Thinking of trading in my 18 Taco for a full-size

If 0-60 in 3 flat and 5k payload is gay, I don't want to be straight.

 

I’m just having a little fun. On a serious note, how many miles can it go before it needs a recharge and how long does the recharge take?

 

An old friend of mine is one of the lead engineers of Rivian vehicles and he tested them in the Arabian desert as some of their initial funding came from Saudis and I can assure these will be off road beasts.

Conservative mileage before recharge is 400 but actually more like 550-600 if driven only on roads and the recharge time is 30 minutes-1 hr for full charge.

 

If those are actual real world numbers they’re going to do very well.

 

I had a 2015 F150 Fx4 with the ecoboost 3.5. Great truck. Now I have a Tacoma. Now. I. Have. A. Tacoma. Again (-:.

 

8 or 10 speed transmissions offer their own can of worms; they offer a whole lot of complexity in exchange for very little reward (the mpg gains are marginal at best). And while we lament about the Tacoma's current auto transmission (which I agree is not that great from a performance perspective), plenty of people on the other side of the fence complain about weird shifting patterns/feels with 8+gears in their Ford or GM product. In fact transmission issues are the top source of complaints for other high volume midsized trucks (Colorado) and even for some 1/2 tons (Ram 1500). So pick your poison...do you want a conservatively tuned transmission that is reliable or do you want more gears but more potential for problems?

Rear disc brakes should be on the Tacoma, I agree. But the drums work fine and don't inhibit performance much if at all for the midsized applications.

I have not heard of driveline shudder being a huge issue with the Tacoma or other Toyota 4x4's, nor have I personally experienced that issue. Again, I encourage you to check out the NHSTA and car complaints website; GM and FCA trucks, among others, are well known for having driveline issues.

Frame rust hasn't been a big deal on Toyota's since the late 2000's; the fact that you bring that up suggests that you're not really paying attention to modern industry trends and news.

I don't know what planet you were living on 25 years ago, but Toyota has never been at the cutting edge with regards to its truck technologies and designs...never. It will put newer technologies to use, but those technologies are almost always heavily vetted and tested before they are implemented in their truck and 4x4 lineup....that's just the way Toyota approaches its design/development process. Also, Toyota's fuel efficiency was never class-leading (at least within the truck segment).

Toyota isn't really lagging behind its competitors in some regards. The Tundra's 5.7l v8 is arguably a more technologically advanced engine than the push-rod dinosaurs that Ram and GM have been using for ages at this point. The frames and underlying chassis design for the likes of the F-150, Ram 1500 and Silverado haven't changed all that much; people make a big deal about new bodywork and interior features, but the underlying designs haven't seen significant changes. Most truck owners are too stupid to understand that; they care more about how cool the interior looks and whether or not the exhaust sounds good. The 3.5l v6 in the Tacoma, while not a great truck engine, is a very advanced design compared to some of the other v6's on the market. Toyota recognized from the get-go that direct and port injection was required on their gasoline engines....meanwhile it took Ford several years to understand why their direct injection ecoboost engines were gunking up prematurely.

Reliability gap hasn't narrowed all that much. Ford, GM and FCA are very much focused on producing for quantity and attaining hp and torque bragging rights. Toyota never has, and never will be, engaged in that market fight. Their priority for the truck segment has always been reliability. All we have to go on for reliability is past data; we can't predict future reliability. Based on that past data, Toyota still reigns supreme in terms of reliability. The burden of proving the gap has narrowed lays with the other OEM's...they have a lot of ground to cover in that regard.


And BTW, I totally concede that there are ways Toyota could improve its current truck offerings. But to sit there and suggest that something like a F-150 is light years ahead of the Tundra in terms of performance or vehicle design is just laughable.

 

I can attest to this. I bought a 2016 with a 3.5 ecoboost brand new with 24 miles on the ticker and from then till the purchase of my new 2019 trd or Tacoma, I had between 80 and 90 work orders. At one point I literally was without a truck for a month straight. These were all non drivetrain components that were failing, but my master cylinder went out on my brakes within the first month of owning it.....again BRAND NEW TRUCK. The panoramic sunroof was known to have issues Ford said and that broke on me 4 times and was replaced 3. The fourth time (had water running down my windshield) they had a random dude that actually came up with a solution for the engineering issues fixed it because ford couldnt or wouldnt come up with the part to recall. Also that engine cokes up like crazy and I would have mornings when it would hardly start. Oh yeah and did I mention I called Ford at one point out of utter frustration of my lack of having a vehicle for a month at a time and the rep legitimately told me to call the BBB if I didn't like paying 600 a month to drive a rental focus instead of the 53K truck I bought....ie: "go pound sand sir, thanks for your money". Please for the love of all things that are holy do NOT enter yourself into that nightmare. I wasn't able to wake up from it till I slept walked onto a Toyota lot and had my eyes opened.

 

Spoken like a true Toyota fanboi! Lol

Makes the argument FOR Toyota and admits they aren’t as technologically advanced as the competition, but then calls the other motor offerings from other manufacturers “dinosaurs” with a negative connotation. The same dinosaurs that still seem to have better fuel economy and towing numbers...by far.

...for the record though, no one said the Toyota 5.7 was bad per se. they said it wasn’t efficient and not as powerful as the others.

...and the interior really blows. Feels like it should come with a Fred Durst hat and tickets to a Bare Naked Ladies concert.

 

If the OP is still here and listening wait until 2021 and buy the new redesigned Tundra. Its suppose to have a 3.5l twin turbo and a available hybrid option with around 30mpg.

 

All of your complaints are valid, they are still having problems with the Pano roof, but sunroofs are an aweful idea IMHO anyways. In 2017 they fixed the "coking" issue by adding port injection alongside the Direct (on a side note, stay away from the 5.0 Coyote from 2017+, there are hundreds of people, possibly thousands, as not everyone posts online, who are currently lemon lawing their 5.0's because of immediate engine failure under 5,000 miles), in 2019, they've finally got the new 10-speed figured out, and all of the other annoyances I have read on F150Forums currently don't apply to my truck. I have still been reading complaints on older trucks having brake master cylinder failure, hopefully Ford steps up on that manufacture range and gets them fixed as a recall. One thing to remember is that all cars and trucks have growing pains in the first year, and no manufacturer is perfect. Glad you're happy with your Taco, I loved mine as well, but it also was in the shop a few times for warranty/TSB repairs.

 

I got a Chevy Trail Boss....Crew Cab. The space inside is incredible....my kids can almost stand.

 

Just stating the obvious...the Tundra's 5.7l v8 isn't a brand new design, but it is certainly more advanced compared to the push-rod v8's FCA and GM have been milking for quite some time now.

Those push-rod engines don't actually get better mpg's...the trucks do, and that's mostly because of the little tricks/compromises that FCA and GM are willing to play (air dams and lower ride heights which compromise approach angles, higher gearing which compromises towing and offroad performance, light-weight body panels and structures which compromises durability).

If you put a 5.7l Hemi or comparable GM engine into a Tundra chassis, I guarantee the mpg differences would be negligible.

 

Let’s see...

• Old tech in the competition = dinosaur
• Old tech in a Toyota = reliable

 

Ecoboost F150s weren't without their problems but carbon on valves, like some in this thread claim, has never been an issue. They actually have a strategy that allows the back of the intake valves to be washed with gas even on the DI only models.

 

I don't have a problem with companies using older tech, assuming it is reliable. To the credit of FCA and GM, their push-rod v8's are, generally-speaking, very torquey and reliable engines, two essential characteristics for a truck engine. The platforms those engines are put in might be a different story.

I'm just pointing out that people like to criticize Toyota for refusing to change its core design and components (like powertrain). But yet, those same people don't levy the same criticisms against other OEM's which are arguably using even older designs. It's a double-standard.

If carbon buildup was never an issue, then why are there so many threads about cleaning the intake valves for the early ecoboost engines? Why are there more engine-related complaints for the earlier model years on Car Complaints and the NHSTA websites? And why did Ford decide to switch over to direct + port injection on the later model years?

Arguably, if there was nothing wrong with using only direct injection, Ford would've had no reason to switch its injection setup. And FWIW, this issue isn't just limited to Fords. It's well known in the sports car community that direct injection can lead to engine issues over the long term.

 

I agree that some Direct Injection suffer from design issues. To your second point though, Ford's official reason for the Port injection was to be able to add more fuel for the 3.5EB HO for the Raptor/Limited and the Ford GT. A little CYA lol

 

That's definitely CYA or misdirection on Ford's part. BMW, among others, has been using direct injection only for plenty of high horsepower engines...lack of fuel hasn't been an issue for them.

 

Please show me 1 documented case of carbon deposits on an F150... Should be easy to find with millions on the road. All you find is people claiming its an issue and to get a catch can. I researched this heavily when I had mine. If it were an issue it would be well documented like the timing chain and CAG issues.

Dual injection has it's benefits. Some times port is more efficient, sometimes DI is more efficient and sometimes a mix of both. Not claiming they're perfect but they don't have carbon issues.

 

I just decided this week that I want a full size truck again. The Tacoma has been great, but I am tired of hitting my head on the sunroof and dread every time we go camping and have to tow with it. I am a Toyota fan, but I refuse to buy an outdated Tundra (had an 07 and a 14).

I want something full size that doesn't break the bank. Been looking at a Silverado Custom Trail Boss. For 2020, GM is making the 6.2L with the 10 speed an option. Will probably end up picking one up. I will miss the Toyota reliability but I really need something bigger.

 

Did you go with the LT or the Custom? I have been looking at the Custom with the old 5.3L and 6sp.