What exactly do you gain with the hybrid?

I pretty much leave it in Eco. What I have noticed about eco vs normal, and even Sport for that matter, is nothing more than the shift points on transmission. I think on Eco it may even skip some gears but it is typically so smooth it is hard to tell. Sport changes it to where you stay in gears until higher shift points and probably forces every gear rather than skipping over any.
I haven’t read anything to confirm this, Its just a guess/observation. Sort of how tow/haul worked in yesteryears.
Also, on Eco, it seems to give a slight more bias to switching back to electric only vs normal and sport, noticeable when you let off accelerator.

 

Use eco in my hybrid CRV but turn it off on the highway like you're supposed to. All I notice is throttle sensitivity.

 

I don't think Toyota would do cylinder deactivation. It's caused too many problems elsewhere.
I do think the 10spd with the 3.31's would add 2-3 mpg pretty easy with the 5.7 as it was. The drag of 4.30s and the 6spd that always engine brakes when coasting rob quite a bit efficiency.
If they kept the bottom end and redesigned the heads and cams I think we'd see equal power and mpg out of the 5.7 no problem.

 

Them 4.30’s in the 21 pro I had made the hills around my house a breeze though.

 

It’s not just fuel economy that killed off the 5.7L, it’s future emissions regulations. In the next few years there may not be any 1/2 tons with V8’s except performance variants that cost a lot. All about meeting fleet wide emissions standards.

 

The pro should I have been a supercharged V8. ISWIS

 

But what about supercharging 4.6? It's a Lexus engine with direct I ejection stripped off and put in tundra. I think it would have been fantastic!!

 

Yep, I was really confused by Toyota’s information about the 18 mph electric only limit so I made sure to try exactly what you did during my test drive. I’m pet familiar with Toyota hybrids and would drive my parents’ Avalon hybrid the same way. Accelerate up to speed and let off to keep it in EV.

 

Same problem. There’s a reason that engine is going away too. Putting a blower on it sure as hell wouldn’t help emissions.

Not sure why everyone wants a supercharged V8. Superchargers are a piss poor way to make boost compared to turbochargers.

 

And how long do you think a 1.87 kwh battery can supply any significant amount of additional power while towing?

 

You really want to keep beating this horse about the battery and towing.

How about you write to Mike Sweers and ask how long it can assist, when it will assist etc.

You could also ask @DexterL since he has towed with his, maybe he can tell you.

 

People are just displacement obsessed period. It's ridiculous.

We don't live in a time any more where the only way to make more power is keep making bigger engines.

 

I drove both options non hybrid and hybrid. Can tell you there is difference. Hybrid has no lag on low end. I just wish they would have made battery part of hybrid around 100 horsepower. Would have made a big difference in MPG capability.

 

A 100hp electric motor is a big heavy bastard though. The combination of that and a 10 speed torque converter automatic transmission would probably be comically long.

 

Sure don’t my guy, I’ve only driven my moms 3 prius’ Over the past 10 years but hey,guess I don’t know how to drive efficiently.

 

I've driven three toyota models(camry, venza and tunrda) and all of them I was able to exceed factory mpg projections. Therefore, it is hard for me to understand difficulty people are having.

 

Yep, I’ve found eco to be the best for getting them back up. I made it back up to 15.7 and it keeps going up the more I drive it. 200 miles on the first tank, I’m hoping I can get it to 18-19. That wouldn’t be bad going from 12.2 when I stepped in the truck.

 

Just thought, not up to date on this battery stuff. But you are right.

 

Well then looks like you are the man to buy a I force max and get 30 mpgs out that bad boy! Get it man!

 

Thank you gang. It is over my budget unfortunately. Please don't be mad at my observations.

 

Battery is 1/2 the equation. Not saying it’s not possible to have a 100hp electric motor sandwiched in there, just packaging it could be a challenge.

I have also wondered about putting an additional electric motor on the back side of the rear axle pumpkin with a pinion gear with a clutch assembly. Probably be too cumbersome and there might be other ways to put an electric motor on an axle in addition to the electric motor between the engine and transmission.

 

Going to try to not derail this too badly, but as you are the OP and opening the door:

1. People aren't displacement obsessed for nothing. As the old saying goes "there's no replacement for displacement." Anything you do the a 1.3L 4 banger to bump up power can be done on a 7.3L V8 and will show greater performance for it. Sure, you can wind that little motor out to 300 HP, but if you take a 375 HP naturally aspirated V8 and boost it... well they aren't even remotely close are they? It's ok for people to have different preferences, isn't it?
2. There is far less opposition to TTV6 trucks than there is opposition to them being forced with no option. Freedom is nice to have, and when it's taken away, people get grumpy.
3. There are advantages to producing the power with a larger displacement, and they are simply mechanical. Want proof, look at the HD segment. The trucks that are designed to work hard every day. How many gassers are a boosted 6? And even the diesel 6s, what's their displacement? Why would that be? Perhaps it's because running a small displacement motor at high RPM while pushing boost is less reliable and incurs way more maintenance. People like to point to rally cars, indy cars, and such that are absolutely thrashed and say they are prime examples of low displacement high power implementations being done well. They generally omit, or are unaware, that the level of maintenance on those small high strung engines is positively obscene. So, yeah, sure, if you wanna sponsor me and pay to have my engine torn down and refurbed once a month, bring on the high power low displacement revolution. Until then, let those of us that have a different preference at least have a choice, eh?

 

After the break in period I will send you the mpgs. I’ve never had this kind of trouble with one. You would have thought my wife was driving with these numbers. Haha

 

1. It's production vehicles dude. No one cares about "maximum performance." It's how can we get reasonable performance the most efficient way possible - more displacement ain't it.
2. It's cheaper to offer one option. Period. And since the one option is basically better than Toyotas 5.7L in every way, it's not a loss lol.
3. Why are we bringing work trucks into the situation? Last time I checked Toyota wasn't in the F-250/2500 segment...

 

1. Really? Why are the Hemi monsters from Dodge selling like hotcakes if no one cares? At the very least everyone is concerned with better if not maximum performance. Also, you are on an enthusiast site... where tons of people have but SCs on their trucks... LT suspensions... headers, tunes, etc. This is exactly the group that DOES care about "maximum performance" and the proof of that is that the only way the TTV6 is viable is if it beats what is already had. If it had less HP, less TQ, and better MPGs, it would not sell the same way it does now. Everyone want better performance.
2. It is cheaper to manufacture, yes. Cheaper to own? Remains to be seen. There's already a price hike on the truck (even before mark ups), for the performance that is "better than the 5.7 in every way" you need to run premium fuel, some states have a hybrid fee that is due annually with registration to recover the lost tax revenue from reduced fuel consumption, turboed/SCed engines will generally have a shorter service life, and the truck is NOT better at everything. Take it off road, where the 2.5 gen Tundra is already a land barge, and see how much worse those angles are and why the extra length is a penalty too.
3. Work trucks were brought into the discussion to illustrate why displacement is preferred for working engines vs commuting ones. It has nothing to do with where Toyota has placed the Tundra because it universally applies across all segments. It is valid data that shows why displacement is relevant and just boosting small engines will not get the same results.

 

Uhhhh the new Tundra does not require premium fuel at all.

 

1. Ok, so the other 99% of people not represented on this forum don't care about maximum performance.
2. Where does Toyota say you must run premium fuel? Who's forcing you to buy a hybrid? Offroad? 99% of owners will never drive the truck off pavement.
3. If you say so. Not concerned about what's valid when no one is talking about that segment of the market lol.

Toyota isn't in the market of pleasing the small minority of potential buyers lol. Overwhelming majority just want a truck that makes sufficient power while getting the best fuel economy. A smaller, forced induction motor does that better than a bigger displacement engine. Bottom line. Won't change no matter how hard you try for it to.

 

I had an ‘18!Ram dually with the Cummins. Loved it, and while it wasnt as “hot” of an engine as my turned up Duramax, I bought the truck for the engine. I knew with care it could probably push 1mil miles.

Aside from not needing it anymore (no longer pulling RVs or big boy trailers), I was more worried about the transmission (it did not have the Aisin option) and the rest of the truck falling apart around it. Same went for the Duramax before it, although I wasnt as convinced of getting 1mil miles out of it the Dmax.

At the end of the day, getting decent fuel mileage is great, and we should for the most part be seeing similar numbers on similar setups, but we didnt buy 6000lb trucks specifically for their fuel mileage. And we didn’t buy other current competitor models for their warranties, or track record of reliability, or resale values. The hemi has had it’s own faults (oil sump/ ring and cylinder wall wear) and Im still not sold on a Chrysler transmission. Ford/GM co-op 10speed seems to now have some of the initial kinks worked out but we will see long-term.

I didn’t have an option of having or not having hybrid, but if I had ordered or purchased another trim I would have wanted it, personally. It certainly isn’t hurting anything. And if the $3000 or so option for it is a make or break deal, then that’s for each his own to decide. Personally I think a long term owner will see the value of having it pay for itself on a bit of fuel savings over a long span as well as a tad higher resale when the time comes.

 

Apparently I was going off old info that was a pre release typo, according to Toyota. They had originally stated that for the max MPG and HP/TQ ratings it would require premium fuel. They later retracted that and said it was a typo. I hadn't followed it super closely, so my bad for having old info.

1. I get your meaning, and you're not wrong. Most consumers will buy the truck and just go. No mods and such. That same majority are the same ones that see a truck and assume "it does it all" and try to pull 30+ foot fifth wheels with 1/2 ton trucks and then complain that mileage is poor and they can't maintain 80 MPH on the highway. The masses are not the best measuring stick of what is actually best for a given application.
2. See my reply to @Coal Dragger on the premium above. I referenced the hybrid because its the option that shows a significant difference in specs to the current 5.7. No, you do not have to buy it, but it is an option so it was worth making mention of as it is part of the whole picture. The 8 HP the non hybrid has over the 5.7 isn't really groundbreaking. The 78 extra TQ would be noticed, but overall the TTV6 isn't lightyears ahead of the outgoing 5.7. This lack of a huge jump in performance is part of what fuels the speculation about what could have been done with a V8 if the looming regs were not dictating the Ol' Yeller treatment. Yep, 99% of owners won't leave pavement or tow, so why don't they get something like a Ford Maverick, or a midsize truck? Ah, because they too care about the performance to a degree, and even if they won't use it, they want it. Why?
3. It's not the segment that is relevant. It's the concept/principle. You made a blanket statement that we don't need large displacement for powerful engines, yet you are restricting the conversation to a narrow segment purely for the sake of excluding evidence that directly counters your assertion.

To your conclusion; Correct, Toyota is playing a numbers game in going for a single option that will have the broadest possible appeal. That doesn't mean that people who wish there were more options don't get that, or that they are saying the new Tundra is bad. I'm not hating on it. I quite like it, but because I tow pretty regularly a larger displacement NA engine fits my needs better. There's nothing wrong with either option, an my only complaint is that one customer's needs aren't in vogue so they don't matter anymore.

 

OK you win. God damn I got other shit to than continue to argue about it lol.