2025 Tundra Engine is down!

Risking a roughly $25000 motor replacement in a Tundra 3.4 or GM 6.2 out of warranty isn’t a road I’m willing to walk down. And IMO if I’m feeling the need to buy a $2500-$3000 extended warranty on a brand new vehicle, I’m buying the wrong truck.

I agree there some risk with the 2500HD as some of the 6.6L GM motors have had oil consumption issues, but that wouldn’t leave me without my truck for an extended period of time suddenly. The valve body issue with the 10 speed transmission worries me more given the parts shortage GM has experienced at times.

 

warranty isn’t that much , but I’m well aware there is no convincing you, nor do I care to

if you feel like your better off in your gm then I wish you all the best, maybe you are .


Good luck, I’ll see you in the next gen 3 thread I’m sure lol .

 

Word

 

You should definitely worry about that valve body:

https://youtu.be/mNnKCEnwp6c?feature=shared

two of my coworkers just dumped their GMC’s, both failed transmissions.

 

Oh I know, Im nothing if not consistent. Sometimes to a fault.

 

For sure… and time will tell. For perspective, we’d have to still be talking about the same valve failure issue in 2031 for GM to be in the same boat as Toyota with the 3.4 catastrophe. I could be wrong here, but I don’t think even GM management and engineering is anywhere near that inept.

 

How many vehicles are in the GM recall vs the Toyota one again?

Don't get me wrong, the issues with the 3rd gen suck and I wish I still had my 2019, but you're hyperbolic rhetoric about it and blanket "design issue" claims aren't doing anything. If it were truly a fundamental design flaw, then every engine should be impacted. The failure rates should be semi consistent. However, as time goes on the failures are not as common. There are way more trucks out there that haven't had a problem than have, and several getting new engines haven't had an issue at all.

The burden of proof is on the prosecution (that means you) to prove the accusation. What is the design flaw? Deflecting with "tell me the exact cause that's been fixed" doesn't cut it. It makes you sound like somebody who has painted themself into a corner and has no recourse but denials and evasion. State the design flaw, or don't, but at this point you're approaching "the empty can rattles the most" status.

GM is telling ALL the folks with the engine that they need to change the oil and brace for issues. By contrast, it's not every single Toyota/Lexus 3.4 having an issue. It's an unlucky few.

Yes, the launch of the 3rd gen was a mess. Yes, it's taken a hit to the reliability that Toyota is known for. Yes, we all wish they had kept a V8 and put it with an 8-10 speed. That said, it's certainly no worse off than any of the big 3 for issues. It just looks that way because the issues stand out in stark contrast to the stellar record of Toyotas past. The big 3 issues are just the norm so they don't stand out. They blend into all the issues that have always been there.

 

You should watch the video. With GM, it is not just a matter of being inept. GM is purposely doing things to cut cost which are driving major reliability issues around the 80-125K mark. I grew up in a GM family, drove GM's for years. First 4 vehicles were GM's. Most of our work trucks are GM's. Between the electrical issues that I always battled on GM's and how they make their powertrains now, I'll never put myself in one again.

 

The 3UR had an 8-spd behind it in the LX 570 from 2016-2021 - the AE80F with Full-Time AWD.

 

My comment was in reference to what powerplant we wish had been put into the 3rd gen. What they did in other models doesn't really help, or hurt, the Tundra. The majority of us wanted to keep a V8 I think.

 

Don't disagree.

The 3UR, while proving to be reliable thanks to Vic, was getting long in the tooth and wouldn't have met the new emissions standards.

It would've been a site to see a smaller displacement, say 4.0L, twin turbo V8. Some of us thought they'd go the way of the Hurricane and go Inline 6. Say a T30A-FTS or a T35A-FTS. Or even a 3JZ. Oh wait, that's for the next Supra.

 

Again, not defending GM because I’m just a customer, not an apologist. The 6.2 obviously has serious issues. And if GM is still dealing with the same issue in 2031, they will be exactly as inept as Toyota in handling the 3.4 problem. GM sells about 870,000 Silverado and Sierra 1/2 tons a year. Toyota sold 159,000 Tundras last year. There will be far more 6.2s in the recall by number for sure. I opted for the 6.6 gas motor in my 2500HD to avoid the AFM system and the 6.2 motor found in the 1/2 tons. Hopefully that pays off for me.

As for “proof” of a design flaw, you’ll notice it’s been crickets from the Toyota PR team and their apologists after I asked this question: what exactly is the issue with the manufacturing process that results in debris being left in all these motors for 7 years and counting? Maybe you know? Do you have proof of what the debris problem is? Or are you just parroting back what Toyota’s bots, their PR team and apologists keep repeating here and want you to believe? At this point, IMO you can choose one of three perspectives on this issue:

1. There is a manufacturing problem in two separate billion plus dollar factories that results in Toyota not being able to properly flush machining debris out of their blocks. Even after 7 years, Toyota’s best engineers from Japan and America can’t develop a procedure to consistently flush debris from open passages *before* assembling the internals of their 3.4 flagship truck motor.

2. There’s a design flaw with the 3.4 motor. This design flaw results in metal from disintegrating bearings OR metal left over from manufacturing winding up in the oiling system post filtration and then the main bearings go kaput.

3. Failures are caused by an interaction between a poorly designed oiling system, a poorly designed motor from a materials standpoint (that pesky abnormal silver content that shows up in some of these oil analyses), and early manufacturing defects.

As I’ve said before, my money is on #3
I do believe that Toyota is intentionally hiding the real cause of these failures because there is no economically feasible way for them to fix the multiple problems at this point. The design is complete. The manufacturing facility has been built. The parts suppliers have invested in their manufacturing and delivery systems. Dealers have invested in training and tooling to work on these motors. Etc etc etc The horse has left the barn so to say, and the bean counters have determined it’s less expensive to deal with the recall and future warranty repairs than it would be to disrupt the supply chain at this point. I’d bet a lot of money that the 3.4 will be put out to pasture in a few years, sooner than anyone at Toyota had planned, and that there will be a mostly all new motor released.

 

I would have preferred a naturally aspirated V8. We know they can make emissions because ford's done it. Hell, it even gets better fuel economy than the Tundra while beating it in HP.

I'm just not a fan of undersized engines being used and tacking turbos on to get them up to barely adequate power levels.

 

Uh, You do realize that the Hybrid 3.4 liter makes 587 ft lbs of torque? class leading among any NA v8s on the market today.

 

I'm talking base motors, not top specs. The lateral comparison for your hybrid is the powerboost, and I would touch either of them.

For an upgraded V8 look at the FP700 package on the coyote. 700 HP and 590 lb ft of torque.

I don't care about max specs on paper. 400 HP and 400 lb ft is enough for anything I'd ever attempt in a 1/2 ton.

 

Toyota chose to copy the Ford Powerboost instead of doing something more unique like a smaller displacement V8 or a larger displacement inline 6. There is an increasingly underserved market space in trucks that think 400 HP and 400+ ft/lb of torque gets the job done in a 1500 without the overhead complexity of turbos, their EGR systems etc. And they want a fresh engine with modern efficiency not some 20 year old design that still hanging around because it's cheap. That is more aimed at the GM 5.3 and Hemi.

I fit the above. I use my truck for transportation and some truck stuff. I am not drag racing it on the weekends. But the days of 15 mpg or lower being acceptable are gone for me.

Tundra volume wise is a niche vehicle. They could have gone less what everyone else is doing under the hood to stand out but supposing due to costs went with an existing motor family that best matched what everyone else mainly Ford was doing

 

Fully understand their logic. I just don't like the direction is all.

 

The 5.7 liter v8 in the old Tundra besides reliability wasn't all that, I mean I get v8 noises as I had a Gen 1 Raptor and its v8 made some awesome low-end driving but returning 10-14 mpgs wasn't that great. I for one don't just drive a Tundra for its twin turbo v6 hybrid motor, I drive one because of the overall package. The application of Tech is unsurpassed in the full-size truck category. The Tundra is not as big as a F150 or Silverado but it feels like it is. The digital rear view mirror and huge center display make it better designed than other modern trucks. The quality for me is why I drive one, it is best in the quarter ton truck category by far. Maybe Toyota should have done a v8 option but then I would think that you on this board would still not buy it. The fact is you cannot please everyone and Toyota's idea was to bring a competitive full size truck to market and do it quickly.

I love having an integrated camera for the front of the vehicle that way I can press and record what I want at any time.

 

before the release of the gen 3 I didnt want them to keep the same 5.7 at all...

I was asking for a 6.2 iForce, HA

 

small correction, Ford ripped off toyota and came first to market when they stole Toyotas hybrid tech when the partnership collapsed.

ok, continue on

 

Let me guess - Holiday Inn Express last night?

 

I feel a surge of beers coming my way for trademark infringement

#notRyan

 

Look, I know I’m right. You know I’m right. That’s why no one here has stated why Toyota can’t flush metal out of a motor in two separate billion dollar plants, because the issue isn’t about machining debris at all. It’s a design defect. Toyota has mitigated it to some degree but some of you are going to be staring down $30K invoices for out of warranty short block repairs in the future. It sucks and I’m sorry Toyota screwed you. As they say, don’t shoot the messenger.

 

Are you for real, do you like to stir the pot and see what BS you can spout?

I have a 23 with almost 30k miles on it trouble free. I get my oil changed every 5k miles not 10k miles like the manual suggests. I have a 10-year 125k mile warranty on my truck. So, if my engine fails, I will not be paying for it. Will you still be saying this crap as many trucks hit 100k and even 200k miles? You take care of your vehicle, and it will take care of you. There is no massive coverup or conspiracy ongoing regarding the 3rd gen. If you don't like them that is your choice you do not have to buy one. Enjoy your 10–15-year-old rust buckets that may or may not make 300k miles and stop bashing a truck which you do not own and will not ever own.

 

Twin turbo makes sense where I live in the Colorado, n/a motors are gasping for air. The Tundra is relaxed and doesn't need high rpm. I've had countless GM, but there are only two kinds, those that squeak and rattle, and those that are going to. (Actually, make that one kind.)

 

Bet you I don't.

 

Wtf this is insane so the long blocks they’re putting in as replacements are different or “special” than the regular engines going in because if the 25 trucks are failing doesn’t that mean the replacement engines will fail as well smfh