Fairly critical take on how Toyota has repositioned the Tundra

My '05 doublecab has a 6.2ft bed.

Main reason I put my name on a '22 instead of buying a '21 is because the '22 actually offers upgrades in the power, torque, fuel economy and tech departments. The '21 really doesn't give me anything beyond what my '05 has other than power and size. 2.5 Gens, while excellent in they're own right, are basically just bloated 1st Gens.

I've said it before and I'll say it again though. I'm not sure why anyone with a 2014+ Tundra is even considering buying a '22.

 

I admittedly don't know much about the FGT.

I've said that before repeatedly, too.

 

You wanna fuckin bet?

 

Gorgeous photo btw.

 

I went from a '12 Taco V6 AC SR5 MT 4WD to an '05 Tundra 4.7 AC Limited 4WD. Was happy to do so. Tundra was so smooth and quiet with the triple door seals, no annoying driveline vibration, 4' wide drywall sheets fit between the wheelwells. The pushbutton 4WD system was much smoother actuating than the twistknob Taco. Loved the column shifter and full instrumentation, and got $14k price differential.

 

Because anyone with a Gen 2.5 can get close to what they paid, if not make money on their truck toward a trade in on a new 2022; well probably should say 2023 now or soon. 8^0
The trade in value is a compelling carrot.
Among the issues for me however, is that for everything good they added to the new truck, they took that many "truck utility " things away from it too. The main reason I did not do anything earlier, plus the early first year issues holding me back.
So a bit of a stalemate right now while I watch for the issues to be sorted and happily just drive my 2018.
The latest problem I saw with water dripping from the driver grip handle is disappointing.

 

Get your concerns will QC. Everyone has their own assessment of assessment there. But what “truck utility” do you feel they took away?

 

This has been covered already on this forum, but for me personally.
I can't load dressers, large screen TVs behind the front seats anymore. Thats SUV quality waterproof storage area.
2.5 Gen Cab was Class Leading in size.
My dog is too big to sit on a 3rd Gen platform placed on the frame that was designed to hold the batteries.
2.5 Gen was not totally flat with seats up but good enough.
Overall Cab size is smaller.

Bumper - gone SUV - no step up standard. that's a miss. And the add on under bumper step up costs alot. Should have come standard.

Bed size - smaller not as tall anymore to swallow items, and not as wide. My miter saw would need (visual assume) to go in set at angle with tonneau cover.
Actual Cubic space can be fixed with the longer bed on Crewmax that I am actually considering, but damn, I am stuck with a longer bed when not using it.

The rear axle on the 2.5 gen has a higher load rating than the 3.0 Gen. Just saying piece of mind.

With that this truck for anyone coming from a small Tacoma or other midsize is a good bump up. IMO
Except .....I do wonder if a Ridgeline owner has just as much cubic space holding power with the trunk under the bed versus short bed? 8^0

For a Truck Person - the truck manufacturer should never go down on Cubic Space Holding Power. Toyota Did.
hence contributing to the title of this thread.

Just some thoughts.

 

For what it’s worth, I moved my daughter this weekend and easily fit a 55” tv inside my CM (along with what felt like millions of hoodies and shoes), and a crazy amount of kitchen stuff. 21.4 MPG (didn’t need a trailer).

My 120lb dog has no problems fitting. Use a seat cover though not floor. Kids back there too. I don’t think he noticed the 3/4 inch difference. I do like the extra inch of headroom so maybe.

I can tow and haul (albeit a hauling is a negligible amount) more. Does it matter the rear axel is rated higher if it doesn’t translate to anything?

 

I'm glad its working our for you. Re: the Dog - its not about him fitting..Its about not becoming a licking post for him or allowing him to jump out the open rear window which he can do on the seat. The Floor swallows him and he is content.

******************
Now IMO the biggest negative perception Toyota had going into the Gen 3 intro was the loss of the V8. Remember I am talking perception here.
Their engineers did everything they could to create an engine in this case with batteries, to be like a V8 and more.
Rear seat storage space be damned.
I personally wish they had created a true Hybrid, that could run on battery for a stretch and gets a lot better gas mileage.
The current model is a temporary stop gap - IMO. They will need to introduce a true Hybrid if they continue with the Tundra.
Still may end up in new Tundra. The issue is there aren't any available on the lot. I can wait for the current situation to change.
btw I get 18 mpg with the 5.7. Getting 3 mpg better in a 2022 is not enough from a mileage perspective to change.

 

To be clear, I’m not encouraging anyone to buy a 22. This thing could get 10 mpg better and it wouldn’t make sense to change just based on MPG. I’m curious though why the comments about less utility come up (repeatedly) when it’s not less utility. It’s more personal preference. I.e. can’t open back window when dog is in truck.

Or the thought that the hybrid replaces the V8 when the base in the SR5 up provides more HP and lb-ft of torque. Current could be a stopgap. Who knows. But aren’t they all? Technology isn’t going to stop advancing.

 

@FLTon

well I am not sure about that ... that would be pretty damn good !
It would be competing with my wifes outback.

Glad your truck is working for you..

 

Let's say I could sell my truck for what I bought it for ($45k) and I could get $8k off a new one (which is what I got off my current truck when I bought it), putting my purchase price at $51k. If my average fuel economy goes from 15 L/100 km (16 mpg) to 9 L/100 km (26 mpg), at current fuel prices of $1.65/L and my average driving amount of 6000 km/year, it would take me over 10 years to recoup that initial investment.

I doubt most of the guys who are pushing for others to buy a 2022 even keep their trucks that long.

Anyone who takes exception to any of my assumptions, feel free to do the calculation for your own use case and also remember to factor in what you owe on your current truck if it isn't paid off.

$50k - $45k = 6000 km/yr * (15 - 9) L/100 km * $1.65/ L * X

Solve for X, which is your payback period in years.

 

I have a simpler calculation, I don’t give a shit about mpg and just buy what I want , ha!

 

If we use a more realistic fuel economy of 21 mpg based on what's been reported here and by the media and we assume no discount on the new truck given the market, we get a payback period of 35 years.

 

I think my point was no one should give a shit about fuel economy because you don't come out ahead if you spend all your time buying new vehicles chasing even up to 10 mpg.

 

For me it would be to increase payload 300+ pounds, partially by getting a full size bed (going back to a DC), off road (going to an OR from Platinum) better ride and handling (IMO), and better MPG. Some of this is clearly to correct purchase decisions on my 2019.

What's holding me back is mostly the extra length, questionable reliability, and what makes the Tundra superior to the F150 and RAM at this point, including cost.

I'm in no hurry though.

 

legit concern. This is my one annoyance. You can’t really tell driving just in u turns. So not sure why but give me bed length but don’t sneak extra yardage into the front. Assumed it’s for the TT but the garage is tight.

 

I see this comment a lot and I think it's a very common misconception. The Tacoma has had the same cab size since 2005. So while exterior bits, low hanging plastics, large hood bulges have made the Tacoma grow dimensionally the actual interior cabin space is the same as it has since the introduction of the 2nd gen. Meaning low seating position, low roof height, narrow width and a tight backseat even in the Double Cab config. Bed lengths have remained the same with 5ft and 6ft options and I think the 3rd gen Taco might have a slightly taller bed??? So while from 2nd gen to 3rd gen the Taco may have grown in each dimension the actual usability of that space where it matters has not. It's just additional fluff from a long hood and massive chin. Published numbers are also a little deceiving since many times they measure width from fender to fender and not the actual body. I've parked my FGT next to 3rd gen Tacoma's and it's not very difficult to see from the eye test that the FGT is a larger vehicle in all dimensions. I have both a FGT DC and 2nd gen Tacoma DC and the interior cabin space is notably bigger in the FGT.

It will be interesting to see what Toyota comes up with for the 4th gen Tacoma. I would have to believe the cab design would be all new and likely 1-2" larger in each dimension. I hope it comes closer in size to the FGT because as it currently stands, I find the interior space of the Tacoma to be quite small and uncomfortable.

I'm not going to say the FGT is a better truck than a 3rd gen Tacoma. They are afterall at least 16 year old trucks. However I would say that my 06 DC is roomier, more comfortable, has a smoother powertrain, more TQ, and has at least 300lbs more payload compared to a similar Tacoma.

 

Alright, I've been reading this thread for what seems like a week lol. I've held back on posting because for a while, because I did halfway agree with some of the points being made. The more I've thought about it though, this is super nit picky and not relative to all the great aspects of the truck that far outweigh the slight cons. My takes are: 1.) If you're driving a truck that is your livelihood, you should be in a 3/4 ton diesel. 2.) If you're off-roading in a 4x4 vehicle to the point of commonly needing front tow hooks, you should absolutely have a replacement bumper equipped with stronger hooks and anchor point. I grew up on the texas coast guiding fishing trips, and have a ranch in south texas and have had a need for them maybe twice. 3.) After owning a 22' 1794 and now TRD Pro, I can speak to the QC issues. My 1794 had some small check engine light issues and the evaporator coil sprung a leak. At that time, they weren't taking the necessary QC measures before getting them to the dealerships. After the complaints (myself included, almost went lemon law on that), all new tundra's are getting put on substantial QA holds before going to port, then to dealer to ensure those fit/finish, and small quirks won't be popping up shortly after driving it off the lot. I couldn't be happier with the pro. It's a very capable truck and will give any truck in the class a run for its money. Rant over

 

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2022/05...ing-75k-pickup-trucks-for-the-cappuccino-run/

He seems mad.

 

1) Why not a one ton diesel?

 

Yeah, because GM doesn't have the Denali, Ford the Platinum and Dodge the Limited.

 

Because by every metric it's a better and should I add for those complaining its smaller, bigger truck than the previous generation.

 

3/4 ton, 1 ton. who gives a shit lol. If your line of work calls for HD, a tundra doesnt belong in the conversation.

 

The thing is 'is it worth $35k CAD' more than a 2.5 gen? My opinion is no, but I haven't driven it. If you're looking at getting into a new vehicle and have comparable trim 60k '21 or 65k '22 then I'd go '22. But to take the loss in value and start fresh on a loan I don't see the '22 being better enough to warrant trading in a nearly, or completely paid off 2.5 gen.

 

I’m with ya there. It wouldn’t make sense in that scenario from value/loan perspective. The truck is great but unless you’ve got money to play with, the old gen will do. I wouldn’t have pulled the trigger on the pro if i didn’t get a truck allowance and fuel card for work.

 

Hybrid rear axle is bigger than non-hybrid. You can delete the underseat storage cabinet if you want.

 

I have a '22 coming in with my name on it. A comparable trim '21 came up on car gurus with 18,000kms. on it. They're asking $66,500. My '22 is around $57,800. Low mileage 1 - 3 year old trucks are generally more expensive than a new one in this insane market.

But yes. If you have a paid off or nearly paid off 2.5 gen, you'd be silly to buy a '22 at this point. You'd be even sillier if you have a whole bunch left owing on it. Personally, I'm coming from a '05. It's a pretty big step up.

 

Here in Miami I can get a used 19 SR5 10k for $36k. A 19 Limited with 27k for $47k. 2020-21 are around $4-5k more. You have some crazy prices there, wow.