Tacoma/Tundra differences

[The_Martian_King]

I am new to this forum and to truck based modifications in general. Right now I have a 2wd Tacoma that I use as a commuter vehicle and road transportation for a variety of camping/canoeing/hiking gear. It fits my needs at the moment since I just use it to go to a put in and then carry or paddle the rest of the way. Eventually I plan on getting a dedicated commuter car (diesel or hybrid) and trading the truck in for a dedicated offroad expedition truck.

So since I have a fair amount of time before I get the truck I want, I figured I could plan for the end result and pick the truck to match instead of changeing a truck to get a specific outcome.

I prefer to go long distances, into remote area for extended periods of time. I am not that interested in the more technical trails, but self reliancey is a huge priority. I tend to solo my trips so being able to pull myself out of a jam is a good thing. All that means I will need a winch, jack, some armor to keep the truck in tact along with all the other modifications and rescue equipment. That is alot of weight to add to something that I will be living out of for weeks at a time.

Which brings us up to the big question. Do I want a Tacoma to keep overall weight on the trail down, or do I want a Tundra to handle all of the extra gear? Is the Tundra's durability worth the extra weight and cost? I plan on heavily modifying either one and since I am looking so far into the future design changes might make any info obsolete, but it is nice to dream.

 

[devinsixtyseven]

What year Tacomas and Tundras are you looking at? There are some pretty major differences in the last couple years, for both models.

 

[The_Martian_King]

2006/2007

I would either get something new or extremely low miles. I found my current truck with less then 7,000 miles on it. That was enough to knock off the new vehicle price jump while basically being untouched.

Should I be looking at an older model that might have used more metal then plastic?

 

[OnlyNaTaco]

for expedition purposes def a tacoma, the tundar is wide, wont fit through some of the tight canyon runs, heavy, youll have a tough time getting through extreme stuff, the 4.7 is fairly slow for the weight it has to move, thus worse gas milage. Much more after market available for the tacoma. Tacoma is more reliable. You dont see a lot of full size expedition trucks, those are some of the reasons for it

 

[RoundOut]

If you want new, the 2007 Tundra might as well be a giant Dodge crew cab. They are nice, but HUGE. It is a FULL SIZE TRUCK.

The newer Tacomas are almost as big as the earlier Tundras. One of the most frustrating things for me, as a Tundra owner, is the lack of variety in aftermarket lifts, bumpers, snorkels, etc. OnlyNaTaco is right about that, for sure.

If I were in the market for a newer vehicle for expeditions and my options were a Tacoma or a Tundra, it would definitely be a Taco.

 

[The_Martian_King]

If the new Tacomas are almost as big as the older Tundras then should I be looking at an older model and just dealing with the extra mileage?

I have a 2003 Xtra cab with an ARE cap w/ roof rack. Here on the east coast I can get around fine with 2wd since there is a paved road to anywhere. Since I am not looking at technical trails and the fact that I am hoofing or paddling to my final destinations, I don't need an expedition vehicle yet. I toss an inflatable matress in the back when I am car camping. It is probably the most comfortable vehicle that I have ridden in for long distance trips (I have family in upstate NY and lower GA, I grew up traveling from one to the other). In a few years I plan on moving out west and would like to take advantage of some wilderness that isn't so densely populated (like the Adirondack Mountains).

Being an obsesive planner (I have more trouble finding what I want then actually getting it) I figured I would plan ahead, design it out and then have time to be picky on the truck. I was completly happy with my trucks compromise between a 5/day a week commute vehicle and an occasional pack horse, untill I saw some of the mods on this site. Now I want to increase my time frame so that I can quickly get my "toy truck".

 

[Martinjmpr]

MK: Since you have a Tacoma already you are obviously familiar with the size. What extra gear do you think you'll need that a Taco can't handle?

I'll be the first to admit to being a Tacoma bigot. The older T100 and Tundras were OK but the new one is just hideous - if you're going to get something that big, might as well get an American full size truck with a Diesel engine!

Incidentally, I haven't compared the numbers but I'm pretty sure the 05-up Tacoma is as big as, or bigger than, the T100.

Are you going to be camping solo? Even a couple can get by just fine on what a Taco can carry. Start adding kids and then you may have a point about needing a larger vehicle.

You said:

I prefer to go long distances, into remote area for extended periods of time. I am not that interested in the more technical trails, but self reliancey is a huge priority. I tend to solo my trips so being able to pull myself out of a jam is a good thing. All that means I will need a winch, jack, some armor to keep the truck in tact along with all the other modifications and rescue equipment. That is alot of weight to add to something that I will be living out of for weeks at a time.

Honestly, I don't think you "need" all that stuff. I've never owned a winch and don't ever plan to. IMO winches are for people who like to do highly technical class 10 trails where they're going over huge boulders. If all you want to do is get into the back country away from the crowds, a regular 4x4 will probably be all you need. Now, a winch can be a good thing to have - there are probably areas that I'd have gone into if I'd had a winch just because it would give me the peace-of-mind of knowing that I could extract myself from a mud hole or arroyo - but it's hardly a "neccessity." "Armor" is another thing that is valuable if you do a lot of rock crawling but I believe the stock Tacoma already has skid plates (I'll have to check to see if mine does. My last 4x4, a Mitsubishi Montero, did.) As for a jack, they can be handy but they don't take up a huge amount of space, either, certainly not enough to warrant a much bigger truck. I mean, it's not like you have to carry 5 months worth of food and water!

As has already been pointed out, the aftermarket for the Taco is huge. Not so much for the Tundra, and now they've gone and changed the truck completely so there will be another lag before aftermarket stuff comes out.

I think in general the best idea when camping or doing anything outdoors is to use as little as you absolutely need. If you can get by with 'less truck' then you should. A Taco will be cheaper to buy, cheaper to fuel up and cheaper to accessorize, which will leave more money for travel and exploration.

 

[The_Martian_King]

I am abusive on my stuff and just for regular winter road trips I tend to have a jerry can of fuel, a full tool box, chains, jacks and shovels. I have a come-along instead of a winch, but ever since I had to pull my truck out of a ditch using it and a lot of rope, I have been interested in getting an actual winch on my next truck.

You are right about not needing all of that stuff, but like my first-aid kit, I have never needed it when I did have it and miss it when I don't have it. What I was refering to by armor was stuff to protect my lights and fenders from bushes and small trees as well as road hazards like road cones that fall off the back of construction vehicles. (I lost a blinker housing to one that was in the middle of I-81 miles from any construction site).

On the other hand I do solo most often, so I have to take more precautions then others because I can't get any help if I get stuck. For my canoeing gear I genearly have triple redundancey for my safety and survival gear, but none of my gear has ever failed or really been needed. I just feel safer if I am prepared for anything that might happen. Which is why I suspect I will end up with a lot of gear. Yeah Yeah I know I am paranoid.

 

[asteffes]

Knowing you're prepared will help you relax and enjoy your trip.

 

[Martinjmpr]

Knowing you're prepared will help you relax and enjoy your trip.

True, but eventually you reach the point of diminishing returns. I mean, I never carry a spare axle or U-joint, even though those things can break and leave you stranded. If you get too crazy with the spares you get to the point where you're pulling another vehicle behind you! :hehe:

Besides that, the more stuff you carry, the more weight you have which will also restrict where you can go.

MK, only you know what you're comfortable with. I've never found it neccessary to protect my lights or fenders from the brush, as they're pretty easy to avoid (unless you're off-road racing.) And, again, hanging a big brush guard or winch off your front end will alter your handling, put a whole bunch more stress on your front end parts, and decrease your approach angle.

Depending on how much you want to get into this, you might want to consider something like this:

Warn Multi-mount winch

That way you can keep the winch in the truck where it's safe and won't add to your approach angle, until you need it. As a bonus, if you have a receiver hitch in the back you can use the winch to back you out of trouble, too.

 

[devinsixtyseven]

The 4.7L V8 (2UZFE) is no dog, not by a long shot. It's even better with a chip and a few airflow mods.

<04 Tacomas and 1st gen Tundras share a drivetrain and are really only different in dimensions. This means a 1st-gen Tundra will handle a load better, and a <04 Tacoma will be more durable (comparing the same load in each). It also means a Tundra (or a T-100, or 05+ Taco) will be more stable at high speed and offroad. Tundras (and I imagine 05+ Tacos) are capable of both, and well.

Tundras have more room for toys . I don't need a trailer...I might never need a trailer. I have a roomy back seat roughly the size of a <04 Tacoma dcab back seat, but wider, and more room in the bed. Two bikes, fuel, water, spare, gear, food, whatever, it all fits under the canvas top. The T-100 and 05+ extended cab Taco are similar to within inches.

All that size gives a Tundra a poor departure, approach and breakover angle compared to a Tacoma...but not by much, certainly not enough to matter on the majority of trails. The difference is only when you take a stock Tacoma and stock Tundra to a fairly difficult trail, then the angles and dimensions present more of a challenge in a Tundra.

A new (05+) Tacoma is literally within an inch or two in every dimension of a 1st-gen Tundra, but has a smaller (and more efficient) 4.0L V6. Think of it as what the T-100 should have been (but the two aren't at all the same except relative size). Incidentally that's also about the same size as a new Nissan Frontier.

1st-gen Tundras do fine in rough terrain with a payload. There are few places where a <04 Tacoma can fit that a 1st-gen Tundra cannot, the difference will be in the angles and turning radius, not width. I have yet to be unable to follow a similarly modified Tacoma...it would have to be a spot where width, length or turning radius were literally at the bare extreme limit of what a Tacoma could do, and most trails aren't like that.

Aftermarket support for 1st-gen Tundras is similar, for the parts that count most, to 95-04 Tacomas. That's lifts, drivetrain upgrades, engine upgrades, body upgrades. Remember it's seven years old now. They don't appear as much in bling bling truck mags as Dodge Rams, but the V8 and stable platform at speed meant there were (and still are) a lot of Tundra TTs, so performance shocks and springs are easy to find, as is fiberglass. They can be skidded from the nose to the front 1/3 of the fuel tank. They are perfectly capable of embarassing anyone with offroad brand or model hubris, as they are essentially a 95-04 Tacoma with a larger engine, wider track and longer wheelbase...or a T-100 with a bigger engine.

Hope that helps . If I were to do it again, I'd probably get a Tundra again, but it was slim choice over a Tacoma. Take one of each (T-100, 1-gen Tundra, 95-04 Tacoma, 05+ Tacoma, 07 Tundra) for an overnight test drive (any dealer will let you, if you're serious about buying) and see how it fits you. Really you can't go wrong with the 95-04 Tacomas, they're strong, capable, comfortable, and have plenty of room for two people and toys. Pound for pound they are a better platform than a Tundra.

-Sean

 

[jim65wagon]

I have to agree with Sean on the many points of the Tundra. The 4.7 is probably the most underrated engine of its size. It held its own against bigger engines until the last year or two when the big engine/power wars really started rolling. We routinely put enough stuff in the bed for the four of us to spend several nights out, and we try to make it all fit under the cover, although I've decided to build a bed rack to haul firewood too; ( or maybe I'll mount a tent to it).

It shocked me the first time I parked next to the new Tacoma, it looked taller and as wide as my truck; but I don't believe you can stack several sheets of drywall in the bed of the Taco, which was our original reason for the Tundra-the smallest fullsize truck with a full-size bed for DIY projects.

Think about your needs carefully before you make a purchase.

 

[SuperCamperos]

If you are more worried about weight than size of supplies check out the GVWR of the Tacoma vs Tundra...

2004 xtra cab V6 4x4 TACOMA: 1585 lbs
2004 access cab 4x4 TUNDRA: 1565 lbs
2007 access cab V6 4x4 TACOMA: 1395 lbs
2007 SR5 Double Cab LB 6AT 4X4 TUNDRA: 1555 lbs

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/spec_engines.aspx?year=2004&make=Toyota&model=Tacoma&trimid=-1
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/spec_engines.aspx?year=2004&make=Toyota&model=Tundra&trimid=-1
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/spec_engines.aspx?year=2007&make=Toyota&model=Tacoma&trimid=-1
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/spec_engines.aspx?year=2007&make=Toyota&model=Tundra&trimid=-1

Does size matter?

What's going on here? V-8 is nice for torque and sucking down gasoline, but I don't see a lot of advantages to a Tundra. And the new tacoma's 200 lb reduction in payload is just irresponsible engineering. Unless these numbers are wrong, I can't figure it out...

 

[The_Martian_King]

Thanks everyone!

I am trying to 'edumicate' myself about what I have and what I want and this site has been a great help.

The next newbie question I have is - What are your feelings on installing an elocker ontol my 2wd truck? That looks to be the easiest thing to drastically improve my range of driving.

I also was pondering the feasibility of doing a SAS while converting it to 4wd. I realise that it is a lot of work and wouldn't be considered untill after some college class on Machineing, fabrication and vehicle maintnance. However, even if I get a new 4wd truck I plan on being able to pull it completely apart and customise the entire thing anyway. I figure I could find a wrecked truck that had a blown engine and/or body and pull the transmission and drivetrain from it.

 

[devinsixtyseven]

If you are more worried about weight than size of supplies check out the GVWR of the Tacoma vs Tundra...

2004 xtra cab V6 4x4 TACOMA: 1585 lbs
2004 access cab 4x4 TUNDRA: 1565 lbs
2007 access cab V6 4x4 TACOMA: 1395 lbs
2007 SR5 Double Cab LB 6AT 4X4 TUNDRA: 1555 lbs

http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/spec_engines.aspx?year=2004&make=Toyota&model=Tacoma&trimid=-1
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/spec_engines.aspx?year=2004&make=Toyota&model=Tundra&trimid=-1
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/spec_engines.aspx?year=2007&make=Toyota&model=Tacoma&trimid=-1
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/spec_engines.aspx?year=2007&make=Toyota&model=Tundra&trimid=-1

Does size matter?

What's going on here? V-8 is nice for torque and sucking down gasoline, but I don't see a lot of advantages to a Tundra. And the new tacoma's 200 lb reduction in payload is just irresponsible engineering. Unless these numbers are wrong, I can't figure it out...

I wish we had a multi-quote button.

Size does matter when controlling a load, or rather, footprint matters. It also matters at speed...a larger footprint is more stable.

I don't much trust Toyota's (or perhaps MSN's?) payload numbers either. The previous gen Tacos have literally the same running gear as the first gen Tundras (unless you have an E-locker, then it's actually a weaker rear end!), but the payload rating is essentially the same as my Tundra (20# is nothing) despite a GVWR about 800# less, and the rating for a D-Cab Tundra with the same running gear as my truck and GVWR about 600# more lists a payload essentially the same (again, a couple dozen pounds don't count for much).

I recently weighed in at 6500# GVW (3500F/3000R), or about 2000# of payload, then ran fairly rough terrain on a stock drivetrain and extended travel front suspension with 35" tires without a problem, so the drivetrain and frame on a Tundra can take it. Prior to 2005, Tacomas seem to need a rear frame reinforcement to do the same, despite their similar listed payload capacity. If you load 1500# in each of those four trucks, the D-Cab Tundra will be most stable, but the 04 Taco will be least likely to break the running gear (you can always reinforce the frame). The V8 is also plenty strong hauling 6500# of stuff around...but I wonder if the addition to the GVWR and the other two cylinders aren't just self-justification when the payload capacities of the 04 Taco and 04 Tundra are accounted for.

AFA footprint and trail stability, I have an interesting photo somewhere on the HD of a previous gen Tacoma and my Tundra posing on the same large rock. The additional track width makes a noticable difference in roll angle...right now I'm at 69" center to center of the front tread (running wheel adapters).

Other than that, I agree...there is no real benefit to a Tundra vs a Tacoma if you are only looking at your payload weight, and if you want stability, you can always take a Tundra rear axle and a long travel kit and install them on a Tacoma for a more stable, wider track, and the same low rate of fuel consumption.

Martian King, I forget what your current truck is...but if you have an 04 or previous Tacoma without an E-locker, it's the same rear end as a first gen Tundra...you'd be looking at an ARB or something. However, a locked rear end can't make up for the pulling ability of the front end on a steep climb, or the control of a low-range gear. Whether it would work for you really depends on where you intend to go.

-Sean