(partially) new Tundra coming?

[plainjaneFJC]

Say more. Seriously. How is it a turd? I hear/read/see one thing "bad" about them, and it's not mileage. Is your concern an oil consumption issue?

Oil consumption. My truck look like Uncle Bucks hoopty if you remember that old movie.

 

[calicamper]

Oil consumption. My truck look like Uncle Bucks hoopty if you remember that old movie.

Oil quality is a big issue with these engines and several other modern engines I would bet many of these issues are oil related.

 

[plainjaneFJC]

Oil quality is a big issue with these engines and several other modern engines I would bet many of these issues are oil related.

It’s alway had the factory semi synthetic changed at 5k. Bad castings in the heads were the supposed culprit

 

[Todd780]

I do wonder if Toyota will do something similar in the engine line up with the 4.6 now gone in the Tundra. I had a 2.7 and it was a fantastic motor. In many ways, I feel that would be a better match for the tundra than the 3.5.

I figured the non hybrid was the 2.7 equivalent and the hybrid was the 3.5 equivalent? Who knows. Time will tell.

 

[Todd780]

Brady and one other article that I have seen go beyond the cliche and come to a more significant point. For Brady, it's that the new Tundra is essentially the global LC...

I read that too. But I figured when the redesigned Sequoia comes out, wouldn't that be the North American Land Cruiser since it's essentially an SUV version of the Tundra?

Which is now a pick up version of the Land Cruiser?

 

[phsycle]

I figured the non hybrid was the 2.7 equivalent and the hybrid was the 3.5 equivalent? Who knows. Time will tell.

Well, according to Toyota, the 3.5TT is the lesser of the two and the hybrid is the more powerful package. Which I don’t doubt. Just wish it had been more efficiency-focused instead of worrying about power. Any decent V6 TT will make all the power you need for a 1/2 ton truck.

 

[Todd780]

Well, according to Toyota, the 3.5TT is the lesser of the two and the hybrid is the more powerful package. Which I don’t doubt. Just wish it had been more efficiency-focused instead of worrying about power. Any decent V6 TT will make all the power you need for a 1/2 ton truck.

Agreed. I would've like to see it be able to drive a little further or at higher speeds in EV mode.

I seem to recall seeing somewhere that Ford won't be offering a PHEV F150 now. Maybe Toyota will offer a PHEV Tundra down the road?

 

[utherjorge]

I read that too. But I figured when the redesigned Sequoia comes out, wouldn't that be the North American Land Cruiser since it's essentially an SUV version of the Tundra?

Which is now a pick up version of the Land Cruiser?

I'm wondering if it's because the Sequoia is always considered to be "softer" than the LC? I mean, we have a lot of people doing very cool things with Sequoias (I love the first gen ones, especially with the 4.7), so no disrespect. I simply don't think that they have been built to the same standards as a LC, as per many posts an comments all over.

Perhaps with the expectations of a "truck" being "a truck," maybe it's baked in that the truck version using LC300 stuff would be more robust than the American SUV copy?

Additionally, just as the 4runner uses a global platform and is known to be robust...this would be a chance for the Sequoia to come to the same fame? Obviously, too early to tell.

 

[Todd780]

I'm wondering if it's because the Sequoia is always considered to be "softer" than the LC? I mean, we have a lot of people doing very cool things with Sequoias (I love the first gen ones, especially with the 4.7), so no disrespect. I simply don't think that they have been built to the same standards as a LC, as per many posts an comments all over.

Perhaps with the expectations of a "truck" being "a truck," maybe it's baked in that the truck version using LC300 stuff would be more robust than the American SUV copy?

Additionally, just as the 4runner uses a global platform and is known to be robust...this would be a chance for the Sequoia to come to the same fame? Obviously, too early to tell.

I'm guessing the Sequoia will use the same LC300 stuff the 2022 Tundra does. But, being an SUV I thought it would be a more direct version of a North American Land Cruiser.

 

[bkg]

Two points, in no particular order:

First, I absolutely adore Scott Brady's article on the splash page about the new Tundra, for one reason. There were a billion articles the other day when it came out, and they were all shenanigans about being all-new, and spouting praise, and so on. Fine. However, Brady and one other article that I have seen go beyond the cliche and come to a more significant point. For Brady, it's that the new Tundra is essentially the global LC...and he brought the receipts as he did so. Whether you care for LCs, or the new LC (we won't get), that connection is a big one, and so I've narrowed down what I'm buying in a year or so. The Tundra is on my list for sure now.

Ironically, I disliked that comment, to be honest. It implies that there's something inheritably special about the LC that hasn't really existed in quite some time. Some will say it's the best off-road vehicle ever, but since taking on the sequoia/tundra components, it's not hugely different.

 

[utherjorge]

Ironically, I disliked that comment, to be honest. It implies that there's something inheritably special about the LC that hasn't really existed in quite some time. Some will say it's the best off-road vehicle ever, but since taking on the sequoia/tundra components, it's not hugely different.

I won't disagree or agree. However, there's no one I've seen say the 200 wasn't known to be solid worldwide, and I've seen no one say that the LC200 had enough Sequoia bones to make it weaker. Feel free to show me how I'm wrong, but I have been under the impression that there's next to nothing between them. It's my understanding that they are, in fact hugely different.

 

[bkg]

I won't disagree or agree. However, there's no one I've seen say the 200 wasn't known to be solid worldwide, and I've seen no one say that the LC200 had enough Sequoia bones to make it weaker. Feel free to show me how I'm wrong, but I have been under the impression that there's next to nothing between them. It's my understanding that they are, in fact hugely different.

proving a negative is always difficult.

But from what little research i've done, the front suspension can be swapped from Sequoia to LC for "more travel." The steering/front diff/etc... largely the same. Basically, I'd argue "same platform" from the A-pillar forward.

Plus, the LC has a smaller rear diff than the Sequoia, according to some reports... so one could argue it's not as strong.


Will anyone really notice? Meh... probably not. Is the LC a super hero? also... Meh.

 

[tacollie]

The LC is built for a longer service life. Better exhaust materials, the transmission is beefier, better materials for thing like door and window seals, etc. It's the little things that are better. 2nd gen Sequoia is also IRS.

The thing I loved about my Tundra is it was 12 years old and overloaded. It didn't creak or rattle even being off-road a fair amount. The steering still felt tight when I sold it. That's better than my 2 year old Ford that's well under it's GVWR. The transmission in the Tundra was a typically Toyota. Poor gear spacing and shift points. I love the transmission in our F250. Hopefully Toyota sorted done of the basic stuff out while still building a truck today ages well. Payload is still too low for me. One bright side of Ford ownership is parts are dirty cheap after buying Toyota parts for 22 years?

 

[Todd780]

Oil consumption. My truck look like Uncle Bucks hoopty if you remember that old movie.

It's tough to go wrong with a John Candy movie....

 

[plainjaneFJC]

It's tough to go wrong with a John Candy movie....

View attachment 684320

He was the best ever IMO.