Traded my '16 DBL Super White TRD Off Road for a........

Gas mileage is a real toss up and highly related to the driver. However if you check fuelly, which does give a good blend, the Tundra is 20% behind it's competitors with equal to or better ratings overall. I'm not here to knock a guys purchase. To each his own and a new Tundra is still a very nice ride. However to define it as best in class would be turning a blind eye to it's failings. Toyota has left the Tundra on the vine to wither.

Like I said, Toyota faithful drive the Tundra. Everyone else drives something from the big 3.

 

Ahhh
I'm not that quick on acro's

I can see where it would be worth it .
I'm just surprised you needed it when towing 3000

 

You don't need SD to tow 6500 lbs. However it makes a big difference. You don't porpoise nearly as much with a WD hitch at any weight.

 

You dont need it?...maybe towing with a 3/4 or up....I would not even think about towing my trailer any distance with out a WDH

 

My point was more that you could tow that weight without a WD hitch... but you wouldn't want too. As far as I'm concerned if you can get a WD hitch for your trailer for a reasonable cost it should be a no brainer.

 

So Toyota faithful dont drive the Tacoma?.....Yep Tundra has been old news since about 2012,,,,I dont have a clue what direction they will be going in the engine dept and that concerns we being I am going to be looking for a new one in a few years

 

Weight Distributing Hitch. Basically, spring bars that extend from the hitch receiver back under the trailer tongue, and have chains that hitch up onto stirrups, and provide spring force to the trailer/truck so the whole thing tends to move up/down as a unit instead of bending so easily in the middle and porpoising on bumps/dips

here.



thats mine.

 

Oh they do, my comment was directed towards those that have fullsized needs.

 

Not going to lie the new tundra is a well built vehicle with the HUGE back seat with a bigger cab than the rest of the competitors besides dodge extended cab. Love the roll down rear window like the 4runner and Sequoia which amazes all the full size trucks every time they see it. Don't quote me on this but hasn't toyota vehicles always been behind in gas mileage (Land cruisers, 4runners and tundra/Sequoia) because they were building an engine to last rather to push every pony they could to have a numbers war with other competitors?

Dream truck if money wasn't an issue 5.7L 2 door tundra with S/C and LT.

 

its not the 3000 lbs, its that the TRD Off Road is on tall soft springs, with tall bouncy tires, and the Casita 16' is a very short trailer that's somewhat hitch light, which emphasizes the porpoise thing.

here's the full rig hitched up on the level, the taco is *HEAVILY* loaded with gear for a week long astronomy camping trip.

 

http://www.autobytel.com/trucks/car-buying-guides/biggest-crew-cab-trucks-for-2015-125304/

Ford has a bigger overall cab and more total legroom than the Tundra. Fords is flat floored as well. Dodges cab configurations are alien to everyone elses because of the mega cab skew. In general all of the new trucks have that massive amount of leg room now. They all trimmed room from the engine bay to gain more inside. They are all within inches. It makes sense the Tundra is right there for amenities because all they changed was the metal cladding and plastic knobs for the new Tundra. From a mechanical stand point though they are a dead horse. I mean, can Toyota not come up with a new V8 and transmission design in 15 years without threatening their "reliability".

This is a perfect example of Toyota folks not paying attention to other trucks.

As for how long it will last most of the new big 3 trucks built in the last ten years post similar 3rd party reliability numbers as Toyota. The day and age of Toyota leaving the competition behind on quality ended years ago.

 

Gas mileage might suffer a bit because of the 4:30 gears...lol

 

btw, before we bought the tacoma and then the casita (weeks apart), we were looking at mid 2000 Chevy 2500HD extended cabs (don't need crew cab, kids are gone). decided they were just way too big and heavy of a truck to do any semi-serious offroading in, and didn't want to tow a jeep, so this rig was our compromise, a cozy camper for two, plus a offroad worthy 4x4, that can carry adequate gear for my astronomy trips, as well as music festivals, etc.

 

Weirdest thing though is how with those 4.30 gears the Tundra still doesn't do great in tow tests compared to similar HP/torque combinations.

 

Tranny maybe...dont know

 

This is basically why I bought a Tacoma too except I have a very young kid with likely more on the way. We out grew the Tacoma quickly though and ended up adding an F150 to the personal fleet. Now the Tacoma is more of a toy than anything. I just go wheeling with it on my own and when I want to take the trailer we tow with my free work truck (also an F150).

 

Very likely. Power delivery from the 3UR shouldn't be a problem you would think.

 

Apologies you are correct... Lesson learn don't even take your brothers words and do your own research. I agree with you on without dated engine and transmission. On the other thought why change something that works.

What path can they take? Bigger engine with cylinder shut off like Denali with more parts and tech to fail? Or smaller engines like ford and twin turbo with high compression to win the number battle but sacrifice reliability? Or follow the 4.0 to 3.5 like the tacoma with atkinson cycle which even half of toy fans argue about everyday. You say they should change something but don't mention a solution.

Not arguing just food for thought.

 

They could of milked a few more ponies out of the 3UZ. I also wouldn't of minded seeing the more fuel efficient current 2UZ 5.0 L out of the Lexus lineup come into the Tundra as the stock V8 option. It's within 10 HP and 20 ft-lbs of torque and with an 8 speed transmission it could of felt even better than the current offering. I'll agree though that I'm no automotive engineer and, personally, I don't like cylinder deactivation technology but Toyota has technology they could of thrown into an updated UZ engine for the Tundra. Fords 5.0 L engine is not using cylinder deactivation or turbocharging but it's posting 20% better fuel economy with similar power levels to Toyota's 3UZ. Toyota could of went there but I think they chose not to because of the costs of going there in terms of R&D.

 

Traded in a manual 2014 GT 5.0 Mustang heavily modified for the taco and the 5.0 engine I believe is an engineering marvel. Banging off the red limiter at 6K still losing traction in 3rd with supersport tires. The engine was rev happy and had damn good torque at the bottom end. I'd give props to Ford for the 5.0 and even how they came about designing this engine was amazing.