May go back to the 5.7

I’d want the hybrid just for the extra oomph and range if I got a new Tundra.

Excited to see what the 2025-2030 Tundra has to panned out by then so I can get a used one in 2040.

 

Since you all are talking about TFL and the IKE, let me ask. Why do these guys go there only? Do they ever go on a real trip through different states and different mountains? Put the trucks through different scenarios. Different elevations. Etc. Not everyone lives near the IKE, nor do we go balls to the wall towing a trailer. I would like to see how different all manufacturers really are when they tow a trailer like a normal human being would.

 

Sure they have done some extended towing tests:

https://youtu.be/isiXUi2nmIM

https://youtu.be/HibzvGxFhsc

Some towing comparisons as well:

https://youtu.be/lftJi5gBKok

https://youtu.be/OFLTBPuedjk

 

Oh. Ok. I just always run into the the IKE tests.

 

You bought a nearly 400 hp truck expecting good gas mileage with fuel priced at 6 bucks a gallon is the problem. 15 miles per gallon is phenomenal for a 400 hp truck, but the price of fuel is not on your side.

Just saying.

 

lol, ok.

Its just the Tundra hybrid I dont like. Not hybrids

 

What is your specific issue with the hybrid Tundra vs the only other hybrid pickup: the F150 PowerBoost?

Aside from onboard power both trucks are very similar in functionality.

Is your objection to both of them?

 

My objection is to this (truck) implementation of hybrid, in a vehicle that is really designed for work use outside of the daily drive and errands. -- Just like everyone else, I see the 90 lifted city status trucks a day, that have never seen a dirt road, and know people cant afford 3 cars always. Companies deserve to make money. I just don't feel it belongs in a vehicle I plan to use as a truck. We aren't there with the tech yet.

Put in the family minivan, SUV, or crossover (Minivan with ground clearance).

Its not a great implementation. -- Granted, they have to consider payload loss versus battery capacity. Its a tough balance and not easy to please everyone with.

Which is the conundrum that leaves me wanting, in a vehicle that is supposed to be my big work vehicle (not heavy work as in those of you who need 2500 or 3500 trucks). Do i want to give up the payload the battery takes for the small amount of power it adds, and its guaranteed decay over the life of a vehicle, or do i want to have the payload, and long term reliability (read as in beyond battery cycle life considerations) of a work vehicle.

I, am on the side of work from my work vehicle. I have a garbage little electric car we paid 8k for to get good gas mileage. We run 90% or our errands and tasks around town in it. My truck, I don't want to have to deal with batteries and the associated technologies at this point in the game. Understanding where it really is, longevity and such. I plan to own the vehicle for more than the projected life of the battery. Why do i want to deal with the additional maintenance costs of the batteries and associated technologies?

Which isn't a problem in the garbage electric car i bought just to get into the HOV lane for my work commute. I paid 8K and expected it to last me 5-8 years. 5-8 years of HOV access

 

Well you seem to be in luck because Toyota just rates payload about the same non hybrid vs hybrid. For example a limited trim 4X4 crew max 5.5ft bed is listed as having 1740lbs of payload. The same truck in a hybrid shows 1605lbs of payload.

If 135lbs of payload is make or break for your use, it is probably time to look at a bigger truck or a different brand.

 

Im with the other guys, DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO IT.

I bet you, if you could figure up the fuel difference in cost, between a stock new tundra, and a stock 5.7 over say, 10 years.... I would just about bet my first born, that the difference in fuel is still WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY cheaper than having that twin turbo in the shop getting something replaced after 10 years of ownership.

 

The Ford Powerboost seems much better implemented than the tundra hybrid. The powerboost is a straight ripper. The power it makes actually translates to impressive performance and better fuel mileage. And that onboard generator is really cool. I personally will not buy a Ford, but if brand made no difference to the buyer, that is the half ton to own if you want to spend the money on a hybrid. The tundra hybrid returns barely any improved fuel mileage over the non hybrid, and the acceleration/performance is not much better than the non hybrid. Add in the extra complexity and batteries/motor to fail over long term ownership, and for the added cost I think I’d skip the hybrid. Toyota seems to have made the hybrid tundra as a half measure.

 

You failed to address all the other added equipment. None of it is needed for the vehicle to do its job, they keep adding planned obsolescence into things, and people keep throwing their money at it. Hybrid is in trucks, so companies can meet CAFE standards. It has nothing to do with what the consumer wants, only with what they think they can sell. The term hybrid is hot enough right now to help sell vehicles.

Those batteries will wear out, how many charge cycles before they start to lose capacity? How many more before you are carrying around all sorts of useless equipment in the truck because the battery is dead? They are a maintenance item. They wear out on every electric / hybrid car on the planet. What is the maintenance costs associated with the hybrid system? Is that going to burn through the fuel advantage savings? possibly, depending on how much you drive.

Its surely going to make a portion of the truck in paper weight material, on a planned cycle so you will really want to go buy yourself another truck or spend a hunk of cash to fix the one you have.

 

Given that the battery tech Toyota is using is their tried a true Nickel metal hydride, I’m not that worried. There are plenty of high mileage older Priusesesesesess running around still. Much to the annoyance of those of us who want to get anywhere on time, but that’s the driver of said Priusesesesesesrsesessssssss fault not the car.

 

You are correct and I wouldn’t worry about the batteries. Those nickel batteries will last a long time and not too bad expense wise to replace. My brother has a first gen Prius and just now need to replace the batteries. Getting them aftermarket and doing himself. Wasn’t expensive at all.,the only expensive part was the shipping.

 

The one that will regret it are the ones that buy a used 8-10 year old 3rd gen. That thing is so riddled with sensors and figgle ma jigs that it’s going to take a NASA engineer to fix it.

 

I think Toyota half measured the whole truck really. It made some aspects of it worse than the 2nd gen and marginal improvements on other stuff. When they first built the 07 it was all about a working truck, big, bold, stronger. Now they went for the Starbucks looks, wireless chargers, HD display, tiny buttons. They also apparently forgot that you need to step on the bumper to get into the bed of the truck. I think they gave up on chasing after the working 1/2 ton crowd and are going after the mall crawler/grocery getter crowd.

 

I think they’re trying to bank on their young Tacoma crowd upgrading…

It looks more like a teenager designed it than the 3rd Gen Tacoma does.

Their best sales are the Tacoma. Why not get them to upgrade to a bigger cool guy Tacoma.

I think you’re dead on accurate with the not trying to compete with the big 3 1/2 tons. Why bother when you look at sales numbers.

It’ll probably pan out well for them. Just not for those of us who want a reliable working man’s half ton.

 

Why don’t we just do some math? This is a valid point of contention and the cost conscious buyer should consider it as part of operating costs.

I will use EPA average combined fuel economy since my 2007 in mixed driving that leans mostly highway sits right at EPA average with over 145,000 miles of observation. Plus Fuelly data seems to show both 2nd and 3rd Gen generally right around the EPA average combined number.

For fuel cost I am using today’s average national cost for 87 Octane of $4.577/gallon and will show a calculation for the peak average cost of $5.016/gallon. I wish these prices were lower but right now I have to assume this is the new “normal”, if anything I am seriously handicapping the 3rd Gen because I am sure fuel will be even higher 10 years from now.

For an example of methodology first up we have the good old reliable 2nd Gen 5.7L V8 4X4. I will break this down in a few examples of miles driven per year, at an average of 15MPG.

10K miles per year = 666.7 gallons of gas per year. @ $4.577/gallon that is $30,510 for 10 years of fuel cost. @ $5.016/gallon it will be $33,440.

With that methodology in mind I will try to put the data into an easier to compare format. I will list the truck model and then the first number will be miles driven per year, second number 10 year cost for $4.577 gas, third number 10 year cost for $5.016 gas expressed in a range.

5.7L Gen 2/2.5 4X4, 15 MPG average.

10K: $30,510 - $33,440
12K: $36,620 - $40,130
15K: $45,770 - $50,160

3.5L TTV6 Gen 3 4X4, 19 MPG average.

10K: $24,089 - $26,400
12K: $28,907 - $31,681
15K: $36,134 - $39,601

3.5L TTV6 Hybrid Gen 3 4X4 (non TRD Pro), 21 MPG average.

10K: $21,795 - $23,886
12K: $26,154 - $28,661
15K: $32,693 - $35,829

With those figures in mind the advantages to operating costs for fuel look like this:

Gen 3, 3.5L TTV6 4X4 vs Gen 2/2.5, 5.7L 4X4, ten year fuel cost savings.

10K: $6,421 - $7,040
12K: $7,713 - $8,449
15K: $9,636 - $10,559

Gen 3, 3.5L TTV6 Hybrid 4X4 vs Gen 2/2.5, 5.7L 4X4, ten year fuel cost savings.

10K: $8,715 - $9,554
12K: $10,466 - $11,469
15K: $13,077 - $14,331

Maybe this will help someone who is debating between the two trucks.

Personally since I live at a bit higher elevation the fact the new truck is significantly more powerful means a lot. Plus it has better tech, a nicer interior, drives better (according to testers), and has a lot more fuel range. So that coupled with long term lower operating costs justifies the gap in price MSRP to MSRP between a 2021 and 2022.

 

I prefer to step on the rear tire and enter the bed from the side. So I could give two fucks about a step on bumper. Try it some time.

 

Those fuel savings don’t offset the cost to purchase and cost to insure/maintain diffence so at the end of the day it’s a wash and comes down to which truck you prefer and which truck is the best tool for the job you intend to use it for. Preference is personal, some prefer A, some prefer B. So are wants/needs. About what I’ve gleaned from this thread anyway ha.

 

I prefer not to make excuses for the lack of something they left out. I have tried and I have done it. Doesn’t mean they should have made a useless bumper on a total redesign. I do give a lot of fucks if I am getting less for a whole lot more money than the previous gen.

 

Now factor in the MSRP of a 3rd gen compared to the discounted price of a 2nd gen. For me to trade up to a 3rd gen it will take me about 10+ years to recoupe the price difference in mpg. We discussed this already. For you, yes, you had a valid point because you have a 07. But for someone who trade in a18+ and brags about mpg is ridiculous considering the price differences.

 

No argument there, but for buyers like me who are in a position of replacing a long ago paid off truck, or adding a truck etc it’s a different metric.

For me there is no way in hell I would buy a 2021 Tundra for example.

 

Purchase cost considerations are not as easy to compare apples to apples. The new truck has a lot more standard “stuff” on it than the old one does in any given trim level. So that does drive up cost but if you wanted a similarly equipped 2021 to a 2022 you’d need to go up a trim level to achieve it in most cases. Some of the new equipment can’t be had at any price on the 2021 from the factory.

Plus on my 10 year fuel cost outlook I am VERY OPTIMISTICALLY assuming no increase in fuel costs beyond today. Those numbers get real real ugly at $6-$7 per gallon gas.

 

If we even have fuel in 10 years!!!

 

Lul, we’ll have it in 100.

 

I am not sure any of us would be around to challenge that claim sir.

Would we care if we were? If i care about having gas or not at 100+, it sure isnt going to be gasoline...

 

You watch a lot of news, huh?

 

Good analysis At 5k miles/yr and a 10 year savings for me of ~$3k it makes zero sense from a fuel savings standpoint to go from my $47k 2019 Plat to a $65k 2022 Plat. Even at 10k miles/yr it wouldn't come close to making sense from a financial standpoint. But I won't be trading up for fuel savings.

It's kinda like buying anything else now. If you need or want something new today vs. what you could have bought it for a year or two ago you're just fucked.

I replaced my 5 ton and 4 ton AC units a few years ago. If I had waited and needed to replace them today it would have cost probably at least $5k more. Do I wish that I had also replaced the 3 ton unit at the same time? Oh yeah.

 

For most people with a 2.5 Gen Tundra that is still low mileage, under warranty, under finance etc it makes zero sense to trade in for a 3rd Gen Tundra just to save money on fuel costs.

Only really really high mileage drivers would see any savings, and that crowd is usually driving for work purposes so their situation will be different anyway.