Payload Stickers?

Sorry if I missed it, have we still not figured out how Toyota is advertising 1900 and so far no one has seen anything close to that?

 

Toyota is advertising 1940 lb payload on a 2wd dc sr5. If you look at the SUPER fine print in Toyota speak, Payload is for "comparison sake only" and the load capacity sticker is on the door panel. There is no 1940 payload Tundra, period.


That being said, if one does the math for what should be payload they will find a difference of around 385 lbs. Seems like Toyota being conservative adds 2-150 lb passengers and 85 lb hitch. Check out rated payload vs door sticker. I am not happy they are pulling big 3 ratings shit, this all should be simple j2807 tow ratings.

 

what does the big 3 do that is so bad? Ford literally has a table with the weight of every single option you can get. You can hand calculate the exact payload of your F150 and when I calculated it for my truck it was almost dead on to the door sticker. Maybe 50 lbs off but i may have missed something.

and then when I cat scaled my F150 it was actually 20 lbs lighter than the door sticker said with a full tank of gas and me not in the truck. I even had a car seat base in it, some crap in the console, and a set of air bags in the rear.

 

So I looked at a 21 Titan CM this morning with only a 26 gal fuel tank and no sun roof. The trim was comparable to an SR5. Payload was 1377.

 

Some things never change. New gen, same arguments.

 

I’m curious to see if the 3rd gen is as conservatively rated as the 2nd. Fully boxed frame, but composite bed and slightly lower rear axle rating than before.

 

Agreed, but I am personally done fighting that battle.

Life suggests next truck needs to be a 3/4 ton. Was optimistic this new tundra would fit my next truck camper plans.

Oh well - beautiful truck, just not enough function.

 

Just to be clear, the lower axle rating doesn't mean the axle is weak. Could be the tires or springs that Toyota doesn't wish to warranty or be liable for a higher load.

I posted the F150 frame specs earlier. If someone with a '22 Tundra would measure frame rail dimensions and wall thickness, we'd get a good idea of how they compare.

 

I can be at or slightly above my GVWR and 400 pounds below the front and rear axle ratings towing with my WDH.

 

I agree. The 3rd gen Tundra missed the mark on payload. The two most widespread complaints about the 2nd gen were payload and fuel economy. This is a HUGE miss for Toyota in my eyes, but how many of the truck-buying general public agree or even care at all? Like it or not, trucks have become status symbols. Truck buyers want the appearance of capability, but most of them just commute. Maybe they throw their bikes in the bed occasionally to drive to a trailhead or help a neighbor move a couch or something that actually requires the utility of a truck. But it’s the dad version of a minivan for most people. And most truck drivers care far more about the stance of the truck than its actual capability.

And it makes me think that for all of us fretting on this forum about door jamb numbers, there are dozens and dozens of truck owners who don’t have a single clue. They look at the door jamb stickers like they look at the warning stickers on the backside of the visor—which is to say they don’t look at them at all. Most people are careful to tow within their limits, but don’t know that when they take a load of lumber and concrete home from HD that they’re over their GVWR. If the truck squats, they just add new leaf packs, airbags, or sumo springs, etc. and carry on.

Yeah, there is a lot of room in my truck between GVWR (7200lb) and GAWR (4000lb FR/4150lb RR). For all the times I’ve been above GVWR, I’m still within my axle ratings.

 

... for 200,000 miles, with no issues...

 

Or a million miles carrying 2700 lb with no mods at all

 

Mike Sweers is a moron. In his interview with TFL Truck he said they didnt wanna fight the payload battle again, like they allegedly did in 2007(Ford had 1560 lbs payload for a 4x4 supercrew in 2007), but they didn't even match or come close.

Don't give a truck a 12k lb tow rating if you are not gunna back it up with a realistic payload capacity. Realistically, the stickers we have seen in all of the trucks so far cannot tow 12k per the J2807 standard. 300 lbs of passengers plus I think 85 lbs for a WDH plus a 10% tongue weight is more than 1555 lbs.

 

Couldn't agree more.

Then again as someone posted above, 95% of the truck market is not doing truck stuff. Just demigods of debt.

Oh well, hopefully when the chip thing is sorted I can snag a bitchin deal ok a 3/4 ton.


Oh also... "world beater" LOL.

 

The annoying part is that they seem to have built the truck to be capable. The cooling system in it rivals that of gasser HD's and certainly the chassis SEEMS to be stout. It's like they got 1 yard from the goal line and just gave up.

I have an F150 3.5L Ecoboost and the motor is incredibly stout. Like, it can easily tow anything that should be behind a half ton. Ford pulled the same move you are talking about though. They build the F150 for the 90% that don't really use their truck all that hard, but then the 10% that do push them hard find out mighty quick that they skimped on the cooling system. The radiators are out of a freaking minivan and the intercooler is boarderline worthless. Toyota's attempt at it fixes these problems but then they go and ruin it with the payload.

The funny thing is, I bet we see iForce Max trucks come in with high 7000's GVWR with the exact same chassis and brakes and everything. Had they used the same GVWR on the regular trucks that weight 500 lbs less, we would see decent payload numbers. It's going to literally end up being a numbers game.

 

Could the past history of rusting frames cause Toyota to rate the GVWR conservatively?

 

I don’t think they gave up; I think they rate things conservatively across the board. Sweers was saying something in a TFL interview about how they really want to know that the truck is capable of what they say that it is. I think they choose lower numbers so people put less stress on their trucks and they keep the reputation for extremely long service lives. They are choosing to err on the side of caution.

Although, as I’ve said before, the two million-mile Tundras carried loads over 1 ton regularly, and it didn’t affect their service lives at all.

I don’t think that had anything at all to do with the decision. Toyota just goes overboard with safety and with conservative ratings. I just wish a limited crewmax shortbed would have 1800lb of payload. 6.5ft bed crewmax? 2k lbs. Why couldn’t they have done that? Frustrating for the relatively few of us who are paying attention.

 

If I believed that most people weren't completely retarded sacks of meat in dire need of a good culling, then I would agree. However, I think it's more likely that the idiot masses just see a truck and think it will do anything they've seen other trucks do. They can't see beyond the end of their nose and just assume if it's got a bed you can pull whatever monstrosity of a camper you'd like. Sure, they want the appearance of capability, but they also conflate that appearance with actual capability. That's why so many are surprised when they come on the forum and are told about payload and that a 1/2 ton truck has no business with a 5th wheel even if it's "within the tow rating" and then try to blame Toyota.

Half ton trucks are designed to be a more capable family vehicle these days. Says so in the owner manual. There's an open bed so you can move a fridge or a couch that won't fit in a minivan/SUV, and they have a better towing capability for small campers. That's all they've ever really been. If you need to haul heavy or tow big all the time, then you generally need more than what half tons are built for. That doesn't mean the half ton is a failure, it means the idiot buying it saw a bed and assumed it could haul their house. Same as the dipsticks that bitch and howl about a pickup not being able to pull 20,000 lbs. at 75-80 MPH when the owner manual states that you should be towing at 55-65 MPH.

TLDR: Manufacturers are not responsible for idiot consumer assumptions. Never trust marketing, because they take full advantage of "fine print" to lie legally. Do your research before you buy.

 

It should probably be stated again that the payload is a bogus number. If the parts that matter on the Tundra are stout, and it can be easily and safely upgraded to haul a higher load, then you have nothing to worry about.

 

Very well said

 

Thats not how a live though. I don't purposefully go out and buy a truck with the intention to overload it.

I'll just buy a F150 HDPP with 2500 lbs of payload or F350 7.3L with 4000 lbs of payload instead and probably spend similar money. Was just hoping the Tundra was gunna be it.

 

Except measurements tell you dick all about the composition of the material and that means way more than thickness. 1/8 inch aluminum vs 1/8 inch mild steel vs 1/8 inch high quality steel are all going to behave differently under load and stress. You'd have to assume that the materials are all equal for this method to be of any value. I'd rather not peep through a keyhole and assume I know what the room on the other side looks like.

 

It won't be overloaded though, that's the thing.

Am I the only one curious about the frame dimensions on the Tundra and how they compare to the F150? I'd have to drive 100 miles to find one to measure, and I'm not that curious...

 

Do you really think the Tundra uses weaker steel in the frame than Ford? It'd be a hell of an interesting data point to get the dimensions.

 

Purely anecdotal, but I'm guessing door jamb numbers are largely weighted to legal standards. Removing legal responsibility is a huge part of modern business, manufacturing, and construction because people love to take you to court. I work in construction and constantly have to think "Would my decisions and my word hold up in a court of law?" It is an endless paper trail of documented procedures to cover your ass should something go wrong.

I've seen civil structural engineers use 4x safety factors in their designs, meaning they determine the minimum strength of a base structural design and then make it 4 times stronger than that before they will put a professional stamp of approval on it. That helps to protect them from any legal repercussions should the design fail one day.

I'm guessing auto makers do the same thing. They overbuild trucks, and then conservatively rate their capacities. This is safer, but it also removes as much responsibility from the automaker as possible should they end up in a lawsuit after a consumer gets in an accident. That's why Sweers said they rate trucks to what they can confidently tow/haul. If any unexperienced Jim or Nancy jumps in their brand new truck and hooks up to their brand new camper but stays within the numbers, they should be relatively fine. An experienced driver with LT tires, proper spring rates and valved suspension for the weight and road conditions, and good weight distribution could probably responsibly push the factory numbers. No automaker is going to give you the time of the day if you want to argue this though, they have plenty of HD trucks they'd like to sell you instead.

Automakers also have to sell more trucks than their competitors, so that's probably where the proverbial dick measuring contest of towing capacities comes into play. But the numbers are confusing, because anyone who understands payload and GVWR knows that by the time you load up yourself, your family, and all your crap in the bed of your half ton that you just don't have the payload left to pull a trailer anywhere near the max numbers anymore. That way there is a legal line the consumer crossed before the automaker can be deemed at fault for an accident. Sure, someone could be within their towing capacity when their truck and 8000 lb travel trailer blew through that red light and killed someone at the bottom of the hill after their breaks got hot, BUT they were over the GVWR because they had too much weight in the truck when they brought their family and stuff with them. Therefore it is the fault of the consumer, and I would not want to be in this loosing position legally if I were involved in such an accident. Things can get very sour for you personally if you are on the loosing side in court.

I believe the conservative numbers push everyone to be safer in the long run. Stepping up to an HD truck if you're at the limits of a half ton is a good decision for you and everyone around you because it is safer. They're built to a higher standard and just carry/move/stop weight better.

 

Does Toyota produce a document like the Ford Body Builders Guides?





They give you the dimensions, Wall thickness and yield strength of the steel.

I get what you mean about the truck not being overloaded since its theoretically overbuilt, but with something like the HDPP F150 you at least know they didnt just slap a different sticker on the same truck and call it a day. Almost the entire chassis is different. Frame, springs, shocks, axle, wheels, tires, etc are all unique to the HDPP.

And on top of that, my 2014 F150 shares the same frame as the HDPP of that year. All 157" trucks run the same exact frame for 11-14. That doesnt mean I think I should go assume I have an 8200 lb GVWR and am good to go over my payload by 500 lbs. I have exceed payload before, but only very briefly for less than a couple miles. In my day to day towing and camping I dont. I tow a 5500 lb GVWR trailer with a truck that has a curb weight of 6140 lbs.

 

It isn't a legal or performance "standard" at all. It's a warranty and liability CYA for Toyota, but not you... and it's based on a completely stock configuration, and any "standard" Toyota or Ford or GM, etc wishes to use. And whatever rationale they use is a secret because they never tell us.

IOW Toyota cannot be held liable for their truck causing an accident if it's over GVWR. They also may deny your warranty if they find out you've been running over GVWR. But they can also deny your warranty if you have a lift, bigger tires, other mods, etc.

 

Depends on if you reinforce/improve all the components. There is a pervasive assumption that payload is only about shocks, springs, and frames. It's not. It's all aspects of the vehicle. Braking capacity, engine cooling, transmission cooling, gearing, bushings, bolts and nuts holding everything together, traction, cornering, and even the crash performance is all part of it. If you aren't approaching the "upgrades" from a whole vehicle perspective plenty of important factors are not being considered and can have unexpected impacts in various conditions. Putting airbags on a truck so it doesn't sag doesn't make it carry a greater load. Neither does adding a leaf, or changing the shocks, because they don't address all the factors that are affected by adding weight to a vehicle.

 

False. They can deny your warranty claim if they can reasonably show that your modification caused the problem. That's a topic for another thread though.

 

Yeah I mostly agree that people in large numbers are generally stupid. But I think there’s something to driving a truck these days that is akin to how people dress. It’s messenging. They’re advertising capability that isn’t necessarily there. For so many years it was cool to wear Red Wings and flannel shirts and grow a beard. That dude ain’t a lumberjack from Wyoming; he’s an aspiring singer from LA who waits tables. He is advertising skills and a lifestyle that aren’t there. He’s just trying to look the part. Same reason wearing Carhartt anything is so prevalent right now. I remember reading a recent article by a woman bemoaning the beard trend. She was basically saying women in the dating scene are frustrated these days because they can’t tell who the actual men are anymore. Kind of funny, but she has a point…

I see FAR fewer people buying any ol’ truck and overloading or overtowing than I see people just commuting to work and the grocery store in a truck with a 6” lift and an empty bed. Look at all the overlanding builds where the truck never leaves the pavement. They just want the look of capability. Most of them don’t know or don’t care about their door jamb numbers because they’re not going to do anything with their truck that actually requires a truck. It’s 100% about the stance. It has to have the right lift/level, the right wheels with the right offset, and who cares if they just raised their center of gravity dangerously high with a block lift or lowered their payload by 200 lb with wheels/tires alone. To me, more people buy a lot more than they need and never actually utilize the capability they’re advertising. It’s more of that than just being dangerously stupid IMO.

Often it’s just for safety, too. They see all the other trucks and think they need to drive one, too, in order to be safe.