I would like to agree but I thought the new Silverados would be a giant flop thanks to the atrocious design language. Somehow they've sold the ******** out of themIf it's anything close to that monstrosity posted above then it'll be a major flop. I nearly threw up in my mouth looking at it.

Speaking of... the Tundra being a low volume North America only vehicle, there is no way they are going to invest a lot in R&D. Toyota hasn't even done much with the Tacoma. Anything fancy and high tech is going to be shared with other vehicles, I think. Turbo diesel? Not likely. What else would they put it in? They could have been putting a Hilux diesel in the Tacoma all this time, but even that's too much trouble.
A turbo ~3.5l I could see, since they've had one in other vehicles for awhile, and the Tundra really needs a more modern engine. I wouldn't necessarily expect more engine options; there is only one currently. Probably more gears; but maybe not. New rear suspension like Ram? Maybe a hybrid a few years down the road.
Toyota put a patent down for an emissions technology designed to control excess soot and particulate...there was some news/media discussion a while back. Is that smoking gun proof that a NA Toyota diesel is on the way? No, but it is certainly within the realm of possibilities.
Maybe for overseas? The foreign market for diesels is very robust. Not here.
I don't expect a 3.5l twin turbo to solve much of anything. Ford's gets about the same mpg as their V8. I see it as more of a lower cost way for Toyota to do an engine upgrade and get ~10% boost in mpg (vs upgrading the v8), since they have a similar engine in a Lexus. Like Ford's I expect it will have more low end torque which is nice.
The 2.7 is quite a bit better on gas than the 3.5, plus you have 2wd which helps a little. I think the 2.7 is the best engine overall.
I look at Fuelly generally for comparisons of similar vehicles. Too many variables otherwise. Speed and drafting make a big difference. I'm surprised I always get ~18 mpg going down to Alamo and back, even with unfavorable wind, but speeds are lower than on the freeway.
I'm surprised I always get ~18 mpg going down to Alamo and back, even with unfavorable wind, but speeds are lower than on the freeway.
This is what would make me look at an EcoBoost over the 5.0L if my next truck is an F150.The extra power in the lower RPM range of the 3.5 made the 5.0 seen neutered.
I'm curious to see where my RPM's would be on similar trips with an Eco towing our 5,000 lbs (loaded) 23' holiday trailer.