2014 Tundra Pre-Orders Strong – Production Changes, More Variations Coming

0 Flares 0 Flares ×

UPDATE: There has been a lot of media outlets lately (like this Autonews story) talking about what Bill Fay, Toyota Division General Manager, comments on expanding production of the Tundra and moving production of the Tacoma. Just a reminder, we reported on this months ago. Here is our original post.

Lost in the frantic news and reviews of the 2014 Tundra is a most interesting tidbit. It seems Toyota’s Chief Engineer Mike Sweers alluded to Toyota building more Tundra pickups and different variations of it are coming soon. Say what?

2014 Tundra Pre-Orders Strong - Production Changes, More Variations Coming

According to Chief Engineer Mike Sweers, pre-orders of the 2014 have been really strong prompting discussion of moving the Tacoma production and building more variations of the truck.

According to a news article in the USA Today, Sweers said Toyota is considering moving production of the Tacoma to Mexico thereby creating more capacity for the Tundra pickup. It would also mean that Toyota could build more variations of its pickup in the future. Everyone on this site knows exactly what I mean: longer bed Crewmax, Diesel, HD, etc… Will they, maybe or maybe not. However, right now is the absolute best time in recent history to do it with pickup trucks setting sales records.

Here is the exact language from the article:

“Under consideration: Shifting some production of the compact Tacoma pickup, built at San Antonio, back to the Baja, Mexico, Tacoma factory, says Mike Sweers, chief engineer for the Tundra.

Other possibilities: overtime shifts, and speeding up the Texas assembly line. That’s always a touchy issue in manufacturing plants. Sweers thinks it could be done by asking line workers to ferret out wasted moments and inefficient processes.

Toyota says it’s considering the production issues now because advance orders for 2014 Tundras have been stronger than expected. The automaker plans as-yet-undisclosed additional variants of the Tundra that, it believes, should boost demand even more.”

The rest of the article is filler portraying the Toyota Tundra as a failure and how Toyota is praying the new 2014 model will save it. Right because the world’s largest automaker NEEDS a full-size truck to sell well in just North America or it’s lights out?!? Same garbage.

While we have heard rumor after rumor in the past about a diesel Tundra, the above statement is the next iteration from a Toyota executive. The reality is that Toyota WANTS to build more trucks, but will the bean counters let them. That is the question.

What do you think? Is this news exciting or are you more “I’ll wait until I see it?”

Related Posts:

Filed Under: Auto News


RSSComments (34)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. DJ says:

    I have read a couple of the 2014 Tundra Reviews, and quite frankly they tick me off. What is it that the Big Three have in their trucks that make them SO VASTLY SUPERIOR IN EVERY SINGLE CATAGORY. It’s absurd the way these magazines and reviewers bow down to them. It’s a guarantee that pretty much any Tundra review you read will be done by a biased reviewer who clearly has an agenda and something against Toyota building a full-size truck. One I read said the Tundra is slow to get up to speed and it will hurt it hauling heavy loads…..Are you friggin’ kidding me!?!?!?!? Anyone who has drove a Tundra knows it’s geared low and jumps off the line better than any truck on the market. Oh but wait it’s not one of the “super trucks” Ford or Dodge makes. Give me a break!

    • Larry says:

      With the Big 3 selling trucks in millions, and with Tundra down in the few hundred thousand range I don’t expect anything else in the trade rags.

      What’s the risk of any publication saying anything negative about an F150 turbo V6?

      Buy any new model with a new engine and the risk is on your side of the isle. The only rational thing to do with new technology is to wait and confer with an independent service person. Want to know what not to buy they will tell you and just look at what they drive.

      The owners of the shop which does the service on all 3 of my vehicles own Tacoma and Tundras. One staff member has an F250, another a diesel Ram. Other staff have Tacoma trucks, Subaru, Honda and Toyota cars. No cars made by the Big 3 only 2 trucks. Their recommendation to me was to find a way to live with a smaller truck and by Tacoma. They do not like the smaller F150 V8s and gave me a number of reasons, plug history, oil flow to cams, cam phasors etc. Their view of EcoBoost to this point is unknown but, they also said they have never seen any good history with any gas turbo other then older Saabs. They said it’s too early to tell.

      This tells me more then any magazine.

      So Toyota is a little behind the Tech curve. If it works, then that’s not a big problem. Better to get it right then to get it fast.

      • Tim Esterdahl says:


        It is funny you bring up what the mechanics drive, the same thing happens in my neck of the woods. With rare exception, all the new trucks are Tundras.


  2. LJC says:

    Here’s why (excerpt from a previous post of mine) “I think the reasons for the relentless “pot shots” at the Tundra are simple. The pickup truck is seen as a U.S.A creation and a foreign owned company creating vehicle that can compete with our “domestic” auto manufacturers is seen as a threat. Ever see anybody lash out at the Titan? ”

    Since Toyota has a facility to test the J2807 standard, they should test competitor trucks to see if they can tow what their posted towing capacities. Or as Toyota has done in the past, have AMCI do it.

  3. DJ says:

    That’s a good point, nobody ever lashes out at the Titan, it’s just dismissed. And often the Tundra isn’t even listed as competition for the Ram, F-150 or Silverado. Which is funny because for years it’s had more power.

    It’s like the Ram, F-150, and GM trucks are flawless and the Tundra falls short in every catagory, it’s so predictible with these reviews that it’s laughable. I’m reminded of the magazine review in 2009 of the Tundra vs F-150 where the Tundra did everything better, yet….they picked the F-150.

    Another great one from a review I read is that the 5.7 is ancient technology that’s been left in the dust, HUH?!?!? 32V, VVT, Aluminum Block is outdated old technology? Tell that to Ford and their ancient V-8 Technology.

    And don’t get me started on MPG, a review mentioned that the Tundra’s 13mpg is far behind what the other guys are doing. First off, I’ve never gotten 13mpg, secondly, the other guys ADVERTISE a lot of things, but real world application shows they’re lying.

    It’s like a media conspiracy, simliar to how they give certain policitians a pass and are all over others. Our media is a joke.

    • Tim Esterdahl says:


      Agreed! I find many times that I’ll see an engine comparison without the Tundra listed. WTH? The Tundra engine is renowned.

      That guy who stated 13mpg, I tore into him on a forum (hoping he reads it). My beef? He drove 50 miles during the media review and he probably drove like a mad men like all of us do at these events. Then, he had the stupidity to call out poor MPG for the Tundra!?! Really, you romp on the gas and only drive a truck 50 miles and you are disappointed in the fuel economy. Dudes a genius!


      • Larry says:


        I know it’s a bit off point but, does the smaller Toyota V8 have the same reputation as the 5.7 engine?

        All this talk of power still just doesn’t add up for me. I just have no need for the power of a bigger engine.

        So I have been wondering if the 2 engines have the same durability?

        • Tim Esterdahl says:


          I would assume it does, I haven’t heard anything bad about it.

          The only real downside to the smaller engine is trying to find one since Toyota makes so few of them and resale value is lower.


          • GoBig says:

            I’ve ran it to a couple people with the 4.6L engine, and they seemed content. They weren’t towing big stuff, so the extra horse power wasn’t missed.

            At least the 4.6 does a little better on gas. Oddly enough, the 4.7 that it replaced didn’t get any better fuel economy that the 5.7.

  4. GoBig says:

    The problem with most “reviews” is that they’re done by magazines that survive on advertising revenue. The big 3 dump a lot of money in to those publications.

    I prefer to get the skinny from Consumer Reports, or J.D. Powers. Kind of odd isn’t it how the Toyota Trucks score very high on unbiased quality assessments, while some of the trade magazines bash them?

    • Tim Esterdahl says:


      Good points. I have worked in Journalism for years now and I can tell you that sometimes although very rare it happens where a parent company is concerned about ticking off a major investor. I’m not 100% sure about the reviews I have read, but as an independent publication like us, we aren’t afraid to piss anyone off. 🙂


      • LJC says:

        GOOD! Let’s tell PUTC and Mark Williams to go to hell!
        The top five fixes for the 2014 Tundra is total BS!
        C-Channel frame? Lighter Engine?
        That “now” POS site has a hidden agenda, just like those a$$holes autoblob and autoguide!

        I know my post can seem a little aggressive, but I feel it’s important to get my point across 😀

  5. Rick says:

    8 Speed? Still the best truck out there and best MPG/engine. IF it ever gets DI, it’s all gravy. The new interior is great, second to none. The nose is growing on me too. Now I wish I waited. Hope the supercharger is in the works too.

  6. toyrulz says:

    I saw one review that even (partly) contradicted itself stating tundra is behind on MPGs but stated that unlike others that offer multiple rear diff ratios and marketing takes the MPGs from the high and the tow rating from the low (article on this needed) Toyota does it all with one. I don’t know why that ever escaped me – but if its true, its quite telling.

    What is the dream MPGs for trucks – pass 30 right? My buddy’s Dad was telling me his 3yo Chevy got 32mpgs on a round trip to Toronto – I didn’t (and don’t) believe it and told him so. He said all he did was keep speed down to 90-95km/h. I am thinking his calculator was mad in China instead of Japan…

    • Tim Esterdahl says:


      Most of the other manufactures boast about MPGs by citing their super light-duty (can’t haul a thing) truck and then use their best towing vehicle to talk about towing capacity. Toyota’s point has always been, if you compare “apples to apples,” the Tundra is comparable on MPGs and towing. While I have agreed that this was accurate in the past, I’m really not so sure now with the new GM twins and their Eco engines performing better on several reviews. The EcoBoost also gets better fuel economy, but I’m not sold it is a 100% apples to apples comparison. Ram is actually really comparable. Their ratings for their Hemi in a crewcab (similar to a Tundra) is 13 city and 19 hwy. Pretty darn close to the Tundra. The difference with Ram/Tundra really is in the transmission with the 8-speed getting way better fuel economy than the 6-speed.

      The problem with writing an article on this (as I discovered) is that there are a lot of different setups and engine choices. Plus, the offerings these days are changing really fast.


    • Larry says:

      You are right. I don’t believe it either. I bet he is looking at the readout on the dash while going down hill with a tail wind, foot off the gas.

      30 MPG trucks with 300 HP and 350 FT/lb which weigh 5500 pounds and can pull 10000 pounds. Keep dreaming. My Subaru might get 28 and it only weighs 3000 pounds.

  7. Mickey says:

    I have the tow pkg on my CM 5.7. I get over 20mpg. I said it before it’s the way you drive and then the terrain, weather, 4×4 vs 4×2, especially street tires over A/T tires. Lifted or not lifted. Lifted creates drag which in turn burns more gas. I really like the pictured one above. I guess it’s a trip to the dealership.

    • Tim Esterdahl says:


      Really? You like the truck above? What about the 5 and a half foot bed?


      • Mickey says:

        Tim I don’t use my bed enough to justify a longer bed. I know how to prioritize when it comes to the bed. I moved from one house to another 30 miles away with this truck. I didn’t have an issue. When I built my fence I used this truck with some straps to tie down. Used this truck to carry 4 Queen Palms at a height of 12 feet+. If you don use a full size bed daily then there is no need for a full size on a CM. Everything changes with a full size bed. One of hand is turning radius. Parking is another. I have an extended and expanded 3 car garage. A full size bed on a CM won’t fit in the garage. If you can’t garage your truck then the people should quit complaining about the paint. Tim I cruise in my truck and travel a good bit. I like the room the truck gives me along with the towing I want for my boat. By the way it fits in the garage. It’s an 18.5 foot Bayliner with 3.0 Mercury I/O Alpha One. My boat is a 2006 which looks brand new simply because it doesn’t stay outside and no need of a cover which can give your seats mildew. Care to fish Tim?

        • Tim Esterdahl says:

          Absolutely! When are we going fishing? I’m sure I can get Jason to pay me to go and “write a story.” LOL!

          Alas, I have too many kids at the moment to even consider buying a boat and going fishing. I get away every now and again to hike, golf or take a bike ride. That is about it.


          • Tim Esterdahl says:

            I should add, the Toyota event I am going to in Wyoming has time for a leisure activity. I choose fishing on one of the lakes up there (I don’t have the details). That is going to be sweet!


  8. gordich says:

    Well…I’ve posted it many times here before! My 4.6l DC 4X4 has gobs of power and great fuel economy. If you wish to smoke the tires, turn off the traction control and LSD and let’er eat! Easily tows our 4000lb Airstream. When driven nicely it is constantly over 20mpg, and higher. That’s with the towing package, all season Michelins, 6.5′ bed and a 2″ lift. Great ride!

  9. […] then why preorders are doing really good? 2014 Tundra Pre-Orders Strong – Production Changes, More Variations Coming | Tundra Headquarters Blo… USA Today 2014 Toyota Tundra Review – Seriously Better | Tundra Headquarters Blog […]

  10. mk says:

    maybe I should wait to consider buying a chevy silverado cewmax 6 1/2′ bed this spring? I highly doubt though that the tundra will be out by then or advertised with this feature I want. The DC tundra rear seats are adequate for adults, but 4-5″ more in legroom in backseat would be nice. If you have a 20′ deep garage, it will fit, but just barely. I have a 24′ deep garage and even with stuff in front sticking out 3′ am sure it will fit no problems but with less than 5″ in front and back to close the garage door. You just have to organize and move stuff around in your garage to make it work.

    • Tim Esterdahl says:


      I’m not sure when/if things will happen with the Tundra options. I just keep hearing things that lead me down that road.

      Another thing to consider is that Toyota is at capacity with its stock truck. Remember they are working on a new Rock Warrior package. Where will they build that if they can’t currently build enough stock trucks?


  11. toyotadave says:

    you gotta remember fellas that this administration is at war with Toyota. Plus my personal theory is that the white house moniters publications. They gotta do all they can to build up public image for their UAW big-3 and anyone not playing ball gets run out of town…quickly!

    • Larry says:

      I’m not much of a fan of the current administration but I have not run across them making any statements regarding Toyota. Not saying you are wrong Just haven’t see anything.

      Have any pointers to information.

      As for the UAW, they have kind of become their own worst enemy. Toyota has nothing to fear from them. They may be close to hitting bottom which might help them start on the road back to being something useful. Nothing wrong with organization, as long as it’s not self destructive.

    • Tim Esterdahl says:


      Boy, they must not be monitoring this site! We have consistently reported negatively on the UAW.

      At war with Toyota? What makes you say that.


  12. toyotadave says:

    Tim, think of the timeline during the cash for clunkers debacle, when those sales results reached the white house, that’s when all the hoopla and witch-hunting(recalls) all started for Toyota. What better way to demoralize the American public than to have them mistrust a particular manufacturer. Right!? The Obama Administration wants more cash flow to the UAW made stuff because they are the ones that gave him votes/money for election. Obama can’t control what people buy, but if uses his media to smear Toyota enough, he figures people will naturally gravitate away from said victim. I Don’t mean to be so political in my overall views, but the way they took after Toyota made me sick to my stomach. As for the big-3, I personally will not ever buy a new one. Agree with Larry to certain extent myself. Just remember, there’s politics and money in everything. Sorry for rant, just my two cents. Love this site, keep up the good work.

    • Tim Esterdahl says:

      Interesting thoughts – too bad all Obama’s plans then backfired. Toyota recently passed GM again as the world’s largest automaker. Toyota’s sales dipped due to supply issues caused by twin natural disasters.


    • Larry says:

      I see your point. I kind of forgot about those recalls. I thought the Prius recall was one of the dumbest things I ever heard.

      One thing for sure not Obama or anyone else for that matter can help the UAW. They have a big problem and they are the only ones who can fix it. I’m still waiting to see them take the first positive step. Until the UAW realizes they must evolve their ideas, Toyota, BMW, Subaru, Honda …… will keep growing in right to work states. Next time anyone ever has a discussion with a UAW member, offer them this. Get rid of all unions and add the yearly management overhead cost to their hourly rate. So 25 dollar an hour plus 2 = 27 dollars an hour. Make that the minimum wager for all so everyone earns enough to live on. See if a single one of them will take the bate. It won’t be so nice when everyone is equal and inflation takes away their monopoly possition.

0 Flares Twitter 0 Facebook 0 Google+ 0 Email -- 0 Flares ×