Tundra or Tacoma re gear with fourwheel camper opinions 4.88

[bkg]

It's a truck so hauling stuff isn't that weird. And the computer adjusts the behavior of the transmission. If it can't figure out how to shift properly with a load, then that would be a pretty big fail for the engineers.

Tow/haul also increases engine throttle movement relative to pedal movement.

OP doesn't have Tow/Haul mode... No first gen Tundra or Sequoia did.

And engineers have to engineer to the average - the most likely - the mean. Just is what it is.

 

[Flhtruss]

Hay rruf

Check out this calculator you can see what happens to engine rpm with different tires. Engineers do have it covered for the factory one parts on the vehicle. If you alter tire size, this essentially changes engine rpm at any given mph. Automatic's seem to hide this, Compared to a manual trans. You can see the engine rpm change with the calculator. Hope this helps you to understand what happens when you put larger than stock tires, on a vehicle.

Russ

https://www.ringpinion.com/calculators/Calc_RPM.aspx

 

[Kya]

I have an 06' double cab, 33's, some body armor, and carry a FWC for about half of the year. I still have stock gears. When the camper is in you can definitely tell but it still does fine on Colorado passes (not ideal, but fine). If I don't try to keep up with traffic, the truck can hold 3rd gear @3,000-3,500 rpm and still have enough grunt to pass the big rigs when needed. When in low range, going downhill, is when I have really wanted the better gearing. Braking has been higher on my priority list than gears so far. I would not consider larger tires than 33 with stock gears though. Occasionally I tow my snowmobile with the camper on, but maybe once or twice a year. If I were to do that regularly, I would have definitely done the re-gear by now. Hope that helps.

 

[rruff]

You can see the engine rpm change with the calculator. Hope this helps you to understand what happens when you put larger than stock tires, on a vehicle.

I understand that very well. But if you have a 4spd like the OP and you put on big tires and haul a load, the transmission can run in 3rd when necessary rather than 4th. You won't run in the same gears as you did before. The engine won't bog down in high gear, it will shift.

The engineers have to design the transmission to work properly at max payload and max towing. The towing being by far the worst. And I don't think the OP is going to be flirting with those numbers. So it boils down to a preference to have more closely spaced gears in the range where they will get used the most. That's a very reasonable thing to want. But it isn't a magic "fix" and neither is it necessary. And it comes with a cost, which is a few thousand $$ for installing gear boxes that will be less reliable (based on many anecdotes) than the ones being replaced.

I lived in a '84 Toyota with a 2.4L (like 120hp?) with >50% its stock weight in payload added (aero drag increase was probably more than that!). I put bigger tires on it also, with stock gears. I worked! Just seems a little excessive what people think they need now. In most of the world people get by with much smaller engines.

 

[bkg]

We'll have to disagree on engineers building towards a fully-maxed out GVWR... As I know that is not the case, but ... oh well.

Note also that almost all MFG's offer different gearing for those with the "tow package." Toyota's offer 4.3's in their 2nd gen tundras. Offered 4.11 in the previous gens (in some cases). Ford offers 3.73 in the dually as it's anticipated to tow more. Point being - what we're suggesting to the OP is no different than what the MFG's do within their own offerings.

But I do think this point you made is interesting... "Just seems a little excessive what people think they need now. In most of the world people get by with much smaller engines." You realize that people here are adding things to their vehicles that are "a little excessive" with bumpers, tires, lifts, campers, etc? That most of the world doesn't do? And most of the world also doesn't get the size tires we do here... and most of the world DOES get diesel's and much lower gears from the factory.

 

[Skinhyfish]

Loving the input from camper guys..think gears would only help with weight of extra add-ons.. have any guys seen long term issues with a gear swap?

 

[jsnow]

Mine doesn't.

Are you talking about your 2016? The 5.7 is a much different animal than the 4.7

Before I regeared I would drop down into second sometimes pulling the passes here in WA. Now I hardly drop out of OD. At 70 mph I'm at about 2300 rpm.

 

[Skinhyfish]

Jsnow what are you driving?

 

[jsnow]

I have a 2001.

 

[rruff]

Are you talking about your 2016? The 5.7 is a much different animal than the 4.7

The truck is ~35% heavier too.

Based on what I was able to look up regarding overall gearing, my 6spd has a ~30% lower 1st gear and a 9% taller high gear (vs the 1st gen 4spd auto). The 5.7 has a much higher max HP spec, but I'd guess the 4.7 has relatively good torque numbers.

 

[toyotech]

rruff. You have a 2016 tundra. Far different than a 2000-2006 tundra. The newer Tundra's like yours has a better learning computer than the old ones. The newer tundra also has a 5.7 with a bigger towing capacity over the 4.7 in the first gen Tundra's. You can't compare the two and say they are the same. I have access to a bone stock 2000 tundra. Overloaded 2004 tundra pushing 6000lbs recently regear to 488 and 35s. And a 2016 1974 tundra 4x4 bone stock.

The new tundra will handle 35s without a regear has the engine pushing more power plus the closer ratio 6 speed trans makes it doable

With an older tundra depending on years. The 4 speed has much longer gear ratio between gears. So just using a lower gear is fine but pushes your rpms much higher. When I was (2004) on 32s and at 6000 lbs towing an aluminum trailer with a 2seater Rzr. I had to use 2nd just to go 55 up hill with rpms near redline. If I went into 3rd I would have lost speed and i would have to go back into 2nd.

Now I'm regear to 488 and even larger tires (35). I can do the same trip with the Rzr in 4th with just OD off. It drives like a dream now and I can even use cruise control going up hill with just OD off and it won't down shift to 3rd


For a first gen.
456-33
488-35
529-37

Here is my GPS vs Speedo on my 2004 tundra on 35s 488 gears and pushing 6000lbs in weight.

https://youtu.be/8N8T9Qs6VvQ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[toyotech]

Larger tires and different rims increase overall turning weight as well.

Factory gearing is tuned for stock size tire and weight. Weight being more important than anything else. If you can go larger tire and keep each tire weighting the same than yes it won't matter to much other than having to use a lower gear as the shift points to speedo will be off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rruff]

Factory gearing is tuned for stock size tire and weight. Weight being more important than anything else.

Tire weight is actually near to zero in relevancy. When accelerating at low speeds it might be a 1% effect or so, and that's the worst it gets.

 

[rruff]

rruff. You have a 2016 tundra. Far different than a 2000-2006 tundra. The newer Tundra's like yours has a better learning computer than the old ones.

I know it's different. The post I was replying to stated that a computer controlled transmission would hunt for gears when a load was added. Does the 2002 even have a computer controlled transmission?

Some people like to obsess about things. Many who put 35s on a new Tundra feel the need to regear as well. That's without a load. They notice a loss in initial acceleration and it bugs them and they have to "fix" it. Others run 37s and load it with a big camper and it's fine.

For the $3-4k cost of a regear, I can think of other things I'd rather have. That's getting close to the price of a supercharger, which would be an actual power increase and not just a gear change.

 

[toyotech]

Tire weight is actually near to zero in relevancy. When accelerating at low speeds it might be a 1% effect or so, and that's the worst it gets.

Bull**** ********. I have compared a stock tundra to mine. And the weight is noticeable. Stock on 1st gen is 29 inch. Jumping to 33-35 can increase tire weight to 15-30lbs or more per tire.

At highway speeds it may not be notable to you but your engine will see an increase in load which can causing transmission to hunt gears.

Again we are talking about 1st gen tundra which I don't think you have any experience in. 2nd and 3rd gen tundra is a whole other beast.

Either way. Re gearing has been the most noticeable improvement in drivability with larger tires.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk