Why I Can't Buy a 2022 Tundra

Today, I finally got to see a Tundra Hybrid in the Capstone trim at my dealer. For reference, headroom , seatroom and legroom were compared to my 2014 1794 Tundra parked near it. The front seats were 2 to 3 inches thinner across the lap than my 1794 seats. Front seat headroom was adequate but again, nothing like my 1794. Why optimize a larger storage console over seating room Toyota? Strike 1. The rear seat headroom was inadequate in both the Hybrid and non- Hybrid. My wife is 5'10", about the size of an average male and her head hit the ceiling in both but was really scrunched up in the Hybrid. We have 3 inches or so headroom in my 1794 back seat. Strike 2. The legroom in the back is barely adequate for anyone with long legs and the 2022 is nowhere near as roomy as my 2014. I can live with the front seat headroom and the rear seat legroom but for the small improvement in gas mileage and the cheaper plastics used in the truck (to save weight?), this 2022 Tundra has pathetic construction and that's just the stuff that doesn't move the truck. Strike 3. Toyota, you blew it badly.
I have really enjoyed almost all of the opinions in this forum and I wish you all well in your future purchases, whatever you decide. I'm looking at a 21 or just keeping mine awhile longer.

 

I’m 6’2” and 250ish. I fit fine in front or back seat. Leg room in back is great according to my teenagers who are comparing it to a crew cab Ram 3500 (not the mega cab). Not like I ever actually measured to compare, thats just according to their observation.

I can understand your not being impressed with the plastic interior stuff. Honestly though, the competition isn’t doing things much different on that regard.

 

Cool, I'll take yours.

 

Weird, those measurements don't jive with the published data on both year models you are comparing. But if it doesn't "feel" like it for you personally, that is what matters. I know everyone that gets in my truck that were also in my previous gen Tundra says it's massive and they feel like they have plenty of extra room.

 

Which cab? They don’t get much more legroom than a crewmax cab.

 

I don't think you can get a capstone in anything but a Crewmax.

 

Just personal opinion as well but
I agree with the post above 100%. I'm roughly the same size if not bigger than the post above and I have no issues sitting in the front or back seat of my '22. My adult friends who sit behind me when I'm driving don't need any adjustments of my driver's seat for them to be comfy.

 

I have a Crew Max. Not sure what numbers Toyota published for either regarding seats but my wife is something of a drafting expert. She brought her tape measure with her and measured the width of all 4 front seats. Sitting in the Capstone, My legs (6'2" and 215) were at the edge of the seats laterally. Mine have room on the sides in my 1794. The rear headroom speaks for itself. Trust me, I did not enjoy writing this letter at all. I've been planning to get a 1794 Hybrid Crew Max as soon as they fixed a few details. Headroom and seat width aren't fixable. I'll keep this truck awhile. It's been bulletproof. The rear seats were the clincher. My wife, at 5'10" can't sit in the back and my son is 6'5" so when he's here, he gets the front. The height of the rear seats in the Hybrid and non-Hybrid (storage only) is different than the 2014 and must sit up higher. That coupled with the roofline appearing lower on the Capstone probably sealed my headroom issues. Again, I REALLY wanted to like this truck (and I do) but I can't live with the headroom issues.

 

Sit in a 2.5 sometime and you'll see what I mean about the seats and headroom.

 

I traded in a 2014 Platinum Crewmax for my 22. I know the cab is smaller in a few areas, but that hasn't translated to the same feel for me as it has for you. Either way, the 2014 is a hell of a truck and if that's what you want to stick with, you aren't going to be disappointed.

 

only thing i can think of is that the side bolsters are pushed up more than the 2.5 gen where they are flatter. hence the smaller width.

 

At 6’0 and 255lbs I can sit in the back of my CrewMax with plenty of head and leg room…

 

There's probably less headroom in the models with panoramic sunroof, in combination with the higher seat for the hybrid battery underneath the rear seats. I'm 5'10 and have a good 3" or so before my head touches the headliner in my SR5 when in the backseat. Haven't sat in one with a panoramic sun roof yet.

 

Keep in mind that people with taller torsos will have less headroom in cars than people with shorter torsos. A friend of mine is my height (6') but his inseam is 2" longer than mine which makes his torso shorter than mine. He has zero issue with head room in any vehicle he sits in.

 

one nuance that really pisses me off and makes me think i can be happy with my 2015 for longer than planned is the bullshit they're trying to pull with subscriptions services on car starters and seat warmers on new vehicles. those are both things people in the great white north appreciate and i'm not interested in spending money on.

 

Agree 10000%. Wtf should I pay you for something my car is able to do all on its own? I can understand a subscription for things that need constant updates like GPS maps, but that isn't needed for some of this stuff different manufacturers now want to charge a subscription for.

 

Subscription for the seat warmers?! That’s a first I’ve heard of that…

 

Not Toyota. That one is BMW. There's been a few news articles in the last year about different manufacturers considering subscription services for some things.

https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/12/23204950/bmw-subscriptions-microtransactions-heated-seats-feature

 

Are you sure you were sitting in a 2022 Tundra? Sure as f*** doesn’t sound like it.

 

No, you must be right. This was just a new silver truck sitting in a dealer showroom that said Capstone on both sides. Must have been one of the rare 2015 Capstones. Not a real bright post, might want to clean*** it up in more ways than one. Get a tape measure and go in your Platinum backseat. If you're over 5'10" tall, you may have just found out the lack of headroom in that huge truck. Many new/younger car buyers never sit in the backseats of the cars they buy. The panoramic sunroof makes all the difference in the world. I meant no insult to 2022 Tundras but regardless of how you feel, my wife at 5'10" and me at 6'2" can't sit in the back of a 2022 (yes 2022) Tundra with a Panoramic Sunroof. I wish we could, she wanted the Tundra as much as I did. Her 2001 Sequoia runs like the day we bought it. Amazing how a thread can devolve, especially one only attempting to point out a lack of rear headroom in a Tundra with a panoramic sunroof.

 

Lol
Good luck with this one.

 

As someone who's purchased over 50 new vehicles in their lifetime, I've looked at 50 or so more and ended up deciding not to purchase for one reason or another. Not one single time did it ever dawn on me to to go the specific vehicle forum about said vehicle and voice why I couldn't purchase it...

 

Because others MUST know.

(Honestly, this sentiment, extrapolated to the nth degree, is why FB exists.)

 

I have had 2 gen 2.5 tundras, pretty much nothing I liked better about those than my 2022 1794 it’s a nice truck. I’ve owned likely 50 plus vehicles as well, nothing is perfect but the 2022 is a big step up from the 2.5, each to their own.

 

I tested a platinum 22 and while it is smaller inside and much longer outside, I didn't find it such a huge difference to the point of being a deal killer. You feel like your more in a plane cockpit rather than a larger open space, so I get what people are talking about, lower roofline with the brow over the rearview mirror area makes it seem smaller as well. its still a pretty big truck.

talk about seats, I tested the GMC AT4 6.2 recently, OMG the front seats are small and uncomfortable, 100% deal killer uncomfortable.

If you want a larger feeling , higher sitting, truck, look at the Ram, new ones are really nice.

Im going with a platinum tundra when the supply and market get more back to normal, Im not doing ADM or paint sealer for 2K, or any other bullshit they are forcing now.

 

HAAAA! says his 5'-10" wife don't fit. I've sat in the 22 tundra and I'm 6'-2", 200lbs, with plenty of room, more then I will ever need. I feel like every older gen Tundra owner is scratching at every tree trying to convince themselves that their truck is not becoming outdated. We get it, past Tundras were great but all good things come to an end. Its time for the 3rd gen to shine, and it will when all its kinks get ironed out.

Also I'm sure nobody here minds if you don't buy one, 1 more for someone who is waiting to get one.

 

If you sit in the back seat of the Tundra with a panoramic sunroof and are really 6'2" tall your head will hit the roof. I'm amazed at the folks that argue with that part of the post. My head hit, my wife's head hit. This isn't a contest to see who's right, it's a post to alert others that this might be an issue if you've never sat in the back. It must make you feel good to win the argument. In that case I forfeit, you win. I guess you don't mind sitting with all the room you'll ever need (as long as your head is tilted at an acute angle).
I was even talking to the sales manager today about possibly buying one with a normal sunroof. It's offered only on the Limited Double Cab and below trim. Anything else is panoramic all the way. He acknowledged the interior size reduction in the 2022, but what does he know, he's just a sales manager.

 

This is 100% what it is.
That and convincing themselves that Gen 3 is riddled with “so many problems” that theirs didn’t/doesn’t have.
Meanwhile Gen 2/2.5 has had literally dozens of recalls since 2007.

 

There is no one size fits all since everyone is built differently. The headroom really comes down to torso height, as was mentioned earlier in this thread. For the OP and his wife they both must have really tall torso heights. No one can argue that. I took my son with me to try out the new Tundra (need to replace my stolen 2020) to see if the panoramic roof would be a deal breaker or not. With the panoramic roof the very back of the headliner is higher than the rest surrounding the pano roof, pretty much an intentional head space relief for back seat passengers. I am 6'6" and my son 6'1". Both of us could sit in the back seat with or without panoramic roof. My head just barely fit under the headliner relief in the pano model. However, I was unable to lean forward without my head touching the lower headliner at the back of the pano roof (just in front of the relief), my son could no problem. So I guess that means we have shorter torso heights. It does seem a bit odd to me that someone 5'10" would have a taller torso than someone 6'6". But then again people are all different. Plus I have no hair and maybe hers is more fluffy making up the difference I do also wish they kept the cavernous dimensions of the previous gen. I did like that a lot about my previous truck and something I liked less about the new one. Unfortunately I have no choice.