2022 Tundra

They are not quiet, it doesn't matter which year with the 3.5 at times they sound like a little diesel. Its normal, and annoying to some. I am going to bet that the new Tundra will be exactly the same. They don't initially give you a lot of confidence towing and about 4500 lbs is about my limit of comfort towing with it, they like to rev, and you have to use the S mode. Some people are not comfortable with the rev happy motor, I got used to it towing heavy with HD gas trucks and as long as she stays outta the red line your doing no harm. It takes some getting used to for sure. I have a feeling a lot of 2022 and beyond Tundra owners are going to get real familiar with getting used to those same things..lol. If this 2022 does what I need, I'm going to add one to the fleet. I am ok with it as long as it is not "worse" than the tacoma in those regards. If the new one is not up to par, I will probably just get an older one with some miles on it and make it do what I want it to.

I think the Tundra in its current form is going to be a very good used truck purchase for quite a few years, I could not see buying a new one until now (next gen) and only if it has the improvements that command the price tag.

Its a great buy as a high mileage beater now, probably the best buy out there in the 1/2 ton market especially if your going to push it a little past its "on paper" capabilities.

 

Or any other automotive enthusiast forum. Go peruse some threads at NASIOC, judging by some reactions here those guys would make some people cry.

 

I hope they put a diesel turbo in tundra, it’s better than a hybrid system

 

That is just how the auto industry is now.

“Oh you want seats with that? Well that will be another $5000 for this option package….”

 

That would be bad ass if they could pull it off without needing after treatment, and a DPF. I don’t think they’re quite there yet, so the juice might not be worth the squeeze.

 

You forgot to mention that the Tundra stickers for close to or less than the domestics (at least around here):

Tundra SR5: $52k CAD
F-150 XLT: $55K CAD
Sierra Elevation: $65k CAD (when I was looking in November 2019. I know they tend to drop their MSRP through the year.)
Silverado RST: can't remember exactly for some reason. $60k CAD?

For all the inevitable bashers, yes I'm aware that the big 3 tend to offer big discounts off MSRP (though I also got about $8k off my truck) but the question was about paying sticker price so that's why I quoted MSRPs.

 

The thing that's bothering me lately is that many manufacturers only make their more desirable (to me) off-road trims available in crew cabs. It happened to Nissan, Titan is near impossible to find in King Cab Pro-4X (at least as of 2020, I think it was killed for 2021) and the new Frontier Pro-4X is only available in Crew Cab (except Canada, you can get Pro-4X in King Cab).
Same with Ford, want a Tremor? Crew Cab short bed is all you get.

I like to over land, I want the longer bed for sleeping in, don't need 4 doors anymore, but need lockers, skid plates, etc with what the wife and I do.

I get why the industry is doing this, but it sucks. People will extend themselves way out on payments/credit to get the flashiest truck, but to "justify" it to a wife who is marginally more responsible, they get a 4 door version. Some of us still want 2 door toys, and we don't need to justify our wants.

 

But the current Tundra is noisy like a diesel...

 

Cause I hate them hybrid brake system

 

Call me a fanboy but i love everything about the new tundra. it's a good refresher.

 

Well then it may get worse...lol...

 

And some of us would be sitting in the beds of our problem free and infinitely superior 1st Gens, sipping whiskey and placing bets on the fights.

 

I hear you man.

We can all complain (justifiably) about what the pick up market in the US has become. But it is what it is.

I blame a few things for the current state of the truck market, with a personal caveat. To get it out of the way I personally like crew cab 4 door trucks with nice interiors. I am glad they are available, and most likely will buy them exclusively if my finances allow it.

However, I lament the fact that manufacturers underserve the buyers who don’t want all those options, or long wheel bases or short beds etc. They look at what sells and allot production capacity accordingly, and what sells and makes the $$$ are loaded up crew cab pickups.

So the trucks get more and more expensive, and have more and more tech. Great for those of us who appreciate it, but it crowds out guys who don’t like it/can’t justify the cost.

I blame CAFE standards for this. Americans like big powerful automobiles that are nice places to spend time with enough room for the family and all the stuff. Fuel economy standards have made that a tough row to hoe if you’re running a car company and want to offer a full size family car with lots of power. You’re getting slapped with a gas guzzler tax. So you build lame ass FWD passenger cars with no power. Consumers take one look and decide well to hell with that I’ll buy this giant truck because it’s a better family car than this supposed family car.

So now the trucks have to be good at a lot of stuff. They have to ride well, have tons of space inside, have all sorts of infotainment, and still be able to do truck stuff. No wonder they cost so damn much.

I’m surprised the major players haven’t taken a page from Honda and make an AWD truck with no low range transfer case or off-road aspirations just to hit a much lower MSRP.

 

So far it’s looking good...

 

This, and honestly, it's a huge reason as to why I bought a Tundra when I did. I'm well aware that a newer F150 can beat mine in a race, get better gas mileage, etc. I think the do-it-all mentality is part of the reason why we tend to get in so many arguments/discussions here. LOL American truck buyers essentially force the big 3 to say "Well, OK, so here you go...it's fast, it's light, it's capable, it's got tons of tech....reliability? Uh....it's fast, it's light, it's capable, it's got tons of tech...."

Meanwhile, Tundra is still sort of saying "Uh....I thought you wanted a truck? For truck stuff?" I'd love for my truck to get better mileage, but that would mean either a) being lighter (in which case it'd probably be thrown around more by heavy loads while towing), or b) fuel-saving features such as AFM or cylinder shut-off, which is rarely appreciated by anyone once they break. I can't tell you HOW many of my GMC/Chevrolet fanboy buddies traded in their vehicles last year/early this year when they heard they could get new trucks WITHOUT the fuel-saving features. LOL They had no problem telling me their trucks could tow 1K more than mine could, and I was fine with that every time their trucks were in the shop.

 

sure a truck leaf spring is made out of cheese could do real truck stuff...lol

 

I never said Tundras are/were perfect. I think it's been well-established that they can be improved. My point is that when it comes to the Tundra, Toyota's focus has never been on being the fastest, or the most efficient, etc.

 

Tundra should be perfect, they have 14 years to make things right

 

For me, a CC is A-OK if I can get the better off-road package and a longer bed (at least 6'). I was just lamenting the CC thing because it seems the most common way to get a "normal" length bed is with a KC.
I have seen this thread discuss whether or not the Tundra mules are 6.5' bed, I'd be very grateful to get a CC TRD OR with a 6.5' bed.

You'll never hear me complain that a truck is "too big". My main beef is everything good is bundled with short beds.

 

Or another perspective: They did so well that the design has been able to sell at a steady pace for 14 years, whereas domestics have to do continual updates to woo buyers with the "latest and greatest."


Totally agree that the Tundra has lots of room for improvement, but the only way you get "perfect" is if the goal is easily defined and doesn't move constantly. The Domestics are continually chasing that perfection and it costs them in the reliability/recall department. Toyota puts out a solid product and then watches how it's used, gauges the market at the time, and then they come out with another solid product for the time. It's slower, but in a market segment that is not their bread and butter, it is a sound business strategy.

 

"Perfect" is the latest and greatest in smartphone connectivity (currently wireless Android Auto). Every modern vehicle will be obsoleted within 2 years no matter how good the reliability and longevity is.

 

The power of the V35A-FTS is a whole different animal than the 2GR-FKS in the Tacoma. Other than sharing a V6 configuration there’s not a lot in common there as far as I know.

Having driven and ridden in Fords with the 3.5L EcoBoost I predict the Toyota V35A-FTS is going to not have to rev much at all to make good power, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see it be more than capable of holding a taller gear than you might expect with a load. The EcoBoost makes a lot of low end torque, and it hangs around over a pretty decent swath of the engine operating range. Once it’s making boost there’s a lot of grunt to be had.

A quick glance at the Land Cruiser 300 release shows the V35A-FTS (or whatever variant of V35A they call it) making 409hp @5200 RPM, and 479lb-ft of torque @2000-3600 RPM in the Land Cruiser. With a 10 speed automatic. I’ve watched one video of a full throttle acceleration run and the gear spacing is pretty tight, only dropping maybe 1200 RPM between gears on an upshift. So it’s capable of staying in a given power/torque sweet spot depending on what you’re calling for.

To put it into perspective the 2GR-FKS makes 265lb-ft @4600 RPMS. That is 232hp at that engine speed. Then you have to rev it out to 6000 RPMS to make 278hp. That means it’s only producing 242lb-ft at that engine speed. Not exactly a broad power band. You’ve got 1400 RPM’s between peak torque and peak power. I don’t know what the gear spacing is like but there’s a strong possibility that an upshift at redline may drop RPM’s below peak torque albeit pretty close.

The V35A-FTS in comparison can produce 479lb-ft at only 2000 RPM…. that’s 182hp being made at an engine speed we associate with overdrive at 70-75 MPH. By 3600 RPM that 479lb-ft is 328hp, that is 50hp more power than the 2GR-FKS makes at peak power. At only 3600 RPM. From there to peak horsepower @5200 RPM the V35A-FTS never dips below 413lb-ft of torque. So unless Toyota really messes up the transmission gearing and tuning that 10 speed is going to have a broad wave of torque to use pretty much everywhere in the operating range.

 

Lets just hope they do a better job with the transmission tuning on the Tundra than they did on the Tacoma..lol

 

Link not working.

 

Is that a Land Cruiser 300 or an LS500?

 

LC 300 at the wheels? Tuned or stock, sorry I do not have FacePage or Instagram. So I can’t see the details.

If that is stock at the wheels, then Toyota is lying their ass off about how much power the V35A-FTS puts out. That is only 10% loss through an AWD case at the wheels? Yeah right…

 

Kind of how modern turbo cars are these days.

My previous GTI, rated 220CHP put down 223WHP.
The current VR30DDTT Q60 is within 5HP at the wheels of the rated CHP.
BMWs are famous for this.
Boat outboards are supposedly rated this way (HP at the prop)
Gone are the days of inflated CHP ratings.

 

Yeah I pretty run it full time in tow/haul and S mode. Love driving it this way and when I don't just leave it in S5 or S6 it's fun playing with the gears. How you find fault in such a fun way to drive a truck is beyond me?

But yes in drive and not in tow/haul the parameters are looking for fuel economy I'm guessing, which results in gear hunting. An constant locking and unlocking of the TC, but nowhere near as bad as the Camry powered Tacoma.

 

Umm, there must be other factors that are not being revealed. I bought a ‘21 Sport Taco for my son, lifted it, put oversized XL tires and it gets 18.5 mph on interstate trips. The engine runs and sounds just fine.

 

Or you just get an aftermarket HU. Problem solved.