Does the Toyota Tundra Need to Go on a Diet? Curb Weight Comparison
Tim Esterdahl | Jan 29, 2014 | Comments 19
Putting together a comparison of curb weights for various trucks, one thing stood out. The Tundra is heavy, really heavy. Does the truck need to go on a serious diet? What kind of future does a “heavy” truck have with CAFE regulations and better fuel economy demands from consumers?
The Tundra will be the heaviest truck in the half-ton market. Is that a big deal?
With all the hubbub on the new Ford F-150 and its 700 lb weight loss, it got us thinking about looking at curb weights and how they compare. After putting together the chart below, it is pretty obvious that the Toyota is quite a bit heavier than the other manufactures’ trucks.
While the weight and subsequent fuel economy numbers aren’t exactly a direct correlation of the data, it is worth noting them together. Why not a direct correlation? There are a lot of other factors involved in fuel economy and weight is just one part of it. Consider this: the 2013 GMC Sierra 1500 in a crew cab has a curb weight of 5,335 lbs and estimated 15/21 (city/hwy) MPGs. The 2014 GMC Sierra crew cab 1500 has a curb weight of 5,292 and estimated 16/22 (city/hwy) MPGs. Considering that most experts say 100 lbs of weight loss is only equal to 1-2% improvement, you can’t really make the case that a loss of 43 lbs equals the 1 MPG improvements. It is much more likely that the new engines and the host of other improvements that GM did to their trucks is the difference.
All of this brings us back to the original question, does the Tundra need to go on a diet? What would be the benefit of this? Improved MPGs? Maybe. There are estimates out there that by Ford dropping 700 lbs, it will improve their fuel economy by 10 percent. Looking at the chart, we can see the estimated (if you drive like an old lady) numbers. Yes, Toyota has long argued that their numbers aren’t the “EPA test cycle” variety and that they are really true life numbers. However, it is hard to convince customers of that when they see the big numbers in print on the sticker.
Will Toyota respond to the trend of dropping weight? Probably not. As we wrote about a few days ago, demand is exceeding supply. With such strong demand, why change a thing?
Is curb weight a big deal or just another statistic? Would you like to see the Tundra drop weight?
Related Posts:
Filed Under: TundraHeadquarters.com
Tim
Well the Tundra is the biggest, baddest, and most capable of the half ton on the market. It is almost a three quarter ton in disguise. And guys that actually know trucks know that. It is a “real” truck, not an El Rancho car parading as a truck, and Tundra’s QDR is just another reason they have been unable to keep up with demand so far.
When you look at the chart and the upcoming 2015 5.0 Ford; there is no question Ford has the “packaging” dialed in like no one else. Yes I would buy that 2015 5.0 Ford if it had even a token amount of QDR and a Warranty. But since Ford or GM has absolutely no Warranty, I will not buy one.
The truck market place is 100% defined by Washington and we all lose a lot because of it. If we had a 100% free market, then real competition would explode and we would have a large selection of Lexus quality trucks at lower prices from several companies. But that is not the world we live in.
So if the Tundra is 1,000 lbs. heavier than the Ford; is an issue for me? No. If it weighs only 3,000 lbs and it still does not work then I do not want it.
The biggest single mystery in the future world of Trucks is the Fiat RAM. Would Washington allow them to approach the sales volume of Ford and GM? If RAM provided the QDR of Tundra or better AND replaced their dealer structure that could actually deliver a high degree of service quality with a warranty to the customer than all bets are off. The answer is buried within which nation has the greatest monetary strength?
Randy,
Interesting thoughts. I would add that I spoke to Ram’s chief Reid Bigland in Detroit and they are really excited about their products. In fact, they see Ford as incredibly vulnerable and I think they have plans to significantly improve market share with their Ecodiesel.
I believe, more than Washington’s influence, that the Ecodiesel is the real story. Even during the Ford F-150 reveal, everybody was still talking about the Ecodiesel (or maybe I was, LOL!). Talking with the Ram people, they said that demand for that truck has been higher than any other product in recent memory. That is the big reason why they pushed up production and plan to hit dealers in February instead of hitting the market in the fall.
Watch out for the sales reports in April/May and we will see how the market responds.
-Tim
My friend, have you not seen this? Where is big and bad when the entire rear end of the truck flexes? In the “almost 3/4 ton” world a truck in this age has boxed frame rails. It is rigid. It is strong. The suspension does the flexing, not the frame. Toyota, TOYOTA, used to make good trucks. Midsize trucks. The Landcruiser is one of the best Overlanding rigs out there. (unrelated to midsize) This Americanized Toyota F150 is no good. It’s like having the karate kid versus a lumberjack in a forest. The karate kid is out of place. I by no means like the F150 or the Silverado. I would not buy them. I would use their engines, but not the trucks in their stock form. Who uses trucks? Rich men’s wives or working men. Are these fleet vehicles? No. Are they domestic? No. That means when they break, they are not easily serviced in comparison to domestic vehicles. What is the benefit from the Tundra? Compensation. Big does not mean better. Overbuilt, absolutely. But the fact that the entire truck is it’s suspension does not show me the Tundra is what Toyota says it is. Toyota used to be bulletproof and cheap to maintain. They took you everywhere all the time no matter the condition. They have bought the lie that their current image is a good one since they blend in with the market. Like Creed an Nickelback. One religious, one secular. Both completely awful attempts at music. Yet, totally popular with the sheeple. If this is what you want, ignorant America, so be it. I will be the black sheep.
http://youtu.be/p1LO6uxy11I
Joshua,
You need to watch that video a bit closer. They are purposefully driving over “whoops” like section of pavement. Driven at those speeds, every truck in the market would do the same thing.
-Tim
Tim,
That test was with all the above listed half ton trucks and the Tundra was the worst of all. The F150 was the best. I’m familiar with the course and the testing. Here is the full video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJZVUnOduH4
Joshua,
It is due to Toyota’s unique frame. This has been gone over a dozen times, the Toyota engineers didn’t build the truck to flex as much as the others. The downside is that there are silly videos out there like this one. The upside is that the truck doesn’t squat as much as other trucks and can handle heavier loads over the long run. Frame design is really a series of pros/cons and it is all in what you are going after. Just because one truck’s frame has more flex than the others doesn’t mean it is better or worse. It simply means the engineers had different goals when they designed it.
-Tim
I truly love the Ford marketing (lie) videos; too bad it does not reflect the real world requirements of dependability, reliability, quality, and lowest cost of ownership.
Yes, I know when Joshua shouts at the people – the walls came a tumbling down; but that really has no application to trucks. I have no answer about Nickelback, Creed, or Rich Men’s Wives.
From the looks of that chart, it seems as though the Tundra needs to shed some weight. The problem is that the costs associated with the engineering/tooling to do this will increase the price of the truck. Ford and GM are better able to absorb the these costs because they sell 3 or 4 times as many trucks as Toyota.
Tonyspin,
Agreed that it is quite expensive to drop weight for small 2-3 mpg improvements. And I don’t see Toyota doing this at all.
With that said, the reason I wrote this story was because I was just really surprised by the weight of the Tundra.
-Tim
Those are manufacturer’s numbers. If you look at published as-tested curb weight of somewhat comparably-equipped trucks, you find that the Tundra isn’t much heavier and sometimes lighter than the competition. Here are some as-tested curb weight numbers by Motor Trend:
2013 Ram 1500 Laramie Crew Cab 4×4: 5843 lb
2014 Ram 1500 Laramie Longhorn Crew Cab EcoDiesel 4×4: 6091 lb
2014 Toyota Tundra 1794 Edition CrewMax 4×4: 5899 lb
2012 Ford F150 Lariat SuperCrew 4×4 EcoBoost: 5862 lb
2014 GMC Sierra 1500 SLT 4WD Crew Cab: 5607 lb
The GVWR on the Hemi RAM is 6800 lbs. That means it’s payload is less than 1000 lb (1/2 ton). Does that mean it’s no a half-ton truck (Sarcasm)? I don’t know what the GVWR is on the EcoDiesel RAM, but if it’s also 6800 lbs, it’s payload is less than 800 lbs. You can’t even carry 5 average American men.
http://www.motortrend.com/road.....ewall.html
http://www.motortrend.com/road.....irst_test/
http://www.motortrend.com/road.....irst_test/
http://www.motortrend.com/road.....ewall.html
http://www.motortrend.com/road.....irst_test/
Thanks for this information! And you are right, I pulled manufacture numbers.
It will be interesting to see then what the “real world” curb weight of the new Ford will be. If you subtract 700lbs from those numbers, it is quite a difference between them.
-Tim
The great thing with losing weight is, the engine works less, improved fuel economy, tires last longer, brakes last longer, less mass to toss around. But the laws of physics dictate the truck will be less capable of handling such a massive tow weight. But than again, that won’t stop ford from using their spring dust.
LOL! I have heard that Ford will comply to the J2807 towing standards when they release their information. And I have heard that Ram and GM will follow suit ASAP. I’m not holding my breath. 🙂
-Tim
“The truck market place is 100% defined by Washington and we all lose a lot because of it. If we had a 100% free market, then real competition would explode and we would have a large selection of Lexus quality trucks at lower prices from several companies. But that is not the world we live in.”
Thats about it and you haven’t seen anything yet. Because of all the FED required junk going on all these so called trucks, I gave up and went with a used 2006 3/4 ton. In no way are these things trucks for real work.
A 6500 pound 3/4 ton truck built in 2006 can get 18 MPG in town and the 700 pound lighter 2015 Ford F150 is estimated to be better then the 17 MPG of the current V6 ecoboost. 18 perhaps and I would like to actually see an ecoboost F150 get 17 in city driving. What’s wrong with this picture.
Toyota is in a bit of a bind. Unless they push the Tundra up to the gross of the 3/4 ton market the Feds are going to dance on their head while the big 3 build out heavy truck without all the restrictions of the lighter class. Toyota is going to have to make to some bold moves to meet the 2025 Cafe numbers (which are bogus to stat with). You can bet the the Toyota design teams are working over time to come up with the answer and it’s going to look like the F150 when it comes out.
Free markets, consumer choice and real competition are the only answers which will work. I am planning for at least 20 more years from my 2006 Cummins Ram, I will not pay 250 bucks for tire pressure radian transmitters put DEF in my diesel.
200-300 lbs. difference isn’t much, but over 500 lbs. is a lot in my opinion maybe even able to gain 1 mpg in fuel economy.
I thought I read a long time ago that the weight of the current trucks vs. say 15 years ago have drastically gone up in weight, but so has the hp/torque numbers as well thus hardly any improvement in mpg vs. in the 90’s when I first starting buying chevy silverado’s.
I remember that story as well or a similar one. Basically, if the size of trucks would have stayed the same AND we would have continued to develop improvements in HP/Torque and fuel efficiency, today’s pickups would have MPGs in the 30s.
It is the weight and size that is killing MPGs.
-Tim
With an 8spd, the extra weight wouldn’t be as much of an issue as the extra cogs would allow Toyota to gear the Tundra more aggressively to improve acceleration. The extra two top gears could then extend mpg ratings, especially hwy.
Toyota did achieve a good in class crash rating that the Ram subsequently faired poorly in. If weight is a factor in safety and my own mpg is very acceptable, I feel secure with my truck. *My 2wd truck is lighter.
If Toyota wants to shave a few hundred lbs off the curb weight with maybe a lighter, hydro-formed frame, i’m ok with that. You can just add that weight loss to a gain in payload. Does the Tundra need all aluminum panels? I don’t think so.
If Toyota offered a small V8 diesel with 500 ft. lbs of torque, would many be talking about curb weights when the Tundra far outpaced its class in towing and MPG?
6,800lbs for half ton trucks. If manufacturers go over that, then they have to re-classify that truck to 3/4 ton–and that’s a whole new set of standards and tests that’s required to be met.
I got a ’06 SR5 double-cab 1st-gen tundra. Went to the local dump ground here, scale read 5,585 ibs. Did Toyota overbuild these these units?!! I do know the front differential is of cast-iron material. That’s unheard of on the ‘others’. How is the overall durability/reliability of the 5-speed auto. trans.?? Somebody please give me feedback on this.