2022 Tundra

use mine all the time (whispers) "NasTundra"

 

I think once you actually see that head unit in person, you’ll appreciate it. It looks like the same they currently put in the Highlander Platinum and it’s a really nice unit.

 

I agree. Toyota will find a way to make what could be great as lame as possible.

Look at their recent history:

1.) Updated Tacoma, laggard transmission and a 3.5L V6 plucked out of a car with basically no changes to the power curve appropriate for a 5,000lb truck. Hot garbage. They should have put the 1UR-FE in the Tacoma and basked in awesomeness, but Toyota lamed it up.

2.) 5th Gen 4Runner, dropped the V8 and forced buyers to put up with an ancient 4.0L V6 that is really not that good. Sorry unpopular opinion, but at that much displacement it should have made a lot more Freedom Eagles by the time the 5th Gen 4Runner came out. It was not impressive in the 4th Gen and the 4.7L was better in every way that mattered. Then they put said antique engine in front of an equally antique 5 speed automatic. So the 5th Gen is painfully slow, I drove one once and that was enough. I’d rather punch myself in the nuts every morning than drive one of those anemic turds on two lane highways where I need to pass other vehicles. Needed the 1UR-FE, and PRO model with the 3UR-FE. Didn’t happen. Lame.

The 6th Gen is rumored to not even have a V6. Yeah… not headed in the right direction Toyota.

3.) Killed the Land Cruiser for the US, after only bringing the bloated luxo-barge version that no one who could afford bothered to buy aside from those with a desire to be sneaky about their filthy riches.

4.) Non truck or SUV related but the Supra is a BMW. I used to work for a BMW dealer, trust me when I say that you don’t want to buy an overly complex, poor quality BMW with a Toyota badge on it and have Toyota service departments try to maintain it. It’s tough enough for BMW to keep their own trash heaps on the road, much less for a Toyota dealer to have to join in the fun. I suppose it gives bored techs something to do…

With that in mind I wouldn’t be surprised if the new Tundra had stellar numbers on paper, but the tuning and nannies will hold it back in actual use. Oooooh!!! It’s got all this power and torque we will say, then get in and have the transmission and ECU decide to consider our request for more power via the throttle and respond with: REQUEST DENIED while holding onto the highest gear possible with the intensity of a Robinhood investor and their GameStop shares.

 

the grill is actually not looking as bad as it did a couple days ago.
Still want to see one in person.
Hyundai front grills now are big, lots of plastic, but IMO they are pretty sharp looking vehicles.

 

I think the pro will have a tucked away step at least on one side of the rear frame to use to get into the bed.

 

I can’t see it either. I looked at all the pictures. The picture with the crew and double side by side looks like the silver piece might be separate but the bumper corners look like the are part of the rear quarter panels.

 

didnt have any issues after the ecu learned how we drove, and the update to the ecu helped but not much, we were already happy with how the transmission was. sucked after a battery disconnect, but it went back to normal after a few months.

this was a no brainer move from toyota. kinda hard to fault them on this since the v8 toyota (i had one in silver with the rare oem crossbar in the front) was eating into the lexus GX v8 series. who would buy a lexus v8 if you can buy a 4runner v8 for 1/3 of the price.

as far as the v6, its the 99% of the us population that is dictating direction (cafe, emissions, mpg <--> weight reduction), the people in the forums dont have any clout since we are about 1-5% of the buying public. i see more moms/ladies driving a 4runner than anything else, this is what is driving most of the changes i suspect but i have no evidence.

not surprising since sales average 3.1k a year (2005-2020) high of 4.8k / low of 1.6

not really sure on this but this i was really surprised toyota re-did the supra in this suv climate in the usa. the bmw/yota was to keep cost down i suspect, otherwise doing this from scratch would have put this out of reach of most toyota buying public, i suspect if it was all in house, it would have started at 85k and go up from there.

actually all changes made for toyota are in-line to what we are looking for (remember this will be the wife's primary driver), she is looking for all these changes for her.

1. we rarely pull/haul stuff (think we only touched the tow/haul button once in 3yrs)
2. who cares about 0-60 times in a truck
3. the last few months the wife is nagging about how crappy the mpg is even at highway speeds. doing 55/65 she is barely getting 15/16 mpg on an empty bed/cab going back and forth to see the grandson about 250 miles away (no mods/lifts, etc out side of wheels and tires). if they up the mpg even to 17-19 or god forbid 21 mpg on highway, that would be a major deal to push to the new 2022
4. creature comforts (along with #3) are a big priorities this time around, hence the reason we are swapping our 18 plat cc/sb for the new 22 plat cc/sb, and this will be our last tundra at our age
5. if these changes had not come about, we would have kept our 18 and lumbered on or even looked at going back to a tacoma begrudgingly (dont care for the cramped seating in the tacoma)

 

How often do you go see your grandson?

It takes you about 16 gallons each way now (split difference between 250/15 and 250/16). At 21mpg, it would take about 12 gallons (250/21). A difference of 4 each way x 2 is 8 gallons. At $3 a gallon, that’s $24 each trip.

Would that be worth a new car payment and potentially higher insurance? Not specifically asking you, but it’s more rhetorical. My truck is paid off and I wouldn’t get a new one just to get 5 mpg more. I’d guess most people don’t drive enough for that to make any difference.

 

You only own one vehicle? Why not get a Camry or something like that for the long highway trips? Or even consider getting rid of the truck if you don't need the capability and renting one once every 3 years.

 

Agreed. That line looks more like a reflection to me than a seam. Maybe a parking stripe or curb or something that just happens to reflect at that area. Other photos don't show that line.
(I do hope that it is a seam though. That corner is the most vulnerable part of a truck and will cause very expensive repairs if it is just one piece with the quarter panel)

 

i drive a 2014 4runner limited. she drives the tundra i drive the 4runner. i have to drive roughly 30 miles daily to/from work and ND winters justify the 4runner full time 4WD system. she only drives about 3 miles daily to/from work, but then again we use her tundra for all drives when we are together, otherwise its just her and the tundra. i usually dont go with her when she goes to see the grandson as i have to watch our 2 GSP hunting dogs while she is gone

side benefit is i get alot of alone time on the weekends to do nothing but what i want and only have to deal with dog attitudes (which is non existent)

 

depending on things she can usually make it on about 1 tank if she goes the 55/65 route, fill up on the way if she goes the 75 route. usually its about 1-2 times a month, so about 500 miles round trip for 1 trip. gas is 2.99/gal right now. i track all the fill ups/mpg on the vehicles, here are the stats for the last few fill ups. mpg at or above 14mpg are trips to the grandson, rest are around town.

 

Oh, I don't doubt that it is nice. What bothers me is that it sticks up and above the dash for no apparent reason. The only thing I could this being used for,is to hang something. Like a necklace or charge cables.
Even then, I wouldn't want that all over the rest of the console.

I just don't understand the thought process that determines this to be aesthetically pleasing. I would much prefer it to have a more integrated look to it.

 

So I usually agree with most of what you post Mr. Dragger, and I know there's hyperbole here, but I'm going to have to disagree with you on this point about the 1GR-FE and really this sentiment for trucks as a whole. For the intended use case of a 4R the 4.0L V6 is fine. I know, I know, mo powa babeh. I get it. Everyone wants 500 hp and 30 mpg in their BOF 4 door truck/suv with a super soft suspension. I mean yeah, you're not beating anyone in a drag race with the 1GR-FE, but it's plenty powerful enough for that vehicle. I've never had any problems getting it up to speed. Whether it's merging into traffic after following someone who doesn't understand the purpose of an on-ramp, or passing a car on a two lane backroad. Now if you have four 200 lb. adults and a trailer you're going to struggle doing those things, but I'd argue that's not the regular use case of a 4R.

I'd make this case for any truck. I get why 0-60 specs are shared, but I'm always baffled with how quick these websites and forums are to praise and criticize 1/2 ton trucks based on how fast they would be around a track. How much of that actually translates over to off-road, payload and towing performance? Maybe I'm just a boring driver, but I care more about keeping the revs low and getting more than the mileage rating out of my tires. I do agree a higher performance engine would have been nice option for those more interested in speed than economy for the PRO, or another variant like the track hawk or the raptor.

You know what is a dangerously anemic vehicle? Any small 4 banger that has to rev at 3500 rpm to maintain the speed limit on the interstate. Nothing like pedal to the metal and slowing down going uphill.

 

Going 60 mph I will get 19-20mpg on the hwy, bump it up to 75 and it drops to about 15mpg. Is it hilly or fairly flat? Seems like you mpgs are low for going 55-60mph.

 

I always thought the 4.0 was adequate in my Tacoma. Now that small 4 banger revving to 3500 brings back memories of my '91 4runner that had the 2.4 liter in it it. 5 speed manual, but on the highway you were revving over 3500 rpms to go 70-75mph.

 

it is ND (montana blows, chicago sucks, as the saying goes, no offense to either state . also the wind doesnt help on these small hilly drives no matter where you go in this state or the crap gas we get here for some odd reason. once you get out of ND, the gas improves and the mileage goes up. outside of ND the highway mpg goes up to 16-18 mpg, heck i even got 17 going up the mountains pulling a trailer on tundra from TN to GA on i-75 south.

we only remember/note the days its not windy, snow blowing sideways or raining sideways in ND

 

here are the stats for the last fill ups on our 2016 tacoma sport v6 4x4 for the 2 yrs we had it... sold it on dec-4-2017 for a tundra. somehow fuelly lost records of the fill ups for a while so i dont have all the records continous.

 

Seam.

 

and here is the 4runner last few fill ups ... and thats usually doing 74 mph to from work. i dont drive it in town as we use the tundra for that mostly.

 

If I were in your particular situation, I would probably trade the Tundra for a Corolla and get a good set of winter tires for it.

 

Those numbers aren’t bad for 75 mph. My 2007 Tacoma gets around 16 at 75, but I can get closer to 20 at 60 mph. Where I live 60-65 is typical highway speeds.

 

This is the advantage of the 10 speed. 1 to 4 are super low, 5 to 8 are what 3 to 6 currently are in the Tundra, and 9 and 10 are extreme overdrive. So you can have the 3.23 rear end and still have tons of torque making it to the ground because 1 to 4 are so low. Unloaded the truck will use 1, 4, 8, 10 most often with average throttle usage.

 

I thought the 2nd Tacoma was one of the best looking Toyota trucks in a while. I was going to get a 2nd gen Tundra when I bought my 2012 Tacoma but that I agree was too bubbly for my tastes…. The 3rd Gen Tundra looks 10 times better than the 3rd Gen Tacoma.

 

doesnt work so well for pheasant hunting up here in ND. we dont put the dogs in the bed, they are in the cab with us. if they suffer we suffer is our motto. they sit in the back seat area (we put the seats up, have a full coverage floor liner that goes up under the seats, husky brand) on the way out and back home from the hunting spots.

we had the tacoma but the rear seat area was too cramped for 2 GSP hunting dogs in our opinion.

if we go with someone else, 2 of our dogs plus a 3rd dog is unworkable with a tacoma, tundra was enough room

 

I’m trying but I just don’t see it. Blowing up all these photos it should be a lot easier to see

 

I think the 4.0 feels better in the Tacoma vs the 4Runner. Both would be better served with the 4.6 or 4.7 V8 (depending on the model year). I test drove a 4.0 and 4.7 4Runner years ago. I went home with the 4.7 hands down. No contest. The added torque of the 4.7 makes for a much more pleasant driving experience. Also, depending on driving habits and speed limit I could get 18-20 mpg with the 4.7. I actually got 25 mpg driving on flat ground at 55 mph.

 

good and bad part of the tundra was the single 4.30 rear end, great for pulling stuff but extremely lousy for mpg, and 10yrs of fine tuning the same rear end makes for a fairly stout failure proof rear end.

even if they went with a 8 spd would be great, but i hope the transmission doesnt hunt to bad during windy days or slight inclines with/without a head wind. the tacoma before the ecu flash was really bad at this in my location (the first 30-40 miles of our trip to the capital was hills and/or windy sometimes), so i usually just kept it out of auto and stuck it in 5th manually.

i think 4th was 1:1 ratio if i am correct on the 3rd gen tacoma.

 

My gut tells me that the Tundra mpg woes are more due to engine design and tuning than rear end. You can drive 55 mph at 1500rpm and you would still be luck to maybe crack 18-20. Chevy and Ram consistently get better fuel mileage. I think the Tundra engine is reliable but not very efficient. I thought I remembered reading how the Tundra has to use a lot of fuel to cool the engine and why a lot of boosted guys were blowing engines due to inadequate fueling. I could be completely wrong, just thought I remembered reading that somewhere.

 

well if they had offered the same rear end choices like the big 3, i think the mpg issue wouldnt have been a big issue.

if they offered the 3.55, 3.73, or 4.10 that would cover the bases pretty good for all people.

3.55 if dont expect to tow at all, great mpg
3.73 if you tow once in a while, decent mpg (best trade off between the 2)
4.10 (4.30 in tundra) if you tow a lot, worst mpg