Official 2022 Tundra 3rd Gen Thread

I know few have much choice right now but we are being conditioned to think MSRP is good deal and are now suspicious of a deal below MSRP?!? LOL, we are so screwed!!

 

Obviously I don’t know a lot about turbos . lol . Thank you for the explanation .

 

This one sat on the lot for almost a month. Was one of the first to arrive here in OR. 4x2’s just don’t move here. I saw it in person when getting a new oil filter. This dealer is below MSRP on all Tundras though but only $177 below on 4x4’s. The other dealer in town is $250 below for 4x4’s. Both had unclaimed rigs coming in as of last month. Just none that I wanted.

 

Very impressive towing without a WDH. I hate WDH's myself because when you go from pavement to whoops you have to disconnect and go to a straight hitch. I beef up the rear suspension to compensate onroad (Timbrens on this Sequoia). '22 Tundra is very impressive how it handles max GVWR from LA through Moab and into Denver and no need for a WDH.

 

With that 6k trailer he was within 20lbs of the rear axle max rating! Anybody catch that?

 

He averaged 20mpg on this trip. Impressive considering the speeds he was going at.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxMyQGvSZMQ

 

He also had 250 lbs of bike in the bed and no weight distributing hitch on it. Weight distribution hitch would transfer some of that weight

 

Don’t want to sidetrack the thread. But, a truck cap weighs about 250lbs, so that is a wash for me. And a WDH transfers some weight to the front axle and to the trailer axles but the force is still applied to the tongue. I’m not an engineer, but that is the best way I can explain it and I’ve done a lot of research on this particular subject.
Trust me, I want the new Tundra to work for me & my family. We pull a camper and our tongue weight is 980lbs. and there are four of us. My 2008 Tundra with 1325lbs of payload has been a workhorse for us and taken us all over the U.S. But, I’m now over 200k and 14years in the northeast. It’s time for me to upgrade & hoping the hybrid Tundra can work for me. I just have no confidence in any other brand.

 

Somebody needs to tell him and TFL to stop topping off your fuel after it clicks off. You're causing thousands of dollars in damage to the fuel vapor charcoal canister getting filled with gas or worse.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPiiqcDxDxY

 

Hmm, I've never thought about that. Not that I top it off after it clicks, but . . . very interesting
I'll take a look at the vid.

 

shoot…I guess this is something I need to stop doing as well (on all my vehicles)

 

Honestly sounds like you need a 3/4 ton with those numbers, but from what I have been seeing if your second gen handled it, the third gen will too.

 

Topping off where you see the fuel right at the top of the filler - so full that closing the cap might even spill some out, is definitely bad. They wait 30 seconds to let any foaming die down (this is more of an issue with diesel but gasoline does it too) and then turn the pump on one more time until it clicks off. That doesn't equate to the topping off they're warning against. If doing it TFL's way is causing damage then this would be a massive, widespread problem which it is not.

So yeah, don't top off but that isn't what TFL is doing.

 

Exactly. Some pumps out there don't flow well into various fuel necks and will click off after only like 20 litres even though you're at a 1/4 tank and can take 100 litres. It's all in how the pump, fuel neck, and fuel flow interact. If the fuel is flowing faster you will get the click sooner. Doing the 30 second wait and then going for another click is the most reasonable way to properly determine fuel used without actually having a removable tank

 

Why would you even bother risking thousands in damage for a 1/4 gallon extra? It IS a widespread issue. It's not going to stop your vehicle from running but it does cause permanent damage to the EVAP system. You won't get a check engine light until it's far too late with the purge valve being damaged. Being that it IS just the EVAP system, you COULD delete it in states that don't do emissions checks but that's another topic. If you work in the automotive maintenance field, you would know how widespread of a problem this is. Most people don't even know they have a problem and wonder why their vehicle smells like gas when parked.

 

I think the 3rd gen with fully boxed frame can handle greater payloads than the 2nd gen. On paper, I think the new/ weaker composite bed on the 3rd gen is what is driving payload numbers down. That and maybe rear coils, but those can be upgraded.

 

sounds like the 3rd gen will work great for you then. But don’t get a hybrid if your worried about payload.

 

My last two trucks I always filled up until I could see the fuel. At some point a few years ago I learned it can cause problems so I stopped but. No
Issues ever came from it. At least that I’m aware of.

 

Well, I think the hybrid payload numbers will be close to the non-hybrids. And I definitely want the extra torque that the hybrid provides. I will wait & see how the #’s look.

 

The hybrids will have a payload rating of a couple hundred pounds less. Batteries are heavy..

 

Toyota also increased the GVWR of the hybrids to help negate the battery/motor weights. The payloads won't drop as much as other vehicles do.

 

Toyota website lists the TRD Pro as having a ~6klbs GVWR vs ~5800lbs, more towing and a higher payload than Plat/1794 non-hybrid.

The bed isn't what is lowering the payload. It's the softer suspension in the rear with 5 link coilovers vs leaf springs that makes it a smoother ride, especially when empty. That's why people that overland would usually add leaf spring helpers to increase their permanent payload. People that add campers to 3/4/1tons usually add airbags as well to prevent sagging of the compressed leaf springs.

 

Especially NIMH batteries.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lftJi5gBKok

Looks like the two trucks were fairly similar in towing. Tundra was a little better on fuel, Ram was a little better ride, but pretty similar otherwise.

 

8.8MPG with a 7klb brick hooked up is what I'm used to at altitude with Toyota V8's. TTv6 handles the load well but the physical laws of the Universe don't change by engine choice. You want to hold 70MPH towing a brick you'll be refueling often. I believe TFL has done the same loop with diesel trucks and saw better MPG but not a super-remarkable MPG bump.

 

And that just reinforces how tough it's going to be for EV's to crack the working truck market. ICE get 30-50% mileage when towing, EV's getting that range cut that much is trouble for those looking to travel. Physics don't care if it's hip or trendy.

 

ya, someday it will get there, but not now.

when I drive to northern MN to fish in the summer and fall, I want to go 600 miles without screwing around. or other road trips

 

dont forget to add in cold weather loss on top of the towing loss on EV trucks.

 

I'm thinking my next truck will indeed be an EV one, but that's more going around the city and small runs to in laws. Take a long trip and it'll be in the ICE SUV/Truck. EV's certainly have their place, but around here 4+ hours trips are considered short so that's at least 1 charge up time to get home.

It's why I was really hoping this Tundra would have a PHEV version. Give me 20-30 miles on electric and I'd be super happy. Run around town without worrying about the engine needing to warm up, have the gas backup to take the longer trips.

 

I've said it before, I'll say it again. For fully electric trucks to be practical in most of Canada they need 500+ kms of range at -40 degrees Celsius while towing at least 8000lbs through the mountains at 110km/h with the ability to charge from flat zero to full in under 15 minutes or less anywhere there is currently a gas station. Until that's possible, electric trucks are worthless outside of the 3 or 4 biggest cities in the province.

PHEV is really the only way to be remotely practical for Canadian usage.