2015 Toyota Tundra What to Expect – 2014 Shortfalls?

0 Flares 0 Flares ×

For many Toyota Tundra fans the 2014 re-design was a huge disappointment, what does that mean for the 2015 edition? The truck landscape is going to change dramatically in 2014, will Toyota respond? If so, here is our list of changes we see or would like to see.

2015 Toyota Tundra What to Expect - 2014 Shortfalls?

What do you want to see in the 2015 Toyota Tundra? Here is our list.

Before we begin with our list, let’s understand that in the fall of 2014, we will see the GM Twins re-introduced with some impressive MPG and towing gains on Ford without a big price increase. Ram will release their diesel version of the 1500. Ford will undoubtedly counter this challengers in 2015, will Toyota follow suit. If they want to keep their market share, they had better. Plus, we are getting closer to those 2016 CAFE standards that will force all manufactures to implement new systems to get better MPG.

Let’s also be clear that there will probably not be any big changes in 2015 rather just modifications. However, who knows with the fast pace of changes coming from other manufactures.

Definite Changes:

  1. Trim Packages Changes – some of the trim package offerings will probably be “re-evaluated” and we could see tires and navigation systems moved up and down trim offerings. Granted not a big change and at all, but very likely to happen.
  2. Minor Aerodynamic Improvements – odds are high that after substantial real-world testing by 2014 owners, Toyota engineers will improve the truck’s aerodynamics. This will probably be accomplished by enhancing the benefits of the Aerofins and by improving the fit and finish of exterior pieces. This won’t be a substantial change, rather small changes.
  3. Direct Injection – You know it has to come out at some point. Why not in 2015? Toyota is really falling behind by not offering it yet.
  4. Engine stop-start. We thought this system would have been in the 2014 edition, but it wasn’t. Look this system is not without its critics, however, with the looming CAFE standards looming in 2016, Toyota is going to have to start doing something.

Likely Changes:

We thought these would come in 2014. They should be coming, is 2015 the year?

  1. Variable valve lift. Variable valve timing (VVT) is commonplace, but variable valve lift is still a newer feature on most vehicles. Toyota, long a fan of VVT, currently has a couple of engines running a variable-valve lift system. This should make it’s way into all Toyota vehicles in by the middle of the decade.
  2. Electric steering. Hydraulic steering pumps are less efficient than electric motors. GM and Ford both plan to move this into their full-size trucks soon, and Toyota will likely follow. In fact, this will be a common feature industry wide.

Possible Changes:

  1. Future Powertrain Engine Announcement. We all know that Toyota is really tight-lipped on future plans, but with the rush from Ram and GM to offer diesels in the compact and ½ ton market, Toyota HAS to be planning something. Or well, we HOPE they are planning on something. Could they pull a Nissan and make a major announcement at the Chicago Auto Show?
  2. Rock Warrior with a Rear Locking Differential. It is unlikely that all Toyota Tundra’s will get a locking rear differential, but it should be part of the Rock Warrior package. When is Toyota going to get serious about competing with the other off-road machines (Ford SVT Raptor or Ram Runner)? Adding a stock rear locking differential to a small package truck isn’t rock science and can be integrated into the assembly process. There are after-market suppliers waiting in droves to help Toyota get this accomplished. With the new “truck” guy in Mike Sweers directing the future of the truck, this should be on the table.

Unlikely Changes:

HD version. There are a host of reasons that there won’t be a HD version with a diesel fuel option. Among the biggest? Lack of infrastructure and incredible obstacles in this category with regards to brand loyalty.

6.5’ bed. No we don’t really understand why they don’t offer it either, but they don’t. Unless, the 6.5′ foot bed catches fire with other truck makers, it is highly unlikely Toyota will offer this.

* We didn’t mention a larger fuel tank because, well, we don’t really know for sure if it is or it isn’t in the 2014 edition. Trust us though that if it isn’t coming, we will hammer our Toyota contacts to know why.

That’s our list, what’s yours? What was missing in the 2014 announcement that you would like to see?

Filed Under: TundraHeadquarters.com


RSSComments (60)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. mk says:

    thanks for the link on the new 2014 chevy silverados. If I can get by the looks of the 1988 front end, it will be on my visiting list as long as the 22 mpg hwy. is NOT with anything less than a 3.73 rear axle ratio since I can now get a 6.5′ bed in a crewcab. Something besides Ford I have been wanting for decades and I learned my lesson over 10 years ago attempting to reason that the chevy 1500HD with the 6.0L I bought was a good idea since I loved the interior space but the darn 14 hwy mpg didn’t cut it and the truck road like a lumber wagon way too stiff not loaded down and pulling.

  2. Speedster says:

    I would love to see the direct injection from the Lexus line. I’m hoping it would not only give a bit better fuel economy, but also push it over the 400HP mark. Did I mention that I want it to run on regular pump gas, not Premium, like the Lexus?

    A locking rear differential would be good, but I want it to work in all drive modes – 2WD, 4HI, 4LOW, like the F-150 does, not just in 4LOW like Tacoma does.

    CrewMax with 6.5′ bed. They have the frame already, its just in a Double Cab long box. Its the same wheel base.

    Built in brake controller, voice commands to control music devices like Ford’s SYNC. And please let me be able to order it from the factory with a supercharger!

    I don’t think any of that is unreasonable.


  3. Larry says:

    There is a good chance Toyota is being lured out onto the thin ice. The big 3 seem to be in a sprint to put out unproven engines just to claim they get 1 MPG more then the others. They are not doing this on their 3/4 tons trucks and they would if the technology was quality. There are no EcoBoost motors in the F250 and for good reason. No V6 in the RAM 2500 and people should understand why.

    Engines are proven on the real world over 5 years or more in the -30 of Alaska and the 115 heat of AZ, not in a lab.

    Toyota has a loyal following who will not move to GM/RAM/Ford. Toyota needs to stay on course, quality, long term durability is where the big savings are. They need get it right and then when the EcoBoost motors start flying apart like WalMart mouse traps Toyota will be in the right position. If Toyota does not get sucked into this fools game Texas will become the number one light trucks manufacturer in the US.

    Toyota just need to keep working on good stuff and just wait for the big 3 to do what they have done time and time again.

    Tundra adds need to end with:


    • Brian J says:

      I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you.

      The GM small blocks have been around in some form or another for decades. Its been a proven platform for them (aside from some piston slap issues in the 90s) from the good old days of the rock solid 350 to the current 325 and 366. GM has their issues, but poorly built V-8s are not one of them. I am not a GM fan boy, but I respect the fact that they are still running pushrod V-8s in their trucks. Its old technology that is doing extremely well in a world of DOHC engines.

      Ford has worked very hard to test, and test again, their new engines. They have led the full-size truck game for over 3 decades. They don’t want to give that up. I can guarantee you that Ford is not going to do anything to the F-150 that is not going to be successful and durable. Yes, the Ford MyTouch has had its issues and there was a water issue on the 3.5L V-6, but these are no more troubling than the camshaft issues or the water invasion issues on the air pump on the 5.7L engines from Toyota.

      The fact remains that Toyota has not introduced anything in the way of fuel saving technology in their trucks, and its a disappointment to those of us who expected it with the 2014 Tundra. Sorry, but 13 mpg in town is not going to cut it anymore nor is 18 mpg on the highway. The company with the deepest pockets (Toyota) I would expect to have the best fuel conomy with the latest, and most reliable, technology.

      As far as proving an engine in the real world: The 5.7L was in the same boat 7 years ago. It had early camshaft breaking issues and a lot of truck owners didn’t want to trust the new engine from Toyta, but through some tweaking and adjustments has proven reliable. In 10 years I believe we will be seeing EcoBoost and GM pushrod powerplants with 300,000+ miles without a rebuild out there, just like Toyota.

      • Larry says:


        I remember those GM small block V8s well, 283, 307, 327, 350. Simple tough pushrod motors. The modern double overhead cam systems with variable valve timing may use the same block but, it’s a bit different.

        As for your comment about these new motors going 300,000+, I really do want that to be the case as I need to replace a truck in the next 5 years. For me 35,000 for a truck is a very big deal and I can’t afford to buy what will not last.

        I too want to see engines evolve with positive results.

        I still think the EcoBoost motors won’t make it.

        • steve says:

          I agree Larry toyota has been more reliable than anyting else. I own Toyotas two camrys and 08 Tundra with 285k miles on it,other than regular maintenance never any issues,and the most American made truck!!!

  4. DJ says:

    I think a few simple things are missing from the 2014.

    Increase the 5.7’s mileage and horsepower by adding direct injection, simple. Have to do something to the engine to keep up with the competition.

    I hope for a grill tweak already because that thing is ugly.

    Please stop ignoring the frame. Bed bounce is a real issue and it’s unpleasant and can be fixed.

    Rock Warrior improvements – I’m a current RW owner. Put some Fox Shox on it and a locker, that’s all we ask

  5. AD says:

    Thank You DJ.

    I would like to know why not an a 8-speed because then you could get the lower gearing without having to go to the HWY FE killer 4.3 axle ratio.

  6. Mickey says:

    I agree with Larry.

  7. ricqik says:

    toyota is missing a new truck for 2014.

    this is a mere refresh no matter what toyota labels it. same tactic for did with their f series… but at least ford had more changes then cosmetics.

  8. Mike S. says:

    I’ve already moved on from Toyota. The Tundra is a disappointment and it has been from the beginning. Being a Toyota only owner since 1991 I hate to say it but Ford builds a much better truck. Chevy is coming out with some nice additions too.
    The Tundra has been left in the dust.

    The Tundra needs to be rebuilt from the frame up. I doubt Toyota will do anything impressive with the Tundra since it has such poor market share to begin with, which is of their own doing.

    • Anonymous says:


      Could you be a bit more specific? What do you feel is missing which has made you leave Toyota?

      As toyota just does not build 4WD, standard cab long bed trucks which I need, I am being pushed to the old time work truck, fleet dealers which the big 3 still offer.

      A few years back I worked for a State agency. We had a motor pool of many trucks. I really liked the suspensions on the F150 but, hated the 4 speed auto trans. I think the F250 is just unbeatable but, it’s a heavy beast and can’t be reasonably compared to the Tundra as it does not have the save Fed/EPA requirements.

      I also liked the Toyota Tacoma suspensions. Those Toyota Tacoma truck with the 4 or 6 are rock solid. They own that market and I see no change in sight.

      I too think Ford builds a good F150 but, I am just not willing to take the chance on an overhead cam V6 with such long chains. Time will tell.

      I like what I see in the new RAM V6 paired with the ZF transmissions but, I just don’t know if I am willing to trust the rest of a RAM truck.

      True that Tundra is a small player in all of this and,,,,,,, with RAM/GM/Ford making some risky moves Toyota may be doing the smart thing by going slow. Most Toyota owners I know would not leave. So at most Toyota will continue to hold their current numbers position. Any mistake by the big 3 and they will add customers.

      I think they are being smart by not following the herd just to react.

      There it a lot of discussion on these boards about particular brands and much of it is on the subject of cosmetic things. To be fair to all the manufactures, the Feds/EPA/etc have way too much influence in the products which are on our table.

      With 50 MPG fleet requirements coming at all of us, there is one thing which will happen for sure. All the manufactures will be forced to build light weight disposable models which are going to cost consumers big time. People will need to recognized when a high MPG truck/car is nothing more then token build. In some cases the 3/4 ton trucks which are not put in this classification may be a better long term deal. The Fed just can’t industrial users to buy the light weigh crap, the long term costs are too high. Only the mass private consumer gets stuck with this mandated crap.

      • Now that is an interesting question. Specifically: “Will 3/4- and 1-ton pickup sales increase due to durability concerns with CAFE inspired light-weight 1/2-ton trucks?” Hmm… I think I have a post idea. Thanks!!


    • Don Ricks says:

      I’ve owned my first, and last, Tundra for almost five years. Air pumps, universal joints, and now an ignition switch problems which the dealer tells me cannot be repaired because they cannot reproduce the problem has left me anxious to dump the SR5 for a GM product. I was fairly contented with the truck, and held on due to hopes that Toyota would eventually offer an American quality truck. I’m about to paint the Tundra the prettiest shade of “gone” you have ever seen

      • Larry says:

        I just retired my Toyota after 19 years.

        I had great luck with my T100 and would have purchased a Tundra if they had a model to suit my needs. At times any parts from any manufacture can need replacement. I don’t know the complete history of your truck and it’s needs. I moved to a Cummins Ram 2500 for several reasons.

        I will add this, as I said my T100 was a great truck. The dealer however was the worst outfit I have ever had to deal with. I find all dealers to be bad but this particular Toyota dealer took the cake over all of them. All I can say is ask around and find a good independent service center. They are out there you just need to dig a bit. I have a good local guy who has given me great service on my Toyotas and Subarus.

        In my experience NEVER, NEVER, I mean NEVER take a car to a dealer for service. I have one horror story after another. Subaru, Toyota, Ford, they all suck and my Toyota dealer sucked the most. At the parts department it was like I was begging for food or something, They wouldn’t lift a finger to help me.

        My last service was a recall of a steering component. When they re-assembled everything my steering wheel was not straight and level. When I told them I wanted it correct they wanted to charge me. I never went back and have told probably a thousand people to stay away from them.

        • Mick says:

          My 2000 tundra sr-5 has been the best darn truck I have ever owned. Reliable as all heck! Had a Ford 150 once, once, never again. Things started breaking at 65k. My tundra has 202 k on it now and it still purrs like a Lexus. Thinking about getting a new or newer one but, might wait to see what they have up their sleeve. ALL of you can keep your American badged domestic trucks sourced and built on foreign soil. I’ll keep my Tundra; best American Made Foreign truck in America

  9. Jack Weber says:

    I just want better engines in the tacoma. I was hoping for a display or anouncement at the NYAS. But guess what…nothing. It angers me that toyota has become an americanized company to the point that they are willing to cut costs by skimping on the DVVTi the tacoma. While putting DVVTi in everything else that runs the same engines. I guess they figure that people will buy them anyway, why spend the extra money. Toyota is forgetting what got them to the top of the moutain. Cheap, uber reliable, no frills automobiles packed with drivetrain innovation.

  10. GoBig says:

    A few years back I was on a cruise, and I met a group of people who had a common bond. They all worked for Toyota. I spent an afternoon chatting with one of them, and learned it was a company sponsored trip as a bonus for sales performance. When I learned there was over a hundred of them, I realized what I was forgetting.

    At the end of the day, Toyota is a corporation. They exists to make money, not to satisfy the whims of a minority group of customers.

    The bean counters surely consider the payback versus the costs on every potential innovation.

    As consumers, we sit back and hope that some of our desired tweaks and fixes make it to the black side of a leger sheet and thus in to a production model vehicle.

    It appears to me that truck buyers tend to be mostly brand loyal no matter what rolls off the assembly line. I’ve seen some hideous looking vehicles from the big three hold their grip on sales.

    In the mean time, the corporations hope to turn profits, and fill up those cruise ships. Happy sailing.

    • Jack W. says:

      This is exactly the attitude that allows the coorporations to get by with the bean counting because consumers like you expect them to make money. So your telling me that a 1984 Sub $10K compact pickup with SOHC and multiport fuel injection was sending people on cruises. What about the 1983 toyota tercel with a 5 speed manual transmission w/ overdrive for fuel economy. Was that car sending people on cruises? People like you have forgotten where toyota started out in the American market. I haven’t forgotten b/c there’s an 1988 EFI auto pickup in my driveway with 207K mi on it that runs great. Toyota started out building a better product than the domestics at a cheaper price. Toyota has fallen into mediocrity.

  11. Anonymous says:

    There is a simple answer to corporate marketing.

    Always refuse to purchase what does not meet our requirements. Even a small market will be supported by someone.

    Corporations didn’t force us to purchase cars/trucks with anti-lock brake systems, that came from the Feds. It’s kind of difficult to do much about that but, people should refuse to buy anything which comes as a bundle with other stuff they do not want because a truck company is trying to boost profits. While I would like limited slip differentials, I refuse to purchase them if they are bundled with leather seats and an MP3 player. Each party in a deal must work for what is in their best interest and for me that is keeping Toyota sales people off that cruise ship and on shore where I am. The consumer must take the position that they are in charge and keeping their money in their pocket is the best position. This is the reason I am still running my 19 year old truck. If they don’t build what I demand, I keep my money where it is and I keep earning 7 percent on top. Truck companies need me not the other way around. People should remember that.

    A mining, oil company is not going to purchase tucks with leather interiors and have it driven into the ground by employees who don’t make the payments. Toyota has decided to not build work type trucks with 4WD. So I am kind of stuck with the big 3.

    I am one of the few who does not want fancy trucks. For me trucks need to do work in harsh conditions at the lowest cost since I will destroy them. It’s too costly to destroy a luxury truck. Toyota does not build this kind of truck but, there is still a market for contractor type work trucks. Even though it has become a small market, any percentage of some number is greater then zero if you are not in the market.

    I may need to move to a 3/4 ton truck which does not have to meet all the Fed requirements and have a second car for when I don’t need a truck. The only real loss in this is the extra insurance. Since a car/truck only lasts so many miles the cost of ownership is not derived by the number of vehicles but the miles. It’s doesn’t cost much more over the long term to have a cheap, high MPG car along with a solid industrial type work truck. For me anyway.

    Get what you want or tell the dealer to get stuffed until they are willing to provide what you do want.

    • Gobig says:

      I agree with you totally. I guess that’s why I still drive my minimalist 1985 Toyota pickup.

      I am thinking very seriously about a 2014 Tundra, but I’m still waiting to see the Double Cab configuration. I suppose it will be the same trim options as the Crew Max that was already revealed.

      My dog is hard on fancy interiors.

    • DGH1 says:

      Not sure where your coming from, or where you go truck shopping.
      Last time I checked you can buy a Tundra Standard Cab 4×4 with an 8 Ft. Box.
      Basic Cloth interior, and not many bells or whissels.
      Try your local Toyota dealer.

      • Larry says:

        That post was me, it was not meant to be anonymous.

        99 percent of the time I am the only person in the truck. For me, a 4 door or extended cab model doesn’t add anything and I lose cargo area. When I need a truck, the back end is usually full.

        I checked into it. The Tundra standard cab long bed is rear wheel drive only. Perhaps that will change.

        The truck market is now in 2 segments. The light end, Tacoma and 1/2 ton stuff is now a consumer market. 90 percent of the trucks are going to past car buyers and the 4 door models are the big sellers. So many people have flooded this market (as proof I submit the notion that the F150 outsells everything on the road) the Feds and EPA now see these things as cars. With Ford building so many, they have a problem meeting the Feds requirements for fleet millage. So the F150 is being tuned down into a light weight consumer truck. There is no other way to meet the EPA requirements. I drive a lot of miles out 40 mile long rough dirt roads past many oil and gas drilling rigs. There are no Toyota trucks in commercial service in these locations. When I see a Tundra it is someone towing their raft or dory out to the Green River.

        The work trucks are almost exclusively 3/4 ton where the CAFE requirement do not apply and they weigh almost 1000 pounds more. Tundra is not in this market at this time. I doubt Toyota will move into this market.

        I am not trying to hammer the current Tundra which does meet so many peoples requirements. I just would like to see a bare bones model made available. The dealers don’t need to stock them, just order them for those contractor who have this need. Even though the market is small 1 truck is more then zero and I believe there are enough fleet buyers who need them to justify the production.

        • DGH1 says:

          Hi Larry,

          I almost bought one!
          4×4 Regular Cab Long Bed. It’s available, check the web!
          I ended up with a short bed, don’t need the bed cargo room, and like the space behind
          the seats.
          Before you knock one, crawl underneath, the weight and size of the front suspension will surprise you.
          I have had a Ford Courier, a F150, a Dodge 1/2 ton, a Dodge 1 Ton Cummins (loved that truck!), a
          GMC V35 Dually, S10 Crew Cab,, a F250, a Yukon Denali (really liked that one too!), and now
          a recently acquired Tundra Regular Cab short bed. All were 4×4 or AWD except the courier.

          If you want a decent 1/2 Ton, check out Tundra 4×4 Reg. Cab Long Bed.


          • Larry says:


            Do you have a URL for the truck, (a 4WD standard Cab 8 foot – long bed). I can’t find such a truck and my local dealer is also telling me it’s 2WD only. That dealer is not all that knowledgable about technical issuers and you have to know everything before going in.

            I can’t find one. Is it always possible that I am WRONG on this issue. It would be great to be wrong on this one or I will be stuck with and F150 or Ram 1500.

        • DGH1 says:

          Larry says:
          April 12, 2013 at 10:17 am

          Hi Larry,

          Tim responded to our previous posts, said you were likely after a V6. If so I think you are out of luck.

          However, if you want a 5.7L V8 – you can have your Standard Cab 8 FT, Box.

          Here’s the Link

          Should bring up the specifications for 4×4 Standard Cab
          Std. Box and Long Box.

          Take care,


          Do you have a URL for the truck, (a 4WD standard Cab 8 foot – long bed). I can’t find such a truck and my local dealer is also telling me it’s 2WD only. That dealer is not all that knowledgable about technical issuers and you have to know everything before going in.

          I can’t find one. Is it always possible that I am WRONG on this issue. It would be great to be wrong on this one or I will be stuck with and F150 or Ram 1500.

  12. Anonymous says:

    I wonder if we would’ve kept my now wife’s 1988 toyota tercel 4 speed 2 door coupe it would still be running guessing 350K on it now easily. The clutch was starting to slip at around 80K but NOTHING done to it ever since new besides brakes once is all and tires once is all. Yet, Toyota at that time had a winner since it achieved mid 40’s mpg and was very comfy and roomy for a 2 door vehicle plenty of room for 4 adults comfy. NOW, 20+ years later, Toyota cannot even build a Yaris that achieves 44-45 mpg like the Tercel use to back in 1988. Why not?

    Personally, I believe Toyota has lots it’s edge and has become mediocre, not the one to beat, unlike in years past. Yes, in 2007, the tundra was a sure hit, at least in my eyes being 110% strictly chevy fan for life, but since then, nothing has caught my eye in terms of wanting anything else from Toyota, at least for me.

    If the tundra wants to stay alive, cosmetic changes 7 years later will make them become extinct. At the very least, an improved, more efficient 5.7L returning 15 city and 21 hwy mpg should easily have been achieved no problems. Pretty disappointed in the new 2014 but will visit one before I change my mind on going back to a chevy silverado crew cab with FINALLY COME MAY OR JUNE OF THIS YEAR A 6 1/2′ BED I so want bad!

    • Larry says:

      In 1977 I had a 1600 CC Subaru. It got 41 MPG. I have 2 Subarus today with 2500 CC motors, one gets 23 MPG the other 30 MPG.

      The current milage numbers are not Toyotas fault. This is mostly the Feds. The vehicles are now heavier with all kind of requires stuff. Anti-lock brakes, emission controls big 6, and now 8 speed auto transmissions. Catalytic converters with platinum and palladium in them.

      The consumers now also demand 350 HP and the ability to tow 10000 pounds while going 70 MPH while sitting on leather sets with a soft ride.

      The Feds have their heads so far up you know where it’s crazy. The require all kinds of junk on a small car related to emissions and what ever else yet at the same time I can go out and buy a Ram with an 800 foot pound diesel which weighs 7000 pounds and gets 14 MPG.

      The world is a crazy place.

  13. DGH1 says:

    Hey Anonymous,

    Sounds like you don’t know what you want. One post your after a regular cab 4×4 work truck full lenght box, which You said didn’t exist.
    News Flash, it’s available from Toyota, check with your dealer!

    Next post your after a quad cab. Get real.

    Do you have a clue what you want there boy?

    • DGH1,

      I’m going to side with Larry on this one, I have looked around myself for the truck he wants and I can’t find it.

      He has said he wants:
      4.6L V-6
      Regular Cab
      Grade Trim Level
      Long Bed

      If you can find one, let us know.


      • Mickey says:

        Tim not sure if you can find a V6 in 4WD.

        • Tim Esterdahl says:

          That is Larry’s point. I’m not sure myself that they exist. Frankly, I don’t think Toyota makes that much money on them and thus doesn’t want to build them.


      • DGH1 says:

        Hey Tim,

        Who said anything about 4.6 V6

        Sorry never saw that reference.
        Work truck for me says V8


        • Larry says:

          I like the idea of a V6 even for working trucks. There is more room under the hood.

          While I am old at 59 I am not that old. Back in my days as a brick layer and laborer before that, the trucks we had were all standard cab inline 250 CI (about 4.0L today) 3 speed manual transmission units. Poor fuel economy for sure. Many of the trucks were mid-60s, they even had wood planks in the bed. Power was never an issue and we always had them overloaded. Our 1 ton flat bed was also a small inline 6. 60 MPH was max even empty. The modern V6 is way above the power of the old trucks contractors used. Seems that now people view 350 HP as weak.

          I live at the top of a 14 mile grade at 8000 feet. My old 3.0 V6 is slow but it works. The newer V6 motors have plenty of power.

          I have never understood why people feel their truck needs to have 350 HP especially when most people live and work in low elevation flat land. I will admit that when my truck is loaded and pulling a light trailer, I have to gear down and often will slow to 40 MPH but, I can live with that since my truck doesn’t run loaded most of the time. Even when it is loaded on lower elivation roads on the flats or just rolling hills, 150 HP has been no problem. Next time you see an Isuzu cab forwdard dilevery truck which can handle 10000 pounds, it has less then 300 HP.

          One time I helped a non-profit group outfit a river trip for some of it’s donors. We took out at a place called mineral bottom on the Green River not far from Moab UT. There is a long steep switchback dirt road to get back up to the plateau. The trailer had my dory on it and 3 rolled rafts on top of it. With boat and rafts I had at least 2000-2500 pounds in tow and another 1500 on the truck. The roof of the truck had all 3 rowing frames and 16 oars. The bed was filled with coolers, dry bags, dry boxes etc. Way overloaded for sure and the suspension was bottomed out. The original T100 springs were worthless and were later replaced with custom springs. I actually broke a rear shock. I used low range all the way up that road. Most people would not drive their car on that road. While the truck and suspension were not up to that kind of load, the 150 HP 3.0L 180 cubic inch motor was no problem at all. After getting to the highway, I was often down to 30 MPH on the long grades. That has been on good truck and still going.

          I really want to stay with Toyota.

          We are really hung up on mega power but V6 or V8 it doesn’t make all that much difference. It still takes about the same amount of fuel to move a given load.

        • Tim Esterdahl says:


          Larry did a while back or rather that is what I get from reading a few months of his comments. 🙂 No worries.


  14. Mickey says:

    I don’t knoiw if I want to go there DGH1. But like you said Anonymous can’t get it straight in what he wants. What I can say for earlier that Toyota doesn’t care for quantity but “Quality”. Who cares if Ford makes the most trucks and sells them. They are cheap thatr’s why. You seen their resale? Even Dodge claims they have a better resale than Ford and GM. Personnally I don’t need a big bed for the truck I need. Yes I had a 74 Corona SR5 with an 1800cc engine which got great mpg’s. Problem was if anything broke back then you had to wait 2 weeks for the part. Couldn’t do that.

    • DGH1 says:

      Hi Mickey,

      I had to do some repairs on my F250, a lot of little things. Spark plug blowing out of head (apparently a common Ford problem, NAPA has a repair kit! Tiny starter bolts difficult to removeI didn’t find it as tough as my Dodge trucks were.

      I recently acquired the 2010 Tundra 40K KMS. Base model, not many accessories, but
      So far quite impressed with the undercarriage. Brakes and Joints will likely last longer than
      The big three.

      Only down side so far is as well noted in the forum Fuel Mileage!

      Hope I save on the repairs!


  15. Mike P says:

    I think direct injection will definitely be in. The reason it didn’t go this time is because some companies are having problems with carbon build up since there’s no gas passing through the intake valve. I believe it’s in one of the Lexus models, there is port and direct injection to try and alleviate the problem. If that seems to work reliably, Toyota will probably put it into all of their engines.

    • Tim Esterdahl says:

      Agreed! It is coming – it just makes sense.


    • DGH1 says:

      Hi Mike,

      What are the problems with direct injection?
      I have it on one of my cars, no problems so far, it’s a 2004.
      Pushing 160,000 Kms.


      • Mike P says:

        Some cars with direct injection have carbon buildup around the intake valves because no gas passes through them to clean them up. I don’t even know if Toyota was affected by this but I’m pretty sure Audi/VW among a few have had these problem with their DI engines. The next generation Audi 4 cylinder has port and direct injection to try and deal with this. I should have probably worded my previous comment a little better because that was just speculation on my part as to why the new Tundra does not have it yet

  16. Geo! says:

    I currently work at a Ford Dealership as a driver. I drive new Fords every day for long trips and long real world drives in LA Traffic/ LA Roads/ LA Highways including the 101, 405, 10, 5… etc. I myself used to own a 08 Double Cab 5.7l Tundra with no TRD pkg, and sold Toyotas.. I’ve driven every single trim of F150s from XL to Platinums and I can say the ride quality isn’t that great on the F150s! I thought my Tundra’s ride quality was Okay at the most, bearable and rode really smooth on nice highways, and bumpy/choppy on crappy highways. Now that I’ve driven the F150’s I can say the ride is about the same, not really any better in comparison. Claims of Fully-boxed frame riding better than the Tundra’s frame is complete bull, both are trucks and they both ride like trucks. People should stop complaining about their Tundra’s ride quality because the F150 isn’t any better. The best decision I ever made on the Tundra was installing Bilstein 5100’s which really improved the ride. (Note, the comparison between the F150 & Tundra was with both stock suspension, prior to the bilstein 5100s)

    • Tim Esterdahl says:


      Thanks for the insights!


    • Larry says:

      Since you worked at a dealership, you would have seen many things most of us do not.

      I have never understood why so much attention is focused on how a truck rides. As leaf packs get thicker to carry heavier loads it doesn’t seem reasonable to expect a truck which will ride smooth empty to be able to handle 2000 pounds in the bed. The original springs on my truck had very poor springs. It did ride reasonable well when empty but add a load and the back end would sink. Alcan spring of Colorado made me a set of custom springs. I told them I just wanted to have the truck stay level under load and a rough ride when empty was not that important to me. They did a great job and now my old T100 rides a lot like a stock F150.

      Could you comment on what you see as being the biggest difference between 1/2 and 3/4 ton trucks aside from the bigger engines.

      Have you seen problems with all the automatic engagement systems which lock up the front ends? I have had nothing but trouble with my automatic differential. It’s was not worth having and I disabled it and went back to manual hubs from an old 4Runner. One thing in favor of the F250 is I can still get it without the shift on the fly stuff. It is still available with lock/free manual hubs up front. I have had many of these setups and never had a failure.

  17. rich says:

    That has got to be the most ugly truck I have ever seen.They should of kept the 2nd gen style but add a little more concept to it.The grill has to go and Im not to fond of the nascar look on all the new models comming out.The best make over on toyotas part must go to the tacoma the tundra should be simular.

  18. Eric says:

    I would like to see them offer a baja pkg like the Tacoma has but put it on the Tundra!

  19. Paul says:

    So there are only two changes I like to see is a bigger fuel tank and better mileage. The fuel mileage being low on priority as this is a truck and I tow with it. I’ve always thought you don’t by a truck to get good mileage. The tundra 5.7 tows almost as well as a diesel engine. Better mileage would be real nice but with a 26 gallon tank and pulling a close to ten thousand pound trailer the range sucks. We’re talking stopping for gas every 200 miles. On a cross country trip this equates to a long trip with frequent stops. Other than that probably one of the best trucks I have owned and I have owned a few. We’ll see what happens next year might be getting an eco-boost or down sizing my rig. Diesels are just to expensive all the way around.

  20. lionel montague says:

    toyota can you add a remote starter to the tundra and a longer bed , bigger gas tank. Are yous guys thinking in the future to go diesel with a turbo? i know you guys will think of something big.

  21. Fred Laning says:

    LIke most of the other faithful Toyota owners I have been very satisfied my 2010 Double Cab Limited TRD. Since I tow a 35ft, 10,000 lb travel trailer I added air bags, towing mirors, equalizer bars and Goodyear Silent Armor E rated tires run at 60 psi. The truck absolutely has no trouble towing my trailer anywhere except at times I do have a great need for a locking rear differential! Non towing fuel mileage, 15.3 mpg, could be better but towing mileage is competitive with other trucks including diesels 8-10 mpg. I am considering adding a larger fuel tank for more towing range and the ability to buy fuel at the best prices when I find it. Overall this is the best truck I have ever owned and is also the most comfortable and best handling hands down!!! PS I love the way the transmission and engine handles heavy loads and long hills!

    • Paul says:

      Fred, I agree 100 percent with every thing you wrote. Tows better than any gas truck I’ve owned so far. Totally happy with my 2010 Tundra SR5 TRD 5.7. Not quite getting the same mileage as you when hauling my trailer. But I don’t own a full size truck and expect great fuel economy, yeah it would be nice in a perfect world. I would just like have the option of a larger tank or duel tanks for more distance between refueling. Trying to find a station to accommodate 35 foot toy hauler and a double cab ain’t easy. Toyota has one of the strongest tow vehicles on the market and stopping every 200 miles for gas is rediculous. I am currently researching the possibility of adding an auxiliary fuel cell. But this would mean sacrificing bed space. Any info or thoughts would be appreciated. If toyota rectifies this issue I’ll buy a new one but if they don’t I’ll keep this one till the wheels fall off. Come on Toyota get with it.

      • Fred Laning says:

        Reply to Paul. I am looking at a 46 Gal fuel tank that replaces the existing 26 gal and I will still have my bed space. It is made and sold by Transfer Flow in California. It supposed to be a direct bolt in using the existing fuel pump module from the stock tank. I am also looking into an aftermarket rear locker either Eaton or Auburn. There is an excellent transmission shop in Newport, TN named Allen’s Transmissions that I will use to install. Good luck!

  22. Jdub says:

    how bout push button start??

    • John says:

      i was wondering why they wouldn’t have a smart key with keyless ignition, even if they made it a option.

  23. Jim says:

    Two things missing on Tundra, a “hand hold” for ease of the driver to get in, and Built in brake controller.

  24. Richard says:

    I’m in the process of ordering a 2014 or 2015 tundra sr5 trd. The 2015 is 500 less plus – the rebate of 1000 so the total cost less is $1500. Does anyone know if the 2015 tundra 5.7 is coming with direct injection? If so I it worth the extra $1500

  25. Ron says:

    Hello everyone,

    I am the somewhat proud owner of a 2014 Tundra. I have a 4WD SR5 CrewMax. While I like the truck a lot, I think Toyota “americanized” the truck a little too much (going w/ “good enough” instead of “let’s make this the best in segment”).

    My likes:

    Rock solid

    Great motor (5.7)

    Good driving position

    Comfortable seats

    Interior space(Love the CrewMax)

    Dashboard layout

    My dislikes:

    Lousy dealer service and service advisors.

    Brakes that seem to have a “dead spot” in the pedal before you feel them grab the discs (I have asked 2 dealers about this, and both the no-service advisors looked at me like I was a bimbo asking for a quart of blinker fluid)

    No locking or true LSD rear axle

    Small gas tank (really Toyota, 26 gallons on something this size w/ a big V8 and 4.30 gears???)

    When they call it a glove box, they are not lying, not much room for more than a pair of gloves! I hope the idiot that designed this has to live w/ it! The older models have 2.

    Nice big center console that does NOT lock

    No dual zone HVAC on the SR5 (the older models have this)

    No reclining rear seat on the SR5 (once again, the older models have this…I’m starting to see a pattern here).

    No little storage compartments on the door armrests (older models have this too…)

    Navigation that seems to have it’s own will to change icons

    My In-laws have an ’09 SR5 double cab, and my buddy has an ’07 Limited double cab, so I am somewhat familiar w/ the older models. I guess I just feel cheated a little.

    I test drove a used 2010 CrewMax SR5 that had dual zone HVAC, and a reclining rear seat. We just couldn’t make a deal on the vehicle.

    In my very humble opinion, Toyota seems to have cheapened all the little things that made a Toyota a Toyota. With the 2014’s, it’s like Toyota hired someone away from the big three and asked them “how can we cheapen our truck, but still charge the same price or more?”

    I have owned Toyotas on and off for over 20 years, and have always been very happy w/ them, until now.


    • Tim Esterdahl says:


      I found the same things when I reviewed the new truck in August, 2013. I still really like it, but I am with the critics that thinks Toyota could have kept more storage and features in the new truck.


  26. DGH1 says:

    Was looking forward to a new Tundra, 2015 model.
    I have a 2010 Reg. Cab, Short Box 4×4. Love this truck.
    All the storage in the cab, room behind the seats
    Wheelbase of the truck awesome for what I do.
    Before I bought this, I was shopping for a Dodge, saw the Tundra and fell in love.
    From what I hear, too many poor changes for me to go back for another Toyota Tundra.
    I want reclining seats, dual air, a bench seat with the fold down, a Reg. cab, and a short
    Feel like I am being left behind, and abandoned by Toyota.

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