Tundra bed length conundrum

The half ton truck rating had to do with towing copacity I though...? 1ton=2klbs
That’s how it used to be anyway I understand it’s not so strict any more (F150s range from 500lbs to 1400 or something like that, I think min on a stock tundra is like 7500 or 8000).

Spme people take off the emission controls (trade out exhaust) where it’s legal. Others do it anyway and just roll the dice on the ticket... and find “more lenient” safety inspectors lol

 

How often does someone haul something that is between 5.5-6.5 ft long?
If its over 6.5 ft, i'm guessing you have the tailgate down so you've got the tailgate down either way.
Really the only benefit of the longer bed is for the guys that need to haul things exactly between 5.5-6.5 ft or the guys that use the bed for hauling tools to and from a job site, where the bed space is utilized fully.
I could see the extra space being useful for those that have multiple saws, generators, hand tools, etc.
For the every day user that extra foot doesn't really matter.

Toyota used to offer a "full size" bed with the crew option 04-06 Gen 1 crew cabs.
Something tells me this wasn't a change that was made lightly or without research as Toyota is very much in the pull manufacturing process. Being they do what their customers ask of them, hence why they don't tend to innovate with new features. Those innovative features tend to come from companies that are more into push manufacturing (i.e. Ford).

When I made my choice I looked at friends hauling motorcycles with their tundras. They all had to have the tailgate down as the sport bikes were just barley too long to close the tailgate. So I decided since the tailgate needs to be down, I'll get a crew cab, more room inside for passengers (which I use more), and have the rear tire of the motorcycles rest on the tailgate.
The bed size works well for me and what I do I can see the argument for a longer bed but I don't think the majority of users really need it if they really think about their use.

 

Aren’t CM and DC frames different? Seems like it would be close to dc 8’ bed but They would probably have to do another frame for cm 6.5’ bed.

 

I would have preferred it myself, but it was not even an option. And really, one extra foot isn't going to make this rig any harder to park, so that argument is BS lol

 

There are no places it is legal to delete emissions equipment, it is a federal law, it also a federal crime with big fines for deleting emissions equipment from a vehicle, it is very rare that it happens but if they start in the future alot of people with deleted diesel trucks are going to have issues.

 

Guys that have toppers on their CM's, the 6.5 bed would be perfect for camping, throwing a sleeping bag in back. At 5.5" of bed...it absolutely sucks to try and sleep back there.

 

this is a good use case but I suspect not the majority of users.
Not saying they shouldn't make it an option, especially considering they just need to mix and match existing parts to make it happen.

 

As it sits right now, I can't use my CM as a camping vehicle like I would like to for a couple of reasons.

1. The payload on this truck sucks, and adding a topper to that just reduces that number even more.
2. The 5.5 foot bed just doesn't work to sleep in for me. I can pull it off if I sleep diagonally and bend the legs (I am 6'8"), but if I have someone with me (which I usually do), then using the truck is out.

Another reason for the 6.5 foot bed is that it gives an extra foot for hauling firewood for me, while still keeping the truck at a somewhat reasonable length for maneuvering the forest roads. That is fewer trips up the forest, as I can fit more in the truck (at least until I hit the payload limit - luckily I cut down and dead wood in burn areas, so the wood is seasoned already, so it is fairly light).

Another reason: When I am hauling longer lumber, moving that pivot point a foot further back helps with stability of the lumber as I am bouncing down the road.

Another reason: My friggin' mountain bike doesn't fit in the damn bed unless I angle it (even with the front tire removed). Granted, it is a massive bike, since I am a tall guy, but still.....

I realize that I represent like .01% of the population, but still - I would love a 6.5' bed. And more payload.

 

I'm very sad to see this post. Ive been looking for weeks to replace my 2004 Tundra Crewcab with a 6' bed for a newer model. Looks like that isn't an option.

Can anyone tell me what year they stopped making the crewcab with a 6" bed?

My 04 has a 6'bed, 4 full doors(same legroom as the new Crewmax - 44.5") [ The DC only has 28" of rear leg room. 15.5" less than the crewcab. That's ridiculous and completely useless to me.) rear roll down window. I love this truck but want something newer. It worked in 04, not sure why the same size truck wont work today.
I need room in the cab for me and 4 friends (many of my friends are over 6' as I am. A DC simply will not work at all). Many times we will go somewhere and we have 5 grown men and a bed completely full. That's why I bought it in the 1st place.
I need a 6' bed for my motorcycles and to haul stuff. If 8'ers weren't so unwieldy I'd have that to fit more gear. My bike barely fits in the 6' bed so a 5.5 bed also simply will not work.
I have ALWAYS been a die hard Toyota man. The thought of buying a different brand has never crossed my mind and frankly, makes me sick to think of owning a ford, chevy, or dodge..... /shudder.....
But now Toyota is going to force me to buy something other than a Toyota if I want to have a truck I can actually use the way Ive used my 04 Tundra for the last 14 years.
So Toyota has made the brilliant decision to make a truck that does only one of the two things a 4 door truck is meant to do.. well. You can either use it as a passenger vehicle and its useless for hauling. Or, you can have a truck that actually holds all you and your friends gear... as long as your friends find another way to get to where your headed.
I can easily find a ford, chevy, or dodge that does both.
That's a hard pill to swallow.

 

Go sit in the back of a current model DC first - your 2004 and a 2008-2019 is 2” difference in front and rear combined. A guy at work is 6’3” and he was very surprised he fit in the back of my 15 DC. The door isn’t that small, but the window makes it look like it is. There is less window for some reason which makes it appear smaller from the outside than your model.
Obviously the CrewMax is a lot bigger, but it’s also the biggest offering on the market. I don’t ever haul 4 or 5 tall adults so a CrewMax doesn’t make sense for me.

In 2004 there was only an access cab model (very small) and then the doublecab model you have. Not a CrewMax or “crew cab” model as you mentioned.

It was a tough decision between the two for me as well, and bed space was more valuable to me due to the amount of hunting/fishing/camping we do. I threw some bed bars and a Yakima box on back to keep the cab clear of all of our backpacks/sleeping bags/pillows/dry groceries. It’s worked out way better than expected.

The last year of the model change was 2006 to answer your question.

Your 2004 does not have as much room as a crewmax like you mentioned - all dimensions are definitely closer to the 2008-2019 doublecab model.
Your 2004 double cab has 1” less legroom in front, and 3” more in rear than a 2008-2019 doublecab which is a 2” difference. But front and rear shoulder room in your model is 6” LESS shoulder, and 2” LESS hip - when comparing your 2004 to the 2008-2019 doublecab.
So the current double cab model offering can feel more roomier than your current model doublecab.

The current crewmax is 1” more legroom in front than your 2004, and then 6” more legroom in rear. Quite the difference - 7” overall.
More than triple the difference in your comparison for the 2004 to a 2008-2019 DC.

For the record, I would purchase a 6’5” bed CrewMax if they offered one.

2019 CREWMAX:
Vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv





2004 DOUBLECAB (not access cab)
Vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvbb






2019 DOUBLECAB
Vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

 

Dude go sit in the back seat of a 2007+ double cab Tundra. Personally I thought the back seat space was pretty good, about the same as a decent midsize sedan like an Accord or Camry.

Granted it isn't limo-like room of the Crew-max, which is room in the back seat is more like an Avalon or Lexus LS460 L(long wheelbase). If you are talking German cars, rear seat room is equivalent to those long wheelbase versions of the BMW 7, Benz S-Class, Audi A8. You get that same sort of rear seat room in a Toyota Tundra CrewMax.

Personally I found the Tundra Double Cab to be the best compromise among pickups in that $20,000 range. I hated the Tacoma xtra cab with its useless back seat and rear opening doors. The proper crew cab Tacoma had 4 doors and a short ass bed, or a longer bed length that was almost the same size as my double cab/6.5' bed Tundra. Really I just didn't feel like the Tacoma was compact enough to feel useful, to feel like it handled significantly better, to feel like it was much easier to park in the configuration I wanted, it wasn't that much more fuel efficient either.

I ended up with a bit more base model 2011 4wd Tundra double cab, 4.6 V8, it was cheaper than a 4wd V6 Tacoma crew cab. MPG was kind of similar 14-18mpg depending on how you drive it. My truck had pretty low miles(55k on an 8 year old truck), zero body work, zero rust, good condition factory paint, interior that looked brand new, ran/drove/performed like a new truck.

 

Mine has a 6 and 1/2' bed on a 126.8" wheelbase

 

You misread just a bit of my post. I have the 2004 crewcab, not a dbl cab. So, the new Dbl cabs have just shy of 10" less leg room than MY 04 crewcab and 7.5" less than the new Crewcabs.
Thanks for the links. that info is much better then the info I originally found that said the new DC have 28" of rear leg room.

 

Now that I know the DC has 34.7" of rear legroom and not the 28" i originally found reported I think I will go try one out. Im still not happy about loosing 10" over what My 04 crewcab has but it might work.

 

Losing 10" over what your 04 double cab has??? What?

rear legroom for your 04 is 37.5"

rear legroom for an 07+ double cab is 34.7"

That's a difference of about 3". Not 10"

And your 04 double cab (what you are calling a crew cab) does not have the same legroom as a CrewMax in the rear. It is about 5" less than a CrewMax.

 

You don't have a 2004 Crewcab, you have a 2004 Doublecab (proper Toyota term).
Toyota only made a Doublecab (larger) and then the Access-cab (smaller) in your year.
Toyota then introduced the gigantic "Crewmax" model in 2007.
I would definitely recommend checking out both. You will find that the Crewmax is damn near just way too big inside, and the Doublecab just a little too short.
Although I don't think my doublecab is too tight at all. My kids are only 6 and 10 though. When I looked at the Crewmax and Doublecab - I thought to myself "Do I want more bedspace, and kids less room - or the kids more room and me less bedspace?" I figured my kids are lucky they even have their own door - and the spoiled brats can easily live with the doublecab space - Dad wins. LOL

 

You will never see me own a truck with less than an 8' bed. Well maybe when i turn 75..lol.

 

Adding to this - the 2004 front is 1" less leg room than the 2007+. So in reality, the difference is only 2 inches of leg room between his "Crewcab - which is a Doublecab) and the 2007+ doublecab.
But the other measurements I mentioned above (shoulder/hip room) are much greater in the 2007+

Go check them out OP - you'll be happy with either model I bet.

 

Thanks for the clarification Boosted & Atomic. I was calling it a crewcab because that's what its called on the site where I got the specs I posted. (from your the link boosted posted).. they call it a Crew Max i guess. Ive never measured the leg room back there but the 44.5" listed does seem like an awful lot. The 37.5 that Atomic mentioned seems much closer. If that's the case then I think I could probably be OK (not happy but useable) with the newer DC's.
Now to find one with the roll down rear window & leather seats.
Thanks guys.

 

The difference in 5.5 bed vs 6.5 bed is huge. If you use it a lot you know. 12 foot boards I throw in with tailgate up. And it works well. Literally just throw it in. I understand back window goes down (jealous). But for more than a few pieces of trim I would not throw the lumber I use in thru the window. You can load it up with pt 2x12 12 ft as quick as you can throw them in. The backseat is big enough for me and family or friends. The crew cab is massive inside. I feel like I see more people wish they had a larger bed than a larger backseat

 

2004 is Doublecab

CrewMax is only 2007+ model years and those have the roll-down window option.

2007+ Doublecabs don’t have the roll-down window option.
Fyi

 

I agree, the shorter bed is NOT an option(motorcycles, lumber, furniture, pipe,..... you know things that caused someone to invent the truck in the 1st place). I never stick anything through the widow. Its just nice to roll down all 5 windows in nice weather (like having a hard top Jeep) or when talking to someone in the bed or behind the truck without having to crawl back and slide the tiny windows open. And its nice to see clearly when backing up to a trailer without that little widow in the way.
Bummer its not an option after 2007.(thx for the info Boosted, you just gotta keep bursting my bubbles don't you. )

 

I know - I’m sorry! Lol
BUT - the backup camera in the newer trucks sure kicks ass and takes the place of rolling down back window! It’s very nice when hooking up!
There’s a positive!

 

Great point. What year did the camera become a feature?

 

ETA, I don’t know for sure. I think some of the 2007-2013 had the really small cameras in the corner of the rear-view mirrors and some in dash.
2014+ they are the center-screen in the dash cameras.

 

I have a 2013 with a rear view camera display in my radio head unit.

 

Edited - thx!

 

My work truck has an 8 foot bed... my sport truck has 6 and 1/2 foot bed.

 

The reason I went with a double cab over a crew cab was bed space. I don't have a family, I don't have rear facing car seats, but I still occasionally have people use that rear seat. I frequently haul weird shaped items like couches, construction materials, etc, so I really needed the extra bed space.

Looked at Tacomas, hated the xtra cab with the tight back seat and suicide doors, crew cab/short box had dinky bed, crew cab/reg size bed was just as long as a Tundra. Same thing with GMT900 Chevy/GMC trucks, it was either xtra cab with suicide doors and reg size bed or crew cab and dinky bed. Hated those stupid rear suicide doors and tight back seats in both trucks.

Tundra double cab had four full doors with a good sized 6.5' bed. Rear seat room/comfort was great too, unless you are over 6' tall there is plenty of room back there in a double cab. One of the reasons I bought this truck was due to packaging I found superior to other comparably priced used trucks.