Detroit Auto Show: Under the skin of Toyota's Tundra
Details on the Toyota Tundra have been slowly trickling out since its debut in Chicago last year, and finally, the manufacturer's display at the Detroit Auto Show put all the goods for our inspection. This, along with the recently-released specs, has given us a better idea of how the Tundra might stack up against the competition.
A recent print rag showed up in our mailbox with the breathless proclamation that the Tundra "could be the truck that breaks the Detroit 3's back". That's maybe a bit premature; as we've seen, the Tundra has some advantages and, yes, some potential drawbacks when compared to competing products from the Motor City.
Keep reading for our opinion and analysis of the Tundra's underpinnings, complete with photos from our gallery.
Toyota made a big deal about the construction of the Tundra's frame, but to be honest, we're not sure that it matches up to the structures of the competition.
Where as the Tundra makes use of open C-channels under the bed, closed frame rails are used by Dodge, Ford, and GM on their newest designs. Closed sections, of course, are generally stronger and stiffer for the same mass.
Does this mean that the Tundra's frame is weaker than other comparable trucks? Certainly not -- but it is interesting that the company choose to use a construction technique that has been abandoned by the Big 3.
Up front, we see the same double-wishbone and coil-over shock design that is now being utilized on trucks produced by the Big 3 (torsion bars having been replaced largely because they're difficult to package and require beefy reaction points).
We'd prefer to see a full tubular upper control arm (as has been used on-and-off in recent years by the Big 3), but stamped upper members should prove to be plenty strong for the task.
Down below, Toyota has eschewed the cast aluminum lower control arms currently in favor, and instead used a weldment formed from stamped steel sections. We can't -- and won't -- make a definitive statement on which is "better"; it's simply interesting to note the divergent path taken by Toyota.
Seeing the transfer case tucked up tightly into the frame made us smile, as this greatly reduces the change of getting high-centered. We'd prefer to see a skidplate that's tied into the crossmember, however; that would improve the chances of smoothly gliding over a protrusion such as a stump or rock.
Out back, a 4" aluminum driveshaft carries torque to a Hotchkiss-style rear axle. The large diameter is necessary to avoid vibration at high speeds with the optional 4.30:1 rear gears; aluminum is used to keep the weight somewhat reasonable, and follows the trend set by other manufacturers.
The axle housing is manufactured from stamped steel. This has the disadvantage of being potentially less resistant to direct hits on the "pumpkin" than those axles using a cast center section; on the other hand, this type of construction should be stronger and stiffer than those Salisbury axles that use tubes that are pressed and spot-welded in place (they have a bad habit of bending or separating when abused). Keep all four wheels on the ground, and either design will work well.
Note the use of dual catalytic converters on each side, indicating that a bit of extra effort was required to clean up the powerful iForce V8.
Aisin supplies the six-speed transmission, which is a rarity in the Tundra's class (GM's new six-speed will be available in the Sierra Denali). It gives a broader gear spread than the competition's four- and five-speed boxes, which when combined with the iForce's huge power (a class-leading 381 HP and 403 lb-ft) will out-accelerate and out-pull anything in its class. Fuel economy isn't anything to write home about, but what'd you expect from a three-ton vehicle with nearly 400 HP?
Given that automotive transmissions are traditionally the weakest link in a half-ton truck's drivetrain, we'll be anxiously awaiting durability reports from the field.
Toyota has a reputation for straightforward and functional interior design -- so, um, what happened here? The radio is merely a mild offender in an interior that might be the worst we've seen in a pickup truck since GM's atrocious '88-'94 full-size trucks. The Americans seem to have really trumped Toyota here, and that's not something we thought we'd be saying in 2007.
So, what's the verdict? Will Toyota take market share away from the Big 3, or will the new Tundra suffer from the same minimal impact as its predecessor? Solidly in Toyota's corner are the Tundra's killer drivetrain, and the huge brakes (13.9" in front and 13.6" out back), are also a big plus in our book (those inclined to run wheels 17" or smaller probably feel otherwise). The chassis, however, may not be up to snuff, and the interior is disappointing to say the least. We'll leave the topic of exterior styling alone, as: 1) it's strictly a personal matter; and 2) in our opinion, the industry in general has collectively proceded too far down the pseudo-big-rig path.
We don't think that Toyota will have a problem selling all 200,000 Tundras that it plans to build each year, but gaining share beyond that will not be a battle won in the short term. The Big 3 will not cede ground as it had in the passenger car market over the past three decades. Fortunately, we consumers will all benefit from this latest shot in America's largest vehicle segment.
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Dave T. 1:05PM (1/15/2007)
Totally!!!!!!!!! agree on the interior. Couldn't believe it was an all-new Toyota product. Compared to the new GM's and even older F-150 the interior will not win over fans on its own.
Reply
aaron 1:09PM (1/15/2007)
ahahah nice frame, and a junky interior to boot..
Like you said, to flog some to posers won't be a problem, but for serious duty I don't see many orders for 100 or 200 at a time happening..
Reply
mkbruin 1:11PM (1/15/2007)
Weaker constructed frame than the domestics
Horrible interior
Exposed t-case and alluminum front diff.
Tin Foil driveshaft
4.30 gears? Why not offer several different ratios ranging from 3.55 through 4.56? Give the customer a little flexibility to chose the gears that best represent their interests/needs?
What size is the ring gear in the rear axle?
What is the front alluminum center section? Is it a D44 based unit?
What is the fuel ratings here? You say it is not something to write home about, but what are the numbers!?!?!?!?!
To me it looks like an also-ran. It appears that toyota spent too much money making a truck that is supposed to 'look' like a domestic and not enough money on the parts that count (frame, suspension, options, etc.)
Reply
John P. 1:15PM (1/15/2007)
I kinda like the styling of this truck but,..
The recent articles I've read on the Toyota are that it's chassis isn't anywhere near as stiff at it's competition and it's dash rattles like hell. Come on, Open C construction? That is crap compared to at least the Ford and probably the Chevy also.
This truck will sell pretty well with the posers, the America haters, and those who believe Toyotas are the be all, end all of reliability. Others will rightfully turn towards the Chevy and Ford.
You guys are right on with the interior also. This one is Terrible, it looks chintzy like a 2001 Corolla. The FJ Cruiser interior also looks like crap while we are on the topic.
Overall, This is a much better job from Toyota, and I hope it makes Chevy and Ford make even better Trucks in the future. The competition can't hurt.
Reply
aaron 1:24PM (1/15/2007)
hey mk bruin, good post, and we forgot to ask the most important question:
what is the price?? lmao.. they claim that they are in a pissing match whether or not to include the tow package as standard which would add 10 a month to the payment.. That is the least of their worries.. They are in deep with a seeminglt less than capable truck in a market where incentives rule.
Reply
Joe K. 1:30PM (1/15/2007)
Actually as the frame was explained to me. Fully boxed is more rigid, but rigidity and useablitiy are two different things. higher rigidity may lead to better torsion resistance, but may also cause undue stress. Flex is not a bad thing for towing vehicles, so long as it occurs where it should. Toyota uses this 'triple-tech' frame to have the solid, rigid front end for strength and safety, the rolled c-channel in the middle to be strong, light and also provide a place where brake lines and wires can be less exposed, and the c-channel frame makes for a lighter vehicle while increasing payload. If it is so bad why would Ford Chevy and Dodge use c-channel frames on their Heavy Duty trucks?
The steel used in the lower arms is to reduce the vibrations transmitted into the front sub-structure. Steel is inherently better at this than Aluminum is.
The dual-cats in the exhaust are because the dual-independant Variable Valve Timing has a setting at higher rpms (when REALLY floored) where the exhaust and intake are open at the same time, creating scavenging, thus needing the exhaust to compensate.
As for the two options for the rear gears, due to the fact that they have a 5- or 6-speed transmission they don't need 'Highway' or 'Towing' gears since they can build them into the transmission and everyone can get them. Their logic behind 6-speeds is one gear more to creep and one more overdrive at the top eliminates the need for 3.55 to 4.3 rear ends.
All in all the truck was great to drive with and without payload, as well as towing a trailer. I couldn't complain.
As a Ford man, and current Ford owner I will say that it is a nice truck and has plenty of power and too many lawyers. In all of the testing I wanted to nitpick. i wanted to hate it, but I found it to be overall a well designed, total package. Now we'll wait for pricing to see if all of these goodies equal up to a a good value.
-Joe
Reply
Casey 1:46PM (1/15/2007)
There have been some complaints about the interior from the mainstream automotive press also, but reviews have been exceptionally positive overall.
Check out the article at edmunds.com/insideline
Reply
Richard Warren 1:48PM (1/15/2007)
Less than impressed, screams cheap from the inside out.
Reply
mooseman 1:45PM (1/15/2007)
My take is this;
1) It likely won't be price competitive. I bought my Hemi work truck for $16k off the lot new. Sure, big incentives, but that is the game today. I'd have to believe that the Hemi is a much cheaper engine to build. I'd day they'll trail here.
2) The damn thing is YOOOOOOGE. Lets be honest, it ain't really much less imposing than an F250, and its likely gonna be priced in its range. So, if you're looking for a real truck, not a commuter machine, would you really pick this vehicle over an F250? Which brings me to my next point...
3) The whole market is moving towards diesels in trucks. The 381hp/400tq won't mean much when for not a whole lot more you could be driving a 350/650 6.4L F250, or similar Dodge, or Chevy. Add the light duty diesels coming from the Big 3 in the next 18 months and Toyota looks like they might be the odd man out in the segment.
4) I think the Toyota will mainly steal sales from Nissan. Probably pull a very small percentage of Hemi buyers who got their truck for the tire smoking power (6.3 to 60 IS fast). But honestly, Ford has lagged in the HP wars for a while, they aren't likely to lose many customers over the new 5.7 Toyota.
5) Gawd it is ugly.
Just MHO. YMMV.
Reply
Paul G 1:56PM (1/15/2007)
Any one can copy the best, which is an honor, but Toyota will never be the best unless they take the Ford badge off and put on there own.
Reply
Slippery Pete 2:01PM (1/15/2007)
I'm not generally a fan of the domestics, especially. I'm more of a Japanese fanboi to be honest. But Toyota may discover quickly that large trucks are its Waterloo. GM and Ford build excellent trucks that run forever. GM may have legions of poorly trained monkeys manning its executive offices, but however they do it, they build good trucks. Toyota will need to do better than this effort over 10 or 15 years before they have a shot at taking this market over, IMO.
Or, just wait for GM and Ford to go bankrupt. That's probably the more likely scenario.
Reply
Joshua 1:59PM (1/15/2007)
The strongest highway trucks in the world still use C frames. Of course I'm referring to Semi tractors. The idea is to allow the fame to flex instead of stiffening it to a point where it can only crack. To be clear I'm not insisting that fully boxed frames are a bad choice for modern pickups, I'm just trying to point out that just because a "new" technology has been successfully marketed to the public doesn't mean it's the best solution.
Reply
leo 6:22PM (1/17/2007)
i saw this truck at NAIAS and the interior is not up to Toyota standards of today.
The one piece that look like aluminum is just a painted plastic piece adn look cheap as hell.
i did't like this truck much.
the door is so large (on the two door version only) I don't know how youd get out of it parked in a smallish parking spot. I have drive F150's and Silverados before but I have never seen a door that large. it was almost as large as the read doors on the Mayback 62S that was at the show.
Reply
artie43 2:34PM (1/15/2007)
I thought the Tundra's weren't even out yet but it appears that many have test driven it!! Or maybe there are just a bunch of know-it-alls that just want to hate on Toyota. Many of the reviews I have read really like the new Tundra. It is not breaking any new ground [dual function tailgate, trunk in bed,etc] but it sounds very compeitive with the Detroiters. Will be interesting to see the pricing. That will probably be a trump card here. If the numbers come in very good, it will probably be a big winner. I understand the diesels will be coming too. Interesting that GM had to sell Isuzu and Toyota snapped them up. We sure know where the diesels will be coming from now!! The Tundra will probably be developed over the next few years. I see heavier trucks coming soon, along with the diesels. Toyota takes its' time but is obcessed with building the best products on the market. Look out Detroit. Don't discount Toyota like you did on their cars..... unless you seek extinction!
Reply
Casey 2:43PM (1/15/2007)
I think its also important to realize that the Tundra is only in its second generation. Ford and Chevy have had DECADES to build their admittedly excellent truck lines. I think Toyota should be commended for putting such a competitive package together, especially since they are so dominant in the passenger car segment.
Reply
mkbruin 2:43PM (1/15/2007)
"Toyota takes its' time but is obcessed with building the best products on the market."
And that statement is backed up by more 'service hugs' than any other manufacturer on the planet.
Try not to let reality change your perception... ignorance truly is bliss.
Reply
Chris 2:52PM (1/15/2007)
The Tundra is bigger, stronger, tows more, is uglier, has poor interior, and has a crappy frame. Sounds like a wiener. Toyota overthought this one, but the next Tundra... well, we already said that years ago and it seems it didn't come true.
Reply
Ford Trucks 3:00PM (1/15/2007)
#6 Joe K "c-channel frame makes for a lighter vehicle while increasing payload" F-150 payload 3,050 pounds, Tundra max payload 2,060 pounds and towing well for 2007 the F-150 can now tow 10,500 pounds Tundra
10,300 I dont know much about truck frames (only 19) but with the numbers and all the talk about trucks i know that Ford & Chevy are the top players in the game (Ill take a Ford over the chevy) As for the trans Ford has said a 6spd is on the way for the 150&escape http://blueovalnews.com/ and that they will have a diesel option soon on 150's.
Reply
Craig N. Cote 6:04PM (1/16/2007)
If you're a blue collar worker who's been a dedicated GM, Ford, or German owned Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep employee for years only to see your job vanish and head to Mexico, one would have to love the Toyota simply for the country in which it's built along with EVERY other truck and van Toyota sells here in the good ole USA. This hard fact cannot be claimed by the Big 3, or 2 and a half, or whatever. Some models of Silverado, F-Series, and Rams are built in Mexico and many of the parts contained in these trucks come from there as well-including ALL Hemis! If you consider the Avalanche a truck, and an "American Revolution" as Chevy has sprawled across it's sales brochure, every one of those is built south of the border! The article above says, "Comparing it (Toyota) to competing products from the "Motor City", well many are not from there at all. If you're a store owner, dentist, teacher, etc., you can easily understand that an automobile assembly plant supports so much more that it's own employees. I hail Toyota for doing so much of it's work here in America and not running to Mexico as our "Domestic" friends have, which they could have just as easily done. If you're one of these dudes who acts like you were at Pearl Harbor and heaven forbid an American buy anything Japanese, take some time and question those you admire so much from Detroit about all they've invested in Japanese owned companies (which is staggering), not to mention all the other foreign companies they've actually bought outright. Finally, you can add up all the magazine reviews, awards from countless experts, etc., etc, but the true proof of superiority is found in resale value which 99% of the time Toyota humbles the competition. Say whatever you want about Toyota, but there isn't ONE other company out there who wouldn't trade places with them in a second. They sure aren't closing factories and laying off 10's of thousands!
Reply
Amit Das 3:07PM (1/15/2007)
>>Try not to let reality change your perception... ignorance truly is bliss.
i guess you are always on cloud nine...
find me ANY long-term reliability rating that puts ford, gm, or Chrysler above toyota ANYWHERE in the world
you know MKBRUIN other countries outside of the US
even in europe almost all surveys put japanese brands at the top in reliability
Reply