Well its Official, 2022 is a 3RD GEN :)

Does the Ford need premium fuel to generate its advertised power figures?

 

As far as I know, no. At least that was a selling point of the Ecoboost when it came out. Don’t know if they have changed that now. I deal with enough of Fords crap at work to even care about Ford more than I have to.

 

Yes, because every other TT vehicle has to be rebuilt every 20K miles, even the most reliable auto manufacturer.



I get that you may not like it, but come on, the above is straight hyperbole.

 

Ah, so you're comparing your real world mileage average to other manufacturer's best case scenario EPA estimates. That makes total sense.

Realistic use others are about 3-4 MPG above the usual 15 average of most Tundras that haven't been lifted and put on way bigger tires. That's hardly a budget breaking difference.

 

so you are saying the domestics are getting 11 mpg unloaded around town? or they are getting 15 mpg on the highway unloaded? i am pretty sure the ford is getting better mpg around town unloaded than 11 mpg and way better than 15 mpg on the highway unloaded.

edit: from what i can tell the 3.5 eco boost is getting around 17 city unloaded and about 21 highway unloaded.

if the tundra can get 1-2 mpg better than the fuelly avg on the 3.5 gas of 17 city and 21 hi-way, that would fall in line with what i was expecting of 7-10 mpg better than what i am getting now unloaded.

 

No. Reread my post. I said the Tundras average about 15.

Don't know where you got the idea that I was talking about the domestics when I literally said Tundras in my post.

 

If you want to see the lunacy of these pushes to reduce emissions you need only look at the EGR systems. Pure insanity. It artificially reduces emissions on a brand new vehicle, but years of use will actually build carbon and cause the vehicle to pollute MORE than a non EGR vehicle over time. Seeing this, I can only conclude that the emissions standards are less about actually reducing emissions and more about imposing oversight and control. And that's as close to the truth as can be had without going political.

 

Or how about the fact that burning biofuels contributes to smog?

 

i guess i should have been more detailed in my thought process, my fault.

what i was trying to say and didnt convey correctly in my post was that domestics are killing tundra in mpg by 7-10 mpg vs our avg of 11 mpg. from what i can tell is that ie: ford 3.5 eco boost unloaded is getting about 18 to 21 mpg vs our 11 mpg (7-10 numbers i was using)

if going by that train of thought if the new tundra can get to 19-21 or 23 mpg unloaded hi-way and heck even 15-17 mpg city that would be a huge improvement for us

we can get to 17 mpg hi-way but that mostly long trips and usually outside of ND due to our crap gas and constant wind of 15-25 mph

 

I don’t consider the Ikea gens of the Tundra to be superior at all. You know, assemble your own grab handle, your own trans cooler…

 

You keep saying "our average" and I need clarification. Is that your individual family's average, or are you assuming that is the average of Tundras in general? The reason I ask is because if you are only averaging 11 MPG you are running below the normal average for Tundras and you are going to run below what you are hoping to get out of a domestic or the new Tundra as well. If your Tundra isn't modified a lot and you are getting 11 MPG then it's not the truck.

For comparison, my tundra is not completely stock. I have it "leveled" up front with CB +2 shackles maintaining some rake, steel skids, sliders, aftermarket wheels and tires and I am consistently averaging 15-15.5 MPG per tank of fuel. Hand calculated before you doubt it. Hell, coming to work today I got this one. Short trip, and anecdotal, but I my computer is within a tenth of an MPG when I calculate it out every time.

 

my wife drives it very conservatively and her around town avg is 11mpg, on the highway she gets about 14-15 mpg, i can get 17 mpg on long trips. but the biggest issue is we cant control our wind in ND, we always have 15-25 or 35 mph winds all the time so our highway avg is pretty crap most of the time of 14-15 unloaded with just her and me or just her. her last trip to fargo non interstate (75mph limit) she was doing 55-65mph and she only got 14 going to fargo and 15 on the way back.

and our tundra is stock, 20" aftermarket rims as close to oem specs with oem specs on passenger duratracs (no C or E rated tires, wanted the mileage warranty on the duratracs). no lift, cold intake, trd muffler, etc.

look at our fuelly link, the 14 or 15 are trips to fargo, anything less is around town.

 

Helloooo??? It’s called weight savings. Sometimes you have to pay a price to drive such a fast truck.

 

@AzureNightmare i forgot to add, the below 10mpg during the winter is due to remote starts. the 4.4 we had was pulling a 6x12 uhaul from atl ga to nd loaded with furniture

 

Ok, then I can safely say the other trucks are not going to beat your MPGs by a measure of 10 either. They are just as susceptible to wind as your Tundra, and they won't provide their advertised numbers either. You'll be in the same boat I am, where they are offering about 3-5 MPG improvements over what you currently get. That's about the norm across the board when comparing the Tundra to others. (I feel your pain on the wind. I'm in Wyoming after all.)

So, quick math to see if a new vehicle will actually save you money, or if you're better off driving what you have.

All prices are for demonstration purposes and easy math only. Don't get literal and try to argue semantics, just go with the concept being demonstrated.

Average miles in a year is 15000 with 15 MPG average (again just follow the concept) would be 1000 gallons of fuel in a year. Say $3.00 per gallon of gas and you have $3000 in fuel cost. Now, let's say it's a gain of 3 MPGs to 18. 15000 miles divided by 18 MPG is 833.34 gallons and at $3 that is $2500.02 in annual fuel cost. A saving of $499.98 per year, or $41.665 per month. This applies ONLY if you do not have to run a more expensive fuel, which the turbocharged competition requires for the best economy and performance.

With the math above, I challenge you to get out of your current Tundra and into a competing truck with better MPGs that isn't going to cost you more than $41.665 a month more than you are currently paying. Trust me, I get it. It sucks filling up a gas hog with a big fuel tank, but it WILL NOT SAVE YOU MONEY to get a new vehicle.

 

lol thats not going to happen, ive been a loyal toyota fan since 1981 when my dad got his first cressida (my first toyota was a 1984 celica gt fastback in blue). but i did stray a few times to try other stuff (mazda protege-great small car, hyundai sonata-crappy fuel baffles, subaru legacy 3.6R - great car). my sig show all the vehicles we had between the wife, daughter, son and myself.

i am not looking to save money, just lower the inconvience of having to fill up twice on a 250 mile trip to see the grandson 1-way (and yes i know a 38gal tank should get to fargo from minot but its a struggle sometimes during the summer, dont get me started on winter time). we had a 2016 tacoma v6 sport that at least got 15-16 city and 21 highway when we had it for 2yrs (you can browse our records in fuelly link in retired vehicles). at least that fit in the garage, sadly the tundra doesnt but we are willing to give that up for the interior space of the tundra. you dont realize how cramped the tacoma is until you drive a tundra daily. plus with our 2 GSP hunting dogs that sit in the back seat during drive out/in from hunting spots, its more comfortable for them than being cramped in the tacoma. gets worse if we bring another person along with there dog. in a tacoma it was either leave a dog home and a spouse or put up with 3 dogs and 2 people in a tacoma. in the tundra 2 people and 3 dogs was a cake walk (and we dont put our dogs in the bed since our philosophy is that we suffer the same fate as the dogs, if we are nice in warm in the truck so should they)

in the end we will get a new tundra cause there are other features we wanted in our 2018 that wasnt available and hoping the next gen would resolve which it does. we are not at the point where mpg is king cause we know thats not going to happen with our 2018 and i knew that going into the 2018 tundra. but hoping the 3rd at least improves to the point it gets close to the domestics is what we are looking for. i know if we can get at least 17-19 or heck even 21 highway with our wind issue, that would be a huge improvement convenience wise, as its not about saving money on gas.

we normally dont run our tanks below 1/2 since its a safety issue in ND in case you slide into a snow bank or off the road and have to wait for help/rescue that can take a while if you are outside a city. you hear plenty of news cast where someone tries to walk tot he nearest house or place and freeze to death due to our winters.

anyway enough rambling, we are just looking for an improvement across the board with mpg a big help if its there. who knows some rumors are stating the hybrid is for better towing and not mpg but the non hybrid might actually get better mpg.

personally i think the hybrid would benefit the wife mostly since her around town avg is so crappy and the hybrid should at least help that (if the cost isnt outrageous)

 

2JZ-GTE: “Hold my drink…”

 

A man after my own heart. I did a thread like this a while back. Here is a quick and dirty "is it worth it" equation for trading your truck in on a new one:

T + mx = N + px

x is the number of miles that need to be driven to make the two sides of this basic algebra equation equal. Solve for x.
Plug these numbers in:
T = amount owed on Tundra
m = Tundra price of fuel per mile driven
N = net price on new truck after trade in
p = new truck price of fuel per mile driven
Cost per mile is (Fuel cost per gallon)÷(Average fuel economy).

The equation can be rewritten as

x = (N-T)/(m-p)

I owe $10k on my current Tundra. T = 10,000
I get 14 mpg. Gas is 2.69/gal. So my price per mile in the Tundra is $0.192. (Haha, yikes) m = 0.192
Let's say a new Tundra would be $52k. But I'll get $45k trade-in on my current truck. 10k of that goes to pay off my balance.
So my net price on the new truck is 52-35=$17k. N = 17,000
Say the new Tundra, driving the same way I drive now, averages 19mpg. So price per mile on that truck is $0.142. p = 0.142

Plugging these in, we get x = (17,000-10,000)/(0.192-0.142) = 7,000/0.05 = 140,000 miles.
I would have to drive 140k miles to break even trading my '21 in on a '22 Tundra. That's assuming they're still giving super high trade-in values on a 2.5 gen.

 

Don't know what that is...

 

Yup, and let's go outrageous and say it's twice as good as you are showing, you're still needing to drive 70k to break even.

 

Ah, well if it's range you're after that makes sense. I hope those new features in the 2022 work out well for you, and I await pics of the truck when you get it.

 

yeah just have to see the standard features with the platinum and how much the hybrid upcharge is going to cost. plus the add-ons and trade in value and how bad the "dealer market adjustment" is going to be or if we can get % off that we usually get. i have a set max price and trade in value numbers already computed, just finding a dealer to work with in ND which there isnt a lot of choices.

at least we narrowed down the color to blueprint. too bad they didnt bring back speedway blue, really loved that shade of blue.

 

Pfft. My truck is so fast it’s 12 years ahead of yours.

 

so that must mean I can take ALL my aftermarket parts an put them on my new 2022 truck!!! right????

 

Yes.
"Final 2021 Ford Bronco horsepower and torque ratings come in at 300 horsepower and 325 pound-feet of torque on premium 93 octane fuel for the 2.3L EcoBoost I-4 (275 horsepower and 315 pound-feet on regular 87 octane fuel)."

 

ouch on the 93 octane, wouldnt have been bad at 91 but seesh 93.

good thing i only run 87 and i make sure i dont buy a vehicle that requires anything higher than 87. and i personally dont care about the hp/torque rating cause no matter what, i am still running 87

we do have 89 non blended but they charge even more than 89 blended.

and for those are concerned, i have been running 87 in my 4runner for 8 yrs, no issues and i get the stated mpg on the window sticker.

 

I can't speak for others, but my F150 got 15.9, no matter what I did.

At worst, my Tundra gets 16.5 mixed driving; 18 hwy driving.

 

I always seen it this way. If one is worried about mpg. Get a car, knowing a truck in general it will always waste alot of gas. Also if you can afford it. No need to stress for a few mpg or .1 of it.

 

It has more HP than the current 5.7 in my 17 Platinum.

 

TRD Pro models will NOT be available until Spring of 2022 at the earliest.