2022 Tundra

Confirmed! Limited w/ hybrid has 12" digital gauges.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-FxH1IL9JQ

 

You have it reversed.
"torque is the capacity to do work, while power is how quickly some strenuous task can be accomplished."
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a15347872/horsepower-vs-torque-whats-the-difference/

 

Straight from the Alex on Autos video, unless he heard wrong, he said 7.2 0-60 for the Hybrid.

 

redline is actually using a device to measure 0-60 times, you can see it on the windshield. he also power brakes it before launching.

is alex going by what he heard?

 

I’m going to assume those were times quoted from Toyota. He usually uses his own measuring devices when he’s at home, so for this one I’m gonna assume it’s manufacturer quoted times.

 

the exhaust interior sound is fake compared to the actual exhaust sound. redline compared the old v8 vs the ttv6 actual exterior exhaust sound since he had the old v8 next to his tester. the ttv6 is really anemic in actual sound.

 

Most truck V6’s are very strange sounding. Used to own an F150 with the 2.7 and it was very muffled.

 

It seems like even the "experts" can't agree on it. https://www.repairsmith.com/i/blog/horsepower-vs-torque-getting-speed/
I've read other things that say horsepower is more important for acceleration. This article is saying it's torque, but torque at the wheels not the drive shaft, which they are saying torque at the wheels is basically your horsepower. https://danielmiessler.com/study/horsepower/ I've never heard it like that before so is torque the power that is basically coming out of the engine and horsepower is the "power" at the wheels? I've always heard that torque gets you up to speed, horsepower is how fast you can go.

 

Interesting, but wouldn't that mean diesels should have really fast 0-60 times?

 

I would think so, but the 6.7 powerstroke has a 0-60 time of 6.1 seconds which for that heavy of a truck is pretty good.
I've come to the conclusion that they are very much related and they both matter.

 

That's not a huge difference.

14 vs 17 = 3 mpg difference
17 vs 22 = 5 mpg difference.
That's nothing earth shaking.

 

Elevation plays a big role, so who knows if they are mixing up the two.

 

Approximately a 20% increase for city
Approximately a 30% increase for Highway

That is significant especially for that size of that vehicle. There is only so far mpg’s can go for any vehicle.

I have to respectfully disagree with you here.

 

It's a proportionally significant number, but there have been multiple posts that show a 3-5 MPG increase isn't saving a ton of money. It certainly won't save enough to justify the cost of a new vehicle.

 

it's a good improvement but if the Tundra MPG parallels the F150 Ecoboost numbers the difference between the 5.7 and 3.5 will lessen at speeds over 75 and while towing.

 

21% city increase, 29% highway, with more horsepower way more torque, more payload and towing than the 21, and all from the base engine.

 

Very true…

And I agree that’s it’s not worth trading in my 5.7 because of gas mileage.

But that’s a different discussion…I still feel that is significant gains for the Tundra model.

 

Very true as well…

However in my personal opinion it’s dangerous towing at those speeds. Personally that is a moot point but I understand the thinking and agree…

 

I know "it's a truck, not a race car" but the acceleration numbers, even the mid-6 ones are a bit disappointing. The F-150s are significantly quicker.
Of course, that's not the only thing that matters, the Tundra interior is beautiful and the mpgs should be pretty good. But, if I paid as much money as these are going to be, I would be very aware that the 15 year old truck it just replaced was just as quick, if not quicker. Yeah, yeah, I know "it's a truck" but I'm a gear head and I'd like to think the new truck I just bought would scoot better than the old truck it replaces.

My enthusiasm is dampened

 

Ground breaking story Chuck!
This just in!
Vehicles shaped like Legos get bad mpg when driving over the speed limit or pulling very heavy things!

 

I hear you. But then I realize F150s are also significantly quicker back to the dealer to troubleshoot issues and significanty quicker to plummet in value, so it doesn't bother me as much.

 

Just found this on the Toyota Pressroom site, not sure if it was posted earlier, I don't recall seeing it.

https://toyota-cms-media.s3.amazona...2_Toyota_Tundra_Product_Information_FINAL.pdf

 

I don't think it is ever worth trading in a truck due to gas mileage, for example, it would save me around $12-1,500 a year in gas at our current prices. Not going to go back to $600 payments to save $100 a month, but when I am ready to buy a new truck, saving $100 a month in gas will be nice.

 

And can’t the F150 “quicker” times be attributed to the aluminum bodies?

My MIL retired from the insurance industry. She remembers when they first came out with the aluminum because a few customers were in accidents. The were repaired by reputable shops but the customers were very unhappy with the work.

I know nothing about body work but I been told it’s more difficult than steel panels. I have zero against aluminum but I would take a slightly slower truck until aluminum becomes better.

*EDIT* in addition to everything you said…

 

Ohh absolutely correct here^^

 

Yes, that's a different issue, but it helps people keep MPGs in perspective. There seems to be this magical warm fuzzy feeling about breaking 20 MPG in a truck that makes people think they'll save money trading out a vehicle.

That's the purely financial side of it. If you look at the pollution side of it you are 99.9% better off just driving what you have unless there are large gains in MPG, not just proportionally but actual mileage.


I guess my point is that, for me, MPGs matter more for an initial purchase of a vehicle type far more than they do when replacing a current rig. For vehicle replacement it would have to be something on the order of 10 MPG better for me to consider it a financial benefit. I would say that increased range would be a boon, but every manufacturer seems to shrink the fuel capacity every time they get a boost in mileage. Yes, I know the weigh savings play a part in that mileage, but the point still stands.

 

It sure helps if your buying one anyway.

 

Oh yeah, we have new F-150s at work, they're garbage. Drive nice and quick, just too many reliability issues

 

Sure. If you have two equal vehicle options but one has better MPG, sure. There is usually a compromise somewhere for the MPGs.