2019 Tundra

[rruff]

If I remember right, when the Tacoma was introduced, the frame itself was modified to a much lighter duty compared to Hilux's.

The frame was made open C on the rear, compared to a torsionally stiffer fully boxed frame like all Toyota trucks had previously. It was supposedly done to improve the ride. It isn't necessarily lighter duty. The current US Toyota frames are apparently strong enough for people to overload them and then thrash them offroad.

 

[phsycle]

I tend to end up on the AUS Toyota site from time to time.

Have been looking over the accessories page for the HiLux, actual practical pieces...because they tend to use their trucks as trucks over there.

Like canvas seat covers, and trays. Too bad trays never really caught on over here, just so more practical.

Do see AT and Mainline Overland offer them, but not exactly cheap! That and unlike the HiLux, the Tacoma doesn't have the payload number's to back it up.

I don't know how much they charge, but looks like most alum flat bed places are $2-2.5k. I do love the looks of them, but I would not choose that option even if it were available, as I don't carry bulky, odd shaped items often. Side loading could be useful, but again, not enough to outweigh the benefits of a regular truck bed. I do like the high clearance rear, though, and the aluminum panels that would be less susceptible to my anguish upon scratching or denting it.

 

[phsycle]

The frame was made open C on the rear, compared to a torsionally stiffer fully boxed frame like all Toyota trucks had previously. It was supposedly done to improve the ride. It isn't necessarily lighter duty. The current US Toyota frames are apparently strong enough for people to overload them and then thrash them offroad.

I guess I am not certain if the frame weight rating was decreased due to the change. But I can't imagine softening the ride would not compromise its load carrying capacity? I'm not an engineer, so I don't know. But makes sense to me. If not, why wouldn't they give the Hilux the same ride quality if it doesn't affect the weight/GVWR capacity?

In the past, Demello made frame plate kits to stiffen it up from people overloading their Taco's.

 

[Dalko43]

The frame was made open C on the rear, compared to a torsionally stiffer fully boxed frame like all Toyota trucks had previously. It was supposedly done to improve the ride. It isn't necessarily lighter duty. The current US Toyota frames are apparently strong enough for people to overload them and then thrash them offroad.

"Supposedly?" Some of the marketing literature put out by OEM's needs to be taken with a grain of salt. You do not design a flexy frame for better ride compliance; you re-tune the suspension. Any OEM which claims the opposite needs to be viewed with skepticism.

The Tacoma is a sturdy truck, to include it's frame. But it is beyond argument that the Tacoma's lowered payload rating compared to the Hilux is due in part to differences in frame construction. You can't just slap on a different suspension and expect the Tacoma to have the same OEM-spec'd ratings as a Hilux. I know that some North American overlanders do that, but it's not the same as an OEM-engineered payload rating.

 

[bkg]

I guess I am not certain if the frame weight rating was decreased due to the change. But I can't imagine softening the ride would not compromise its load carrying capacity? I'm not an engineer, so I don't know. But makes sense to me. If not, why wouldn't they give the Hilux the same ride quality if it doesn't affect the weight/GVWR capacity?

In the past, Demello made frame plate kits to stiffen it up from people overloading their Taco's.

Many companies make those plates - Trail Gear, FRORF, Demello, All-Pro, etc, etc. One of mine is FRORF (outside plate), the other is Trail-Gear (boxing kit). They help add rigidity but do not impact payload (at least, not legally or scientifically) .

The change in frames is/was likely consumer driven - as Clutch and others mentioned, 99% of truck owners here commute... and carry less than the weight of a washing machine when actually used as a truck.

 

[phsycle]

Many companies make those plates - Trail Gear, FRORF, Demello, All-Pro, etc, etc. One of mine is FRORF (outside plate), the other is Trail-Gear (boxing kit). They help add rigidity but do not impact payload (at least, not legally or scientifically) .

The change in frames is/was likely consumer driven - as Clutch and others mentioned, 99% of truck owners here commute... and carry less than the weight of a washing machine when actually used as a truck.

I believe Demello was the first one out, but not 100% sure. But you are right--people do associate stiffness with increased load capacity.

Change was definitely consumer driven. The point I was trying to make was, softening the ride also should have affected the payload. Which was an ok tradeoff, because, to your point, most of the people didn't need to haul 2k lbs.

 

[rruff]

If not, why wouldn't they give the Hilux the same ride quality if it doesn't affect the weight/GVWR capacity?

In the past, Demello made frame plate kits to stiffen it up from people overloading their Taco's.

Not from overloading (it does not increase load carrying strength or vertical stiffness), it's just because people wanted a torsionally stiffer frame. I've seen it on Tundras also. Usually it's guys running LT kits who want better high speed desert performance.

Most HD trucks use an open frame that is extremely wimpy in torsion. It is good for articulation and technical offroad (think Unimog). It's bad for high speed off road and street handling.

 

[rruff]

You do not design a flexy frame for better ride compliance; you re-tune the suspension.

Before Toyota changed to a torsionally less stiff frame design they were the only ones who did fully boxed frames in the US. I do believe they made the switch to better appeal to the US market. And it is a fact that if you design a little more torsional flex in the frame it will reduce rocking jolts when you hit a bump. Yes, you can also do this with springs and dampers up to a point. It's a tradeoff. Personally I'd rather have the torsional stiffness. At least I think I would. Maybe not. They liked the TRD (not the Pro which has much nicer suspension) a lot better on a rough desert road compared to the Silverado Z71. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz9hUL-hm_s

I will say that my Tundra rides extremely well on this kind of terrain.

 

[Clutch]

I don't know how much they charge, but looks like most alum flat bed places are $2-2.5k. I do love the looks of them, but I would not choose that option even if it were available, as I don't carry bulky, odd shaped items often. Side loading could be useful, but again, not enough to outweigh the benefits of a regular truck bed. I do like the high clearance rear, though, and the aluminum panels that would be less susceptible to my anguish upon scratching or denting it.

Yeah it is probably a moot point me even looking at them, as I have a 5X8 open trailer that I paid a $1000 for...a lot cheaper than a Ute Tray, does exactly the same thing, and store it when not in use.

I run a camper shell on all of the trucks I have had, would be nice to have easy access to the front of the bed, but cost outweighs convenience.

This with a RTT would be pretty handy. but you're looking at what $10K (maybe more) by the time everything is said and done.

 

[Clutch]

The change in frames is/was likely consumer driven - as Clutch and others mentioned, 99% of truck owners here commute... and carry less than the weight of a washing machine when actually used as a truck.

yep, I don't even know why I even pine over the HiLuxes vs. a Tacoma...I certainly don't need those capacities...prolly the case of wanting what we don't have. Payload might be a little poor, but towing is pretty good. Thinking a trailer is a better option than a on-truck camper anyways. It never fails, get everything setup..and I need to run and get something.

 

[phsycle]

Yeah it is probably a moot point me even looking at them, as I have a 5X8 open trailer that I paid a $1000 for...a lot cheaper than a Ute Tray, does exactly the same thing, and store it when not in use.

I run a camper shell on all of the trucks I have had, would be nice to have easy access to the front of the bed, but cost outweighs convenience.

This with a RTT would be pretty handy. but you're looking at what $10K (maybe more) by the time everything is said and done.

That would be a great set up. But a trailer does make more sense.

I also like being able to throw stuff in the bed, and easily locking it in there with the shell. I need to get a shell with windoors, as side access would be great.

 

[rruff]

yep, I don't even know why I even pine over the HiLuxes vs. a Tacoma.

> 30mpg diesel would sure be nice.

Trailers work for some people, but they are a PITA for maneuvering.

 

[plainjaneFJC]

Where we live, the 3/4-1 ton flat bed truck is king, we are surrounded by a lot of AG. and yeah you can still get a basic truck...well basic by today's standards.

Not terribly efficient though. Ram EcoDiesel is kinda close, but dismal payload. Had high hopes for the new F-150 diesel, but it appears that it will only be offered in the higher urban cowboy trim. No dice on the base XL models. Just think a F-150 RCLB XL with the HD payload package that got 400ft/lbs TQ, 30 mpgs, under $30K would be dang nice.

Even John Travolta drove a single cab.

 

[Clutch]

That would be a great set up. But a trailer does make more sense.

I also like being able to throw stuff in the bed, and easily locking it in there with the shell. I need to get a shell with windoors, as side access would be great.

Yeah pretty slick, eh?

I really like my Wildernest...but it never fails, get all setup and have to go run and get something.

Might put windoors in it, if I ever do a full on restoration of it.

http://www.importperformanceusa.com/project/2004-expedition-tacoma-with-1kz/

Have been considering an enclosed trailer with a RTT for towing the bikes...but what I have works and is paid for. Like most things I contemplate not sure if added convenience (if any) is worth spending the money.

> 30mpg diesel would sure be nice.

Trailers work for some people, but they are a PITA for maneuvering.

30 mpg cheap diesel would be ahhhhsum...(doesn't seem like cheap and diesel go together anymores)

I grew up towing trailers, like second nature to me...in fact some of my first times driving a manual was in a '76 F350 dump, pulling a Bobcat trailer...my family likes to do trial by fire.

Even John Travolta drove a single cab.

Ha ha!

 

[phsycle]

Yeah pretty slick, eh?

I really like my Wildernest...but it never fails, get all setup and have to go run and get something.

Might put windoors in it, if I ever do a full on restoration of it.

http://www.importperformanceusa.com/project/2004-expedition-tacoma-with-1kz/

Have been considering an enclosed trailer with a RTT for towing the bikes...but what I have works and is paid for. Like most things I contemplate not sure if added convenience (if any) is worth spending the money.

That is a nice-looking Tacoma. Set up is pretty nice. If that is all paid for, I would just keep it as-is and keep running it.