Fairly critical take on how Toyota has repositioned the Tundra

Oh what we wouldn't give for 1,500 to 1,800 pound payload in our Tundras

 

exactly my point lol, I’m at 1310 in my 2016

 

I saw one and declined a test drive knowing it has a 24 gal max fuel tank capacity. That eliminates it for me.

 

Funny , I have a loaner 2022 sienna since our 2015 is in the shop, payload is right behind my tundra at 1200lbs+

 

I've seem a lot of Tundras used for small businesses like small landscaping companies where there's one mower on a trailer and weed eaters in the bed. I have yet to see a large construction company's name on the side of the Tundra. Personal observation. I'm sure there are but the larger companies just don't mess with the lighter trucks. Most of the time our Tundras are people haulers with the occasional move the kid to college, take the boat to the lake or like me, the most reliable tow vehicle for a small to medium travel trailer. They are unbeatable for what they are designed for.

 

Imagine doing that to a new Capstone.

 

This is an excellent take

 

Heavy hybrids leave little room for payload. How do you like the ‘22 Sienna?

 

it has some nice stuff on it, rides really nice.

I don’t like the 4 cylinder portion of the power train, it’s not very smooth or quiet. Our v6 2015 is way better in that regard, the new one gets way better mpg but I don’t particularly care for it. Too bad they can’t make a v6 hybrid or something.

 

Yeah it’s mated to a CVT, right? The ‘15 Prius I used to have had one. The engine was loud at times and the RPMs often seemed like they didn’t match how I was accelerating. I drove it as hard as I could for one tank of gas just to see how bad I could do. 42mpg. Lol.

 

Why are you in the truck market in 2 years? Do you drive 250,000 miles a year?

 

There used to be a scaffolding company at our site that had some Tacomas but they also had some 3500s (can't remember if they were Ford or GM). No Tundras as far as I remember.

 

if its CVT that would explain it, you explained it perfect, its like its reving up and Im not even trying to go that fast and the engine is too loud and not very smooth.

I just didnt care for the powertrain, our V6 is way nicer, super smooth and even power too.

we are not likely going to buy another one when this one is replaced.

 

There's one HUGE reason you don't see large companies with Tundras - initial cost. When you get into fleet sales and you can buy 5 F150's to 4 Tundras it's pretty easy to see why accountants pick Ford/GM/Ram over Toyota. A few wouldn't even look at Toyota because they only want 1 brand for service reasons so lacking an HD option takes them out for a few.

Small businesses where 1 truck being in the shop is a HUGE issue you will see some Tundras, but large ones where 1 less truck just means changing who carpools with who then initial cost is going outweigh reliability.

 

moved abroad

 

Mike Sweers did say this is not a work truck. But instead a lifestyle truck.

I think it was in the TFL video where he said it.

Toyota could of released a blue collar version, and let the TRD PRO continue to be the "lifestyle" trim. But they didn't and sales figures will tell them if they were right or wrong.

My vote is they are Wrong. So my money stays with me.

 

just for conversation purposes, but it has higher payload and towing than what you have (and me) so why is your and mine (2016) more of non-lifestyle truck than the gen 3?

I get the tow hook argument but ours suck anyway, they are buried underneath and good luck trying to get to it without damaging the front and having to dig down to get to it unless your nose up

just goes back to my earlier post about all 1/2 tons aren't work trucks, none of them can carry shit for weight as far as actual work trucks

and toyota did release a blue collar version, the SR, which is de-tuned for more longevity, etc. But again, none of these cut it for job sites with any kind of demands

 

My issue is Toyota could have kept everything that makes the 3rd gen what you’re all referring to as a “lifestyle truck” which I guess is just slang for suburban mom car, and still appeased the rest of us truck users. The things we are asking for would not make it a worse “lifestyle truck” but would improve the truck utility of it. It was simply a flop of a redesign with oversights to what many truck people want and need. It wouldn’t make it a worse truck for anyone or have made it more expensive to have tow hooks, a deeper bed, a tighter turning circle, a V8 option and real bumpers. I wish some of you guys would stop making excuses for Toyota for making the truck worse for some us for basically no reason. It’s like they slapped us in the face and said tough shit, this is what you get! I personally won’t reward their out of touch design with my money.

 

It absolutely would have made it more expensive to have options. Toyota doesn't have the scale like Ford to spread the development money across the board. It's quite obvious they weren't building a truck for you, they were building it for the 5 suburban families that are looking to tow a trailer once a year and commute the rest of the year. They would have done some calculations and figured losing you was worth gaining them. Toyota is not Ford, the Tundra is a luxury for them to build not a cornerstone. Toyota cares more about the Camry and Highlander than they do the Tundra.

 

Did you even read what I said? None of my gripes are options except for tow hooks for $40 in steel. Literally everything else is a difference in design cues. If anything I want less standard options not more. I don’t need 12 cameras and a Tesla screen to back up my trailer or park my truck like some people. If they really nailed the 3rd gen it’s odd how many current tundra owners aren’t interested.

Even if I granted you not offering more than 1 engine choice to address any added cost, the other issues wouldn’t have been like moving heaven and earth to address on the drawing board.

 

I for one think the new Tundra is a ho slapping good time.

 

Haha. The lack of hookers is where I originally derailed this thread.

 

Men of high culture we meet again

 

Tundra - Feudal Lord edition.

 

Lexus needs a truck.

 

I think it is unlikely we will see one with this one seemingly filling that role.

 

My impression remains that the Gen1 was designed to disrupt the market by being a class leader in at least a few different critical categories. The Gen3 was not designed to do this because Toyota has decided investing the money to widely outdo other truck makers in specific categories is providing diminishing returns as compared to adding tech and luxury.

The presumption is people looking at a Ford won’t pass it up for a Toyota because the Toyota can tow 120 more pounds or haul 50 more. If they tried to add 3 more inches of leg room than everybody else they feel that won’t be the thing that pushes other brands’ fanboys off the fence. They want to hold current Tundra fans and catch people upgrading smaller trucks.

 

You should price out COMPARABLE (bolded cause people seem to conveniently miss this when they quote stats) models between the Tundra and the big 3. The 3rd gen has a very strong value proposition. Ford moves a lot of 2.7TT's at a similar price point to SR5. GM pricing for an evolution starts at $57K without taxes. That's a top packaged SR5, lower Limited. Chevy is slightly better price wise but only one model offers the 6.2 so you're comparing against the 5.3 or 4cyl. Ram is the only vehicle in the country running sales right now (at least here). Beyond the loyalists is the value prop buyer. Hell look at a base SR vs a base Ford f150 XL (base motor is the 3.3 at the same price). Then go drive them both. Value on paper makes Toyota tough to overlook and the ride/handling qualities will win over folks who aren't going with a predetermined brand.

You might be thinking of Gen2 as the disrupter and it lasted all of 2 seconds till bigger budgets made up that ground. Gen1 while a great truck is essentially a tacoma.