http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/autoshows/...dradually1.html

Oh my. Toyota really wants to try everything don't they. How about some lightweight RWD sports cars instead?

Well, at least you can't say it's boring.

It looks like a Dodge.

'bout time Toyota offered something for the serious truck user.

Yeah it is, hopefully it won't have too many silly shiny metal bits and other concepty parts to make it not a viable "big" truck.

I'm a sucker for big dually diesels. This does pretty well.

This is definitely the next logical step for Toyota trucks. Their marketing is really aiming at the people who really need trucks like contractors. (At least in the USA; and more specificaly, the midwest.)

It'd look good with an M2HB in the back. I keed I keed, but seriously.

i love those rims.


thats about it

I always maintained that the new Tundra looked like a slightly-melted Ram.

"slightly-melted Ram" That describes it well.

it sounds to me like the Hino motor is a bit behind the other powerplants that it would compete with. I mean 8.0L and 300bhp and 600lb-ft? Shoot.

Yeah, the Cummins diesel in the Ram 3500 is 6.7L, 350 hp, 650 ft-lbs, as does the 6.4L in the Ford Super Duty, and the 6.6L Duramax in the Silverado 3500 makes 365 horsepower, 660 ft-lbs. With 20% more displacement than any of the domestics, you wouldn't expect the Toyota to be well below its competition in both power and torque.

They did very well with the new Tundra, but I'd think here it's an even more important battle. Isn't that the reason to buy one of these trucks?

It's only an I6. I'd say it's doin' all right. Remember that output per unit displacement comparisons don't tell the whole story.

I'm not so sure they did. The Tundra makes good numbers on paper, but reviewers have noted that the Silverado has a nicer interior and is a more pleasant daily driver (since when has a GM beat a Toyota in those categories?). In addition, the Tundra had a very embarrassing issue with snapping camshafts in the 5.7L V8 (and Toyota truck buyers value reliability above all else). It has been noted that the metal in the bed is too thin, so it's easily damaged. Finally, it's recently come out that the tailgate isn't very strong, and may snap off while you load or unload an ATV or something similar. Toyota now recommends removing the tailgate before putting a motorcycle or ATV in back, if I recall correctly. And that's something you should never have to do in a half-ton.

They've also had a torque converter problem with the new 6-speed transmission. Link

Even excluding the displacement issue, every other truck in the segment makes 350-365 horsepower. This makes 300. Every other truck makes 650-660 ft-lbs. This makes 600.

And for the record, the Cummins in the Dodge is also an inline-six.

I was just referring to the power/torque numbers.

I didn't know that.

Maybe they just have it tuned really conservatively? Not that I'm trying to make excuses for Toyota or anything.

I think the Tundra is a pretty disappointing showing in terms of quality from Toyota. They know how to make solid, dependable trucks. They've proven this over the years with the Hilux and Land Cruiser pick-ups over the years here. IMO, with the Tundra they've tried too hard to give the appearance of a "butch" truck that'll be of greater appeal in the US, and lost sight of the utilitarian aspect. I'm pretty sure there's a reason the Tundra isn't offered here, but we still get the LC pick-up as competition for the all but the most heavy-duty American trucks.

I think Toyota getting into the half ton plus market was a good thing as the big three had to make sure quality of interior, and reliability had to be a huge focus for them. I kinda laugh though still as toyota fanboys bash the american trucks when you can't even load a sled, or quad in the back without destroying the tailgate, not to mention their quality control problems.

As of now the truck i posted is a concept and numbers on that engine could change, but seems unlikely as Cat wants nothing to do with yota at the moment, and i think if they push this truck to production its destined to fail as is.

I think Toyota might go the route of just trying to put a product out there at any cost. They can stomach the loss, as long as they can get into the market.

I don't understand what Toyota was going for with the new Tundra. There are actually two markets for half-tons, not one:

(1) Personal use vehicles (hauling ATVs and waterskis, as well as being daily drivers).
(2) Commercial use (fleet vehicles).

There's almost no profit in the second category. In the first category, refinement and quality matters more than absolute power. The first generation Tundra did a great job in the first category and didn't even try to compete in the second. Toyota didn't have massive sales, but they sold all that they made. First-generation Tundras didn't languish on dealer lots and weren't sold at or below cost.

The second-generation Tundra's marketing is aimed at the second category, not the first. From reviews, it actually sounds like the new Tundra is worse at category #1 than the first Tundra was.

Why is Toyota chasing high-volume, low-profits sales with fleet vehicles, with a powerful-but-unrefined product that's already got a $4000 rebate on the hood and that has already had quality issues? I can't imagine Toyota's going to make a ton of money on the new Tundra, and it could damage their reputation for refinement, reliability, and fuel economy.

so is the dodge cummins unit, which is an ancient design.

that'd be a pretty nice drive, although i must say it looks ridiculous...