they gear the vehicles to maximize fuel economy during the test. It's hardly representative of the type of driving 95+% of people do.

 

Dealership in Virginia marking Tundras up 20%. DON'T BUY FROM THEM!

https://www.ourismanchantillytoyota.com/new-inventory/index.htm?model=Tundra

 

All this angst over fuel economy ratings from the EPA vs observed results by individual users is amusing to me.

Both sources of data are useful and should be considered if you’re concerned with the running costs in fuel for a car or truck. The EPA number is a more accurate comparison tool between various vehicles than a compilation of data from a lot of end users. For strictly comparison purposes it’s more accurate because the testing protocol is held as close to exactly the same for every vehicle tested as possible. Everything from fuel quality to deviations in acceleration rate on the dyno are controlled for, so controlling for more variables isolates the data output and makes the EPA numbers more accurate.

What a lot of you guys seem to miss is that the EPA testing protocol is not necessarily reflecting real world driving conditions. For example tested vehicle speeds for the highway cycle are too low. They test for 60MPH maximum speeds, with a test average of about 48MPH.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml

I have no reason to doubt that a new 2022 Tundra driven to that testing specification will easily achieve or slightly exceed the EPA rating for “highway” driving. As will most any other vehicle.

Our problem as truck owners/buyers is that we are operating vehicles with the aerodynamic attributes of a slightly smoothed brick, and as speeds increase the energy required to displace atmospheric air increases exponentially. Fact is almost none of us drives 60MPH on a divided highway unless the weather is atrocious or we’re in a construction zone, so even trying to eke out mileage and be gentle on the throttle we’re not going to see EPA numbers unless we want to become an impediment to other traffic. Set your cruise to 75MPH in a full size truck and it’s no surprise that the EPA number is out of reach. You’re not asking the engine to work 25-30% harder, you’re probably asking it to work 75-85% harder. Go ahead and plug numbers in to this and see for yourself.

http://www.apexgarage.com/tech/horsepower_calc.shtml

 

MPG…

 

That dead horse deserves a beating.

Quick get a syringe full of adrenaline and the biggest AED you can find. Let's revive the horse so we can beat him again!!!

 

I don't understand the confusion regarding how Fuelly calculates MPG. You enter your miles and the gallons at each fill-up, just like they calculate on TFLTruck during their MPG runs. Then the app calculates your average MPG over time. After a while it collects a lot of data, and as long as folks are filling their tanks to the top every time, the numbers should be pretty accurate, at least as accurate as the fuel pumps themselves. People are not just entering the MPG off of their trip computer.

http://docs.fuelly.com/faq

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NEy_vb9u2cI

 

Have an opportunity to buy a SR5 OFF ROAD Lunar Rock with small gas tank or Grey SR5 OFF ROAD with large gas tank.

no brainer and get the Grey??

Could be months to get a Lunar with convenience package or longer

 

Unless you absolutely need the truck right now, wait a couple months and get what you want. I dont understand the idea of spending this type of money and not getting what you want simply to be the first to get one.

 

Sr5 trim pictured there? looks better with eveything color matched, I will never do the Yota matte black wheels again though. The truck looks smaller then the previous gen, that just how the picture is or does it seem like that in person?

 

Heard a rumor that dealers are allowed to put in actual orders starting today? That would be pretty cool..

 

Yep this was a SR5 TRD Sport package, didn’t look to see the sticker for what other options - it looks the same size physically in person, I think the new styling is just so different than the existing models it just seems way less “boxy.” The TRD Sport really seems like it squats low in the front though.

 

Nice! If I towed like you do, 100% I would be in a diesel. With my commute being less than 5 miles.... I think I'd kill your truck.

 

I am pretty sure anyone with eyes can see the spec tab on the Tundra page. This guys click-bait titles are getting annoying... I'm surprised he didn't title it "Automotive Engineer Explains How to Use a Website".

 

Yeah, the EPA standards are wildly unrealistic and allegedly widely abused. Look at the $1.2billion lawsuit against Ford. Yikes.

The single criterion of the Fuelly data that makes it so much more valuable to me than EPA standards is that there is no standard for reporting mileage and fuel economy. It’s just people driving how they drive and reporting their numbers. All the speeders, slowpokes, people who idle for long periods, people who start their vehicles and go immediately…ALL the data is put into one pot per vehicle model and year. And patterns and trends emerge. I put a lot more stock in that than I do in an allegedly widely abused govt standard that uses completely unrealistic testing measures to begin with.

Furthermore, unlike manufacturers and their EPA numbers, there is no financial incentive to fudge numbers on Fuelly.

 

Did a test drive today on SR5 4x4. The truck better than any truck I have driven. The truck was super quiet and very responsive. The steering is a little light but works great as a commuter. However, the thigh support on the SR5 cloth is lacking, no power seats in the base SR5, and no arm rest in the rear seat. The cloth seats feel very GMish and were worse than the F150. I also sat in a limited and found the softex seats to be much more comfortable and the power seats (driver/passenger) worked great. I was disappointed to learn most of the inbound SR5s do not have BSM package or premium packages.

 

Saw a Toyota commercial today with the new Tundra… and offering 2.9 financing for 60 months…

 

That’s right… call them out…

 

I figured it might be about the same but just perceived as smaller, the ground clearance does look to be shorter from a looks standpoint.

TFL said the same on the thigh support on the first roadtrip with there truck, that's going to be a bummer for taller people on longer trips. Will have to see how those who tow like the lighter steering feel, I wish they would of used the same steering system the landcruiser has instead of just electric.