• Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus
  • Image Credit: Brandon Turkus

Vital Stats

Engine:
5.7L V8
Power:
381 HP / 401 LB-FT
Transmission:
6-Speed Auto
0-60 Time:
7.2 Seconds (est.)
Drivetrain:
Four-Wheel Drive
Curb Weight:
5,860 LBS
Seating:
2+3
MPG:
13 City / 17 HWY
Base Price:
$47,600
As Tested Price:
$49,805
The Toyota Tundra is the automotive version of off-brand Cheerios: it doesn't dominate the market, and it's not the first model people think of when they hear the term "pickup truck."

Ford, General Motors and Ram dominate the segment with vehicles that offer ridiculous levels of towing and payload capacities and models loaded with luxury items and primed with tech-rich engines. The off-brands, meanwhile, are led by the Tundra, which while still accounting for six-figure sales (112,732 units in 2013, up from 101,621 in 2012), sits well behind the F-150s and Silverados of the world. After our first drive of the revamped 2014 Tundra, we came away thinking this truck is a total underachiever, aimed at placating Toyota loyalists and doing little to win over new customers.

But everybody deserves a second chance, and we thought a week's drive in a different environment might lead to a different – or at least a more fully realized – opinion. While the Tundra might not be an industry leader, it still makes it on many truck buyers' shopping lists. So, should you consider this off-brand pickup truck? To find out, we borrowed a top-of-the-line Tundra Platinum for a week. Read on to see what we found.
2014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x42014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x42014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x4

The Tundra looks brutish. That big, dominating front fascia with its long, wide, non-functional scoop above the grille and LED headlight accents give it an imposing look. The expansive cabin dominates the profile view, and our CrewMax-bodied tester gives the truck an almost out-of-proportion look, because there's tons of room for backseat passengers. From the rear, the chunky taillights and embossed "TUNDRA" in the tailgate add to the truck's bigger-is-better design philosophy.

In the cabin, our Platinum-trimmed tester has an almost Lexus-like sensibility.

In the cabin, our Platinum-trimmed tester has an almost Lexus-like sensibility. The quilted leather on the dash, doors and seat uppers stands out in an increasingly luxury-oriented truck market. It looks good and feels quite nice to the touch. We also note Toyota has opted for a softer leather on the dash and doors, and something a bit more durable on the seats. The painted plastics used on the dash look good and feel solid, while the soft-touch materials on the upper dash and doors make the Tundra Platinum feel more luxurious.

From the driver's seat, visibility is excellent throughout, thanks to the Tundra's high-riding nature, expansive greenhouse and reasonably skinny A-pillars. The tilt-telescopic steering wheel is wrapped in soft leather and is heated, a welcome touch as winter continues to bear down on southeastern Michigan. Power thigh support helps make the front leather seats thoroughly comfortable, too. If you're long-legged, like we are, this is a feature that will prove its worth within the first couple of miles on the road. e'd have no qualms driving long distances in the Tundra.

2014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x42014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x42014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x42014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x4

The rear seats aren't uncomfortable – they don't feel like second-class jump seats, like in some other pickups.

Anyone we put in the back seat had a similar point of view. The second row on the Tundra's CrewMax body style is absolutely mammoth. There's 42.3 inches of rear legroom, which for comparison, is more than the Chevrolet Silverado crew cab (40.9 inches) and just 0.7 inches less than the new Mercedes-Benz S-Class, a car designed for rich people who like to be chauffeured around. The rear seats aren't uncomfortable, either – they don't feel like second-class jump seats, like in some other pickups. They can also be flipped up, adding a bit of interior cargo space.

Before we get to the heart of the driving impressions, let's talk about the Tundra's oily bits. Under that big hood sits a 381-horsepower, 5.7-liter V8. Peak power arrives at a lofty 5,600 rpm (just 300 revs shy of redline) while all 401 pound-feet of torque are deployed at 3,600 rpm. A six-speed automatic is the sole transmission, and while rear-drive comes standard, our tester was equipped with four-wheel drive. The Tundra sports a live rear axle, complete with leaf springs, while the front axle uses a double-wishbone setup. Unlike the majority of Toyotas, it also retains an old-fashioned hydraulic power-steering arrangement. The brakes, meanwhile, use 13.9-inch vented discs in front and 13.6-inch vented discs in the back. On our tester, the binders arrived shielded by a set of 20-inch alloys wrapped in Bridgestone Dueler Alenza tires.

2014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x4

The Tundra's power figures look strong, but only until you take a peek at the curb weight of our Platinum CrewMax 4x4 tester. At 5,860 pounds, this is not a light pickup, and it shows on the road. Off the line, the 5.7 responds well, leaping ahead with surprising verve for a big pickup, but it struggles as the miles per hour increase. We found an uphill freeway on-ramp a particular challenge, as the V8 struggled to get up to speed in time to merge. The throttle response isn't particularly linear, either, due to a rather dull tip-in. It's more or less something that we'd get use to over time, but it's worth mentioning.

Off the line, the 5.7 responds well, but it struggles as the miles per hour increase.

Accompanying the engine at the higher reaches of its rev range is an unpleasant racket. It sounds unrefined and coarse, two attributes we don't normally associate with Toyota V8s. Compounding the issue is the amount of engine noise that enters the cabin. This is disappointing, particularly considering how quiet and composed the truck is at lower engine speeds.

Fuel economy is woeful – another downside to all that weight forcing drivers to run the engine hard. Mike Harley pointed out the Tundra's lack of fuel-saving features in his original drive of the 2014 Tundra, and now that we've driven the truck for a week in the real world, the lack of modern bits like an eight-speed transmission or direct injection are glaring. Our first jaunt in the Tundra, from midtown Detroit to the northern suburbs of Oakland County saw a meager 12.8 mpg. That figure climbed slightly following a prolonged highway run, but only to 13.5 mpg. Attaining the 17 mpg highway predicted by our truck's window sticker strikes as unlikely outside of ideal conditions.

2014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x42014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x42014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x42014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x4

Engine issues aside, the Tundra's six-speed automatic is a really solid gearbox. Upshifts are quick and smooth, while there isn't a lot of hunting on downshifts. And while working the console-mounted gear selector is nice, the Tundra's manual mode is still rather poor. It takes inputs as mere suggestions, rather than commands, and is certainly not our first choice for clutchless, DIY shifting.

As is the way with most fullsize pickups, feedback through the chassis is pretty much absent.

As we mentioned, the Tundra makes use of a decidedly old-school suspension setup (okay, old school now that Ram is fitting air suspensions to the 1500). The solid-rear/leaf-spring setup doesn't ride particularly badly, considering it's a carryover item from the pre-facelift Tundra. It can get crashy on pothole-strewn Michigan roads, but feels largely composed and stable at freeway speeds and on smoother surface streets. Bigger bumps and imperfections can send some unpleasant feelings through the Tundra's suspension, but it's not hugely disruptive or out of place for an empty leaf-sprung pickup. There's not a lot of roll here, and the damping on the Tundra copes well with sudden pedal inputs. As is the way with most fullsize pickups, feedback through the chassis is pretty much absent.

Despite its hydraulic power steering, the tiller in the Tundra is still very much designed for a pickup truck. It's light, and doesn't weigh up enough as it's turned. However, its relaxed nature is good for highway cruising. Feedback is limited, although that shouldn't come as a shock considering the type of vehicle. That said, the Tundra's level of communication is better than some of the electric power-steering setups we've tested in other vehicles.

2014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x4

Now, to bring up the Tundra's weight in a positive sense – the brakes were quite good, despite the truck's body fat. The pedal is linear and easy to modulate, giving the Tundra a sense of sure-footedness that belies its heft.

The CrewMax is the least able member of the entire Tundra family.

The only way to get a Tundra Platinum is with the CrewMax cabin and the accompanying 5.5-foot bed. This is not an ideal setup for those that value payload or towing capacity in their pickups. The CrewMax is the least able member of the entire Tundra family, managing the lowest overall payload (1,440 pounds) and the lowest towing capacity (9,000 pounds). That 5.5-foot bed is surprisingly tiny – we barely fit an unassembled chest of drawers from Ikea back there.

Prices for the Tundra Platinum start at $47,600. Blind-spot monitoring with cross-traffic alert and a set of running boards are the sole options at this high trim spec. BSM can be had on its own for $500, or as a package with the running boards for $845. Our truck also included a $365 bed liner, which along with a $995 destination charge brings the as-tested price to $49,805.

2014 Toyota Tundra Platinum 4x4

The Tundra is, however slightly, a value over its domestic counterparts.

At the start of the story, we discussed how the Tundra is an off-brand pickup relative to the competition. A key quality of store brands is that they're usually cheaper than their name-brand counterparts. So, how does the Tundra stack up? With a 2014 Ford F-150 Limited 4x4 starting at $53,830, a Ram 1500 Laramie Limited hitting $51,600 and a Chevrolet Silverado High Country ringing in at $48,800, the Tundra is, however slightly, a value over its domestic counterparts.

Should you buy one, though? While it is nominally more affordable, its poor fuel economy, small bed size and lower towing capacity certainly represent major strikes against it. Still, the Tundra isn't a bad pickup truck. It's a targeted vehicle that's not designed to tackle worksites like the domestics. It's a vehicle for loyal Toyota customers who just want a big, comfortable truck from the brand they're comfortable with. It might not win many converts, but with such a well-crafted interior and a spacious backseat, at least the Tundra isn't likely to disappoint the faithful.


UPDATE: An earlier version of this story indicated that the Tundra's towing capacity of 9,000 pounds was lower than that of both the F-150 and Silverado. Neither of the American trucks comply with SAE J2807, a unified towing standard set to be adopted by all light-duty pickups in 2015 – the Tundra is already compliant. The new rating system is expected to lower overall tow ratings compared to non-compliant trucks. Therefore, we've stricken the comparison of the Tundra's tow ratings with its American competition.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 134 Comments
      q1ford
      • 1 Year Ago
      I'm a WWll Veteran and there is no way i would buy one of these Jap Toyota Trucks, When you can buy a true American truck from the big three.Don't forget the big three helped us when the war by building us tanks and jeeps and military transporters. Have some loyalty to the USA.
        MechE
        • 1 Year Ago
        @q1ford
        Times have changed, the auto industry is so globally intertwined that its impossible to say who is more domestic than the other. There is multiple ways to determine what qualifies as more "American". For some its easier to draw the line at origin the brand started. Others are more concerned about how many american jobs the brand supports TODAY. And these days, those are two very different measures. Funny how passionate people are about what country their cars are from, but dont really think twice about where their electronics are produced, where the steel in a building came from, what country the bank that finances their mortgage is headquartered, where the cloths on their back were made.....
        ikristopher
        • 1 Year Ago
        @q1ford
        I honestly agreed with you before I discovered that the Tundra has more American parts in it than the GM twins and Ram. It was also built in Texas, by Texans.
        Voice Over
        • 13 Days Ago
        @q1ford

        You are obviously ignorant of the truck industry.  Tundra is the most American made of the big 4.

      teecee656
      • 4 Months Ago

      I have a 2010 Tundra CrewMax with the 5.7 liter engine and 6 speed automatic.  Last Spring on ski trip to Mammoth from the L.A. area (325 miles one way) I averaged 19.2 mpg round trip.  The 5'5" bed is long enough to stow 212cm skis under the tonneau cover and the rear seats are best in class, and comfortable for over 6 footers.  Granted, I use the truck as a SUV, rather than a work truck, the only issue I have is "bed bounce."  On concrete slab highways, and at certain speeds, a harmonic oscillation develops in the ride.  The spacious interior is it's best feature, along with being the most American (made in Texas with the most US sourced parts) truck out there.  I also have a 2012 Dodge MegaCab Laramie sitting in my driveway with the H.O. Cummins.  The Tundra is by far, a more comfortable and refined vehicle, more quiet and much smoother ride in comparison.  Despite the "MegaCab" name, the Tundra has more rear seat leg room as the extra cab length is all behind the seat in the Dodge.  

      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
        normc32
        • 1 Year Ago
        Rusted frames and all!
        marv.shocker
        • 1 Year Ago
        What's "lamazing" about you is how ignorant you are about the truck marketplace. The Tundra's 5.7 liter is STILL the most technologically advanced V-8 on the market. Outclassed? If you mean towing, that's because it's the ONLY truck that conforms to SAE J2807 towing standards, which are designed to reflect REALISTIC towing capacities. If you mean fuel economy, that's because it's the ONLY truck that hasn't pussed out with high gear ratios...it's still available with a 4.30:1 rear axle (which by the way has the largest ring gear in class). If you mean longevity, you must be kidding...
          • 1 Year Ago
          @marv.shocker
          [blocked]
          john96xlt
          • 1 Year Ago
          @marv.shocker
          " It's laughable that you think Toyota only offering one axle ratio is a good thing." Because he, like Toyota, DOES NOT UNDERSTAND full size trucks. Nissan at least made a valiant attempt for a first try, but they let it languish. We'll see what they do with the next gen. I'm betting it puts Toyota in last place if they've learned anything from the first gen Titan. The Titan is more impressive given it's debut time than ANY Toyota has been before or since. Nissan has nobody but themselves to blame for letting it rot on the vine. It's like they said, OK, here's our truck, that's it. No plans to update, no keeping up with the preverbal Jonses (domestics), that's it. Then, they realized you can't build a truck reputation on one model alone in an ever changing class, so they diversified with the NV heavy dutys while they should've developed something new. You could ask why the 2015 Expedition isn't the one we're getting in 2017, and it's the same reason Nissan didn't diversify during Titan development to produce the NV at the same pace. Sometimes you can't afford to do that, spread revolutionary change over the entire model line up in one model year. You can't co-develop complicated platform mates but only so far along, but usually, you do the bread winner first, then get back to the lesser variants. Nissan developed the Titan first, then sat satisfied with it's initial sales, later diversified with the NV instead of going back to the drawing board and developing a new Titan to compete with the *next* F-Series, GM, or Ram. So, they got caught with their pants down, and tried to partner up with 3rd place Dodge/Ram, but that fell through with all the turmoil that was going on at Chrysler at the time. At least it seems they're really going for it with their new Titan, while I don't expect it to top F-150, it will most certainly pass Toyota by a loooong shot. Then what. Toyota may as well give up, and we've heard no indications of their answer to the Titan, let alone F-150 and the Silverado currently under development. See, Ford plans way ahead, they started work on the new F-150 years ago. Has Toyota been working on a new Tundra for years now? If so, where is it? Silverado was just all new, is good enough to keep its base and attract some people in the mood for something different, and we know a phase two of the current truck is progress to combat F-150's aluminum and EcoBoost lineup (with the new 2.7L providing greater versatility at a cheaper price than the top dog 3.5L. No doubt Ram is working on a next gen pickup as well, after already adding a Diesel powerplant that Toyota is only in rumor about putting in this gen (the one Cummins developed for Titan). The market keeps changing, so far the imports can't keep up. Look how long Honda's answer to pickups has lasted. They gave up after the first one rolled off dealership floors. You can't do that and win the big leagues. What I would like to see is a Titan 2500 and 3500. Did I say that out loud
      carguy1701
      • 1 Year Ago
      So in other words, there really isn't a reason to buy it unless you want a Toyota truck. Sounds about right. New gen is coming soon, complete with a 5.0L Cummins diesel. Maybe then it will be a legit challenger to the trucks from Detroit, but until then, also ran in the segment, just like the Titan, which is also in dire need of an update.
        john96xlt
        • 1 Year Ago
        @carguy1701
        "in other words, there really isn't a reason to buy it unless you want a Toyota truck. Sounds about right." That's the way it's always been with Toyota's attempts at full size truck competitors, back to the T-100. There really was no reason to buy it, it wasn't any better at anything than a cheaper, larger, more powerful domestic. The only Toyota truck I liked was the Stout, I just wish they'd have kept developing it. I don't have any personal experience with it, but from what I hear and have read, it could've been something had they kept improving on it then instead of killing it off. Maybe they wouldn't be so far behind the market now. Ford and GM and Chrysler were developing and improving trucks then of course, but if they'd have stuck with it, Toyota might've carved out a respectable slice of pie for themselves by now.
        chanonissan
        • 1 Year Ago
        @carguy1701
        New generation coming soon? are you forgetting this is a new generation started that was presented last year at the chicago auto show and production started september, but I guess you are refering that their might be a or a refresh with a diesel option. I guess you got down vote for the new statement.
          holysmoke.s
          • 1 Year Ago
          @chanonissan
          Stupid ford boys that fall for that propaganda video created by Ford.
          holysmoke.s
          • 1 Year Ago
          @chanonissan
          The Tundra is a newer design than the F-150.
          carguy1701
          • 1 Year Ago
          @chanonissan
          F-150 frame, cab, 3/4 of the engines, and interior are gonna be all new for 2015, aaronm_mt. Try again.
          carguy1701
          • 1 Year Ago
          @chanonissan
          From what I've read on other sites, yeah. This isn't a new truck, brah. It's the same frame that was underneath the 07 Tundra, with all the consequences that entails. Thought this was common knowledge but apparently it isn't. Just because a face is new doesn't necessarily mean that the oily bits are new. Ford did more or less teh same thing with the 09 F-150 but at least they changed all the body panels and updated the frame slightly.
          carguy1701
          • 1 Year Ago
          @chanonissan
          I don't work for Ford, brah. I never said I did. I'm slightly sorry that I 'rustled your jimmies' as they say, but I stand by what I said.
      vulnox
      • 1 Year Ago
      Sluggish V8, terrible fuel economy, not great looks (but I will say the front and back is improved), and a lot of out of date components (power steering, engine, suspension components). At that price I don't see the value proposition Toyota is offering over the other full size pickups.
        jtav2002
        • 1 Year Ago
        @vulnox
        Terrible fuel economy, yes. Sluggish, I find that quite baffling unless they were testing it above sea level. The truck (at least in dbl cab trims) is nearly a second quicker than what they estimated. And actually owning one, it's really not sluggish by any stretch of the imagination. I will say that I personally have no issue meeting the stated highway fuel economy estimates, as bad as they may be. During the summer, my combined (calculated manually) fuel economy is usually in the 16-16.5 range which isn't bad considering it's ratings.
          vulnox
          • 1 Year Ago
          @jtav2002
          That is fair, I will always take the word of an owner over a review or others that comment without driving the truck, so I appreciate your response. I had a 2012 F-150 with the Ecoboost engine and that thing was a beast and could return outstanding fuel economy, but if you didn't keep your foot out of the boost range when taking off from a light you saw that mileage drop quite a bit. There is definitely a lot more to the story in many cases.
          chanonissan
          • 1 Year Ago
          @jtav2002
          This is a fair review, they are testing it against every other truck they have driven, the next japaneese truck the titan have it reviews already and some of the domestic. To prove to you this is fair, the titan was also tested in the winter season. http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/20/2012-nissan-titan-review-road-test/
          chanonissan
          • 1 Year Ago
          @jtav2002
          @jtav2002, sluggish you find baffling unless they are test it above sea level, that is your words, which would suggest because they are testing it in certain condition make it struggle, my point is all vehicle have the same test which is fair. what is your point, they should have test it in the summer? then all truck would have to be tested in the summer.
          john96xlt
          • 1 Year Ago
          @jtav2002
          @vulnox Your story is becoming the typical of EcoBoost owners. You have the power when you need it, the mileage when you don't. It's a different style of driving than a non-aspirated engine. Diesel owners get it more than traditional gas V-8 owners who can't keep their foot out of it.
          jtav2002
          • 1 Year Ago
          @jtav2002
          I don't really recall saying the review was 'unfair." Merely stating that the truck isn't sluggish, and during the summer there is no problem meeting fuel economy estimates. Obviously in cold weather with winter blend gas, mpg drops on any vehicle. Basing fuel economy performance based on winter conditions isn't necessarily the most accurate view, especially since most of the year drivers aren't driving in extreme cold temps, and some parts of the country don't see them much at all.
      Matthew Artelt
      • 1 Year Ago
      As an owner of two previous (2nd Gen, 2008 and 2012) Tundras, I think a number of us were disappointed when Toyota came out with the 3rd Gen truck as really a 2.5th Gen. Revised body but very little change anywhere else. And more stuff to lug around so the attendant gains in weight and losses in fuel economy and payload/towing. Toyota's not doing themselves any favors. I have a Ram now (2013 2500 Diesel 4x4). The difference in every way is stark. I think you should mention thought that Toyota remains to my knowledge the only company that rates their towing capacity in accordance with the latest SAE guidelines, and has for a number of years.
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
      Bruce Lee
      • 1 Year Ago
      You guys are clueless, the Tundra has the highest SAE rated two capacity and if the other manufacturers rated their two limits with SAE they would be much lower. They admitted as much when explaining why SAE ratings were delayed till 2015. Of course you guys know this autoblog, you wrote about it here http://www.autoblog.com/2014/02/10/ford-gm-dodge-pickup-towing-standards+adopted/ but yet we get this crap review claiming that the Tundra is less capable in towing when it's SAE rating embarrasses the other trucks into waiting an entire generation before using the ratings. The tundra is also available with a factory backed supercharger for the V8 that let's you keep the warranty. And the motor you claim is rough is the same power plant under the hood of Lexus models like the IS-F just bored out to 5.7L and with port injection only so if anything it's smoother than the motor in the IS-F. The anti Toyota bias is absurd. Are there good reasons not to buy this? Sure, the fuel economy is awful which is a legitimate critique. All the other nonsense you post is garbage. The real savings isn't in the MSRP, it's in the fact that the Tundra has the best residuals, but you guys don't mention that right? The best reliability, the best residuals, the best real world towing capacity, the best supercharged 500+ horsepower truck with a real warranty. That's why it still sells six figures a year despite being an import in a domestic dominated field and despite awful fuel economy.
        john96xlt
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Bruce Lee
        You're correct. Clearly, all of those points you made do matter and it's just the stupid market that wont give poor Toyota a chance. Well, maybe if they'd get off their asses and get something new, innovative, economical, powerful, tough, reliable, and durable which are not always the same thing. Toyota's Tundra is the cream puff of the truck world. They're for guys to drive to Walmart and pretend they've got manly or macho things going on so they need a big 'ole gas guzzling V-8 pickup truck to do them with. But, you never see them actually doing those "manly" things with their Tundras, because they cant, because they're complete **** two feet off a gravel road, with weight in their small bed, towing a trailer, or a combination of all three. They never get subjected to the abuse and torture that F-Series, GM and Rams get put through, which is why people keep coming back for more when they're ready to upgrade. It's how you develop brand loyalty, something domestic pickup trucks are known for particularly. So, naturally Consumer Reports rates them high. The same way their Lexus sedans get rated high, they're highway vehicles, nothing more. No abuse, no daily grind, no hard core work, they can't handle it and are quickly traded back in for domestics. I've seen it happen several times. Lexus IS-F is a great example. It's also pampered by it's look-at-me owner, or it's occasionally its actually driven hard and then it gets all weird with stability control this and ABS that, it spoils the fun. When you actually put a Toyota to the test and make it do what it claims to be able to do, it can't hold up.
          Jason H
          • 1 Year Ago
          @john96xlt
          My old man had a Tundra before he died. Long bed Regular cab with the 5.7...same size bed as the largest available from any manufacturer. He was a contractor...towed a bobcat and all sorts of other stuff...beat the hell out of it. Drove it off road...took it brush-beating (hunting...he'd been diagnosed with terminal cancer so he pretty much lived like there was no tomorrow...because there wasn't). Anyway, the truck outlived him. Nothing ever broke on it. Zero problems. I drove it (had to sell it after he died), pulled several 8000#+ loads of class 5 on my trailer...it handled the load far better than my 5.3 Silverado, both braking and accelerating. There's nothing wrong with the Tundras. This is anecdotal, I know, but at least it's real (as opposed to your ignorant broad-brush statements of pure opinion)...is it manly enough for you?
          john96xlt
          • 1 Year Ago
          @john96xlt
          @jtav2002, do you have nothing better to do than to personally attack me while refuting nothing I say? @Jason, the fact of the matter is that Toyota's stubbornness in offering limited equipment on each model means that most Tundras sold are high-dollar crew-cabs, which this article points out are not nearly as capable as the "lesser" Tundras with long beds, etc. Can the Tundra do work like a "decent" full size V-8 pickup when configured right? I certainly hope so, otherwise they would sell on par with Ridgeline. I used to tow a 16' trailer loaded down with old engines and rear axles, etc with a 4cyl Isuzu Hombre with a GM 2.2L 4cyl in it. The truck struggled a bit on hills, but it could do it. Is that good enough for daily use? Probably not, but the point is this: Just because it *can* do it, doesn't mean it's as good or better than something else doing the same task.
      marv.shocker
      • 1 Year Ago
      This is a typical Toyota hating rant by Brandon Turkey. Everyone seems to forget that the Tundra is the truck that set the new standard for all other trucks on the road today. It was the FIRST full-size with a six-speed transmission. The FIRST with an easy lower/lift tailgate.THE FIRST with DOHC and variable valve timing. THE FIRST with standard four wheel disc brakes with ABS. PLUS, it's built in the US with the second highest parts content next to Ford F-150. Seven years later, the rest are finally catching up, and you morons think it's BEHIND the curve? Better do some research, dimwits...
        normc32
        • 1 Year Ago
        @marv.shocker
        it gets the worst gas mileage, still has C-boxed frame(?), and no diesel in the past. Hardly competitive and sales show it, they suck!
          marv.shocker
          • 1 Year Ago
          @normc32
          A. It gets the "worst gas mileage" as mentioned, because this is the only V-8 powered truck that still doesn't try to puss out with a standard 3.08 gear ratio. B. There's no such thing as a "C Boxed" it's either C-channel or boxed, idiot. C. The Tundra uses a combination of C channel and fully boxed frame sections. No diesel in the past? NO ONE had a half ton diesel in the past, dummy. D. Sales are slow because Toyota does more than market its trucks, and because it has an uphill battle educating Cretins like you...
          normc32
          • 1 Year Ago
          @normc32
          Youtube the video Ford video show the chassis twisting Tundra. It is made out of tinsel and rusts into pieces. They can't even keep things like spare tire bracket and brake lines from rusting. The truck is engineered that it took them until the 3rd generation to match the domestics. Over priced junk! http://www.safetyresearch.net/2013/11/07/toyota-unintended-acceleration-and-the-big-bowl-of-spaghetti-code/
          john96xlt
          • 1 Year Ago
          @normc32
          Ford Super Dutys are often fitted with ambulance bodies, flat beds, utility bodies and other aftermarket equipment, dump truck bodies, tow truck bodies, and even lift buckets for servicing power lines. That's why they need a C notched frame, which is made using the same technology as semi trucks, as they are often outfitted with different cabs and configurations. Tell me, is the Toyota Tundra fitted with any such bodies typically? C-notched is ideal when you want a versatile platform on which to mount different bodies. It's not ideal for limited cab and bed choices like half tons. Ford and other know this, which is why their half tons are not C-notched. Therefor, they are stronger than Tundra's C-notched.
        The Friendly Grizzly
        @marv.shocker
        I will take simplicity and the resulting reliability over a high whirly-bits quotient every time. And when one looks at construction sites and work fleets, the owners and fleet managers seem to agree with me.
      Avinash Machado
      • 1 Year Ago
      The domestics make the best full size trucks.
      bubciak
      • 1 Year Ago
      http://youtu.be/p1LO6uxy11I. Ha ha ha. :-)
      canuckcharlie
      • 1 Year Ago
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1LO6uxy11I
        holysmoke.s
        • 1 Year Ago
        @canuckcharlie
        Stupid propaganda piece created by Ford.
          carguy1701
          • 1 Year Ago
          @holysmoke.s
          No. Even if it is part of a PR vid Ford made, the reality is that the flexing exhibited by the Tundra in that vid IS excessive, even for a ladder frame vehicle, and believe it or not, there are roads in the US that could pass for that obstacle course. I should know, I drive them every day.
          • 1 Year Ago
          @holysmoke.s
          [blocked]
          carguy1701
          • 1 Year Ago
          @holysmoke.s
          Tundra Twerk Team is listed as having been uploaded by someone who isn't Ford, bro.
          holysmoke.s
          • 1 Year Ago
          @holysmoke.s
          just because that is a typical road in detroit, doesn't mean the rest of the usa has to drive on roads like that it was a propaganda piece put out my your company and you know it. now tell us again how the Tundra is old but the f150 isn't
          holysmoke.s
          • 1 Year Ago
          @holysmoke.s
          are you really that stupid carguy
    • Load More Comments