2019 Tundra

[rruff]

At least, the 2 test runs will give you a good comparison/relative results.

But likely the wrong result.

Sorry to belabor this, but I've done loads of testing of performance variables for bicycle racing, and I know that little things IRL can have big effects. I wouldn't trust a single mpg run in a vehicle to be accurate enough to compare to another on a different day, or even an hour apart. If the wind is low, and it's a loop, same temperature, similar traffic (very little and no drafting), then maybe it isn't too bad.

I certainly wouldn't use Fuelly to tell me what *I'll* get for mpg, but for similar vehicles, which should be used and driven in a similar manner on average, it's a great tool for comparisons.

 

[perterra]

I don't agree with that. My Tacoma with a full load like that (especially talking 500lb over payload) handles way worse than any fullsize truck I've driven, including the new F150. And definitely more comfortable. I can get into parking spots easier, though! I don't carry that much weight (ever), so Taco still does what I need it to do. But when I was hauling some mulch last spring, I was bottoming out like crazy. And that was probably what, 700lbs?

This has gotten me curious, my F-150 is right on the bump stops with 1500 while I have a little room to spare on the Tacoma. That said, my Tacoma rides rough. It looks to have overloads on it, but I'm pretty sure they weren't added aftermarket since I knew the original owner very well. My Tacoma is an 04, the F-150 is a 16.

Unfortunately my trucks see that weight about once a week on average, usually short stretches of 60 miles or so but never had any issues related to weight.

For the record, I aint knockin nobodies choice of truck. I just dont have that pride of ownership stuff, (thats for motorcycles and jeeps). For me a truck is akin to an expensive roller ball refill for my pen. The old one will be used up and consumed when I get another one. Some day when I retire and can drive for fun, I probably will get off in to it again, but for now, it's just a tool

 

[Dalko43]

Did you see that all the manufacturers are facing lawsuits now? Basically the same thing VW did. If you own one, you stand to make good money, but I have a feeling that feature diesels will be less desirable (poorer performance).

Yeah, but unlike the lawsuit and allegations against VW, nothing of substance has been turned up against the other manufacturers (at least the US ones). And all of them are denying any wrongdoing, which would be a stupid move if, in fact, they were cheating as it would be only a matter of time before they get caught.

The jury is still out, but some of these lawsuits have been active for well over a year now, and there hasn't been any real development to them.

if everyone cheated, then one must ask the question... what good are the regulations? they are literally killing the diesel market... And certainly have made them more complex, less reliable and a helluva lot less efficient (so they burn more diesel)... just seems maybe someone jumped the shark a bit

The regulations have been unnecessarily strict IMHO. I think it would have been smarter and more economical to have imposed the emissions reg's in a much more gradual manner. Back in 2007, the major companies had to jump through a lot of hoops in a short amount of time to meet emissions compliance. That said, even with all the mistakes and troubles encountered by the early emissions systems, most of the companies have made tremendous progress in developing and refining those systems.

The newer diesels are less reliable? Relative to the older mechanical clunkers, yes perhaps. But then again, those engines were dirty, smelly, not all that refined and delivered so-so performance compared to the newer versions. I also think reliability has improved on the newer diesels and will continue to do so.

More complex? Yep. And so are all the modern direct-injection, cylinder de-activation, gasoline engines. Everything is more complex nowadays.

Hybrid gassers or diesels would be awesome in a 4x4 too....but with that fuel efficiency advantage you're bringing along a whole lot more complexity. Every technological development has that tradeoff.

 

[phsycle]

But likely the wrong result.

Sorry to belabor this, but I've done loads of testing of performance variables for bicycle racing, and I know that little things IRL can have big effects. I wouldn't trust a single mpg run in a vehicle to be accurate enough to compare to another on a different day, or even an hour apart. If the wind is low, and it's a loop, same temperature, similar traffic (very little and no drafting), then maybe it isn't too bad.

I certainly wouldn't use Fuelly to tell me what *I'll* get for mpg, but for similar vehicles, which should be used and driven in a similar manner on average, it's a great tool for comparisons.

I wouldn’t say Wrong, per se. Its about the type of result your looking for as well. I don’t care about these mixed bag of combined MPG figures. Again, just too many variables. Few people driving 100% city could throw off the figures significantly. People driving like maniacs could throw that off as well. There are just too many outside factors. What I want to know is the efficiency of the Engine itself—without these variables or human input. And to me, no better way to do that than long highway cruises. I just can’t get that from Fuelly. Which brings more significance to my own tests (to me). And from what I’ve noted, Tundra’s are just too far behind. Like 3/4 ton MPG behind.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

This has gotten me curious, my F-150 is right on the bump stops with 1500 while I have a little room to spare on the Tacoma. That said, my Tacoma rides rough. It looks to have overloads on it, but I'm pretty sure they weren't added aftermarket since I knew the original owner very well. My Tacoma is an 04, the F-150 is a 16.

The F150 has a couple of different payload packages to choose from. If you look around, you can get them with a pretty beefy rating.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

Tundra's are just too far behind. Like 3/4 ton MPG behind.

My Tundra got 18MPG with the cruise set at 70MPH going from Orlando to West Palm, my F150 gets 24.

 

[phsycle]

My Tundra got 18MPG with the cruise set at 70MPH going from Orlando to West Palm, my F150 gets 24.

Yup, same experience. My friend with a bone stock F150, on the same stretch of highway, gets 23-24MPG (70MPH limit). I know 3 people with Tundra's now and none of them have ever broken 20MPG. I am getting 23MPG in the Tacoma. At least I can usually park closer!

 

[Clutch]

At least I can usually park closer!

That is funny because I just watch someone in a Tundra struggle in our parking lot out side of my work.

 

[Deleted member 9101]

Yup, same experience. My friend with a bone stock F150, on the same stretch of highway, gets 23-24MPG (70MPH limit). I know 3 people with Tundra's now and none of them have ever broken 20MPG. I am getting 23MPG in the Tacoma. At least I can usually park closer!

I have had my F150 since Veterans day and put about 3,000 miles on it, it has averaged 20.3mpg for that entire time. The over whelming majority of that is city driving. My Tundra averaged in the mid to low teens in town.

 

[thenomad]

I traded in my GMC 1500 crew 4x4 that got an average of 21 city for a Tundra 4x4 that averages 15.5. I do not regret it one bit

 

[FJR Colorado]

http://www.tfltruck.com/2018/01/2019-toyota-tundra-tacoma-4runner-trd-pro-chicago-show/

 

[Clutch]

http://www.tfltruck.com/2018/01/2019-toyota-tundra-tacoma-4runner-trd-pro-chicago-show/

Lemme guess, some marginal performance gains, different decals...and add on another $10K to the price tag.

 

[Regcabguy]

Boxed frame,better economy and enhanced braking.
Maybe a turbocharged small displacement like Ford's Ecoboost.

 

[rruff]

Boxed frame,better economy and enhanced braking.
Maybe a turbocharged small displacement like Ford's Ecoboost.

Is that what you wish, or what you believe?

The Tundra isn't going to be a place where new tech gets showcased. It's limited production and not that upscale. I doubt the Tundra will get boxed unless the Tacoma does also. I expect slightly better mpg, but very much doubt a turbo or diesel will be offered. Do brakes really need enhancing?

 

[bkg]

Lemme guess, some marginal performance gains, different decals...and add on another $10K to the price tag.

I suspect this is correct.

Unless they decide to really invest and build a Raptor/Rebel/zr2 competitor?