May go back to the 5.7

Average improvement over many drivers is 3.5 mpg. Not nothing, but not a lot to write home about either. Certainly not a reason to drop 45k+ on a new truck (with issues)…

 

In this case 3.5MPG better is a 25% increase. That’s pretty significant.

I mean if you got a 25% pay increase you would probably call that fairly significant, at least most people would.

 

Where is 3.5 coming from? Because the EPA rating which is standardized is +6mpg which is almost a 40 % increase. And the Tundra had one major issue and it was a supplier fault. Outside of that it's having typical first year woes unless I'm missing something major.

 

He’s using owner reported data from fuelly.

 

It depends on what one considers major I suppose. One recall for loose axle nuts. No worse than my fuel pump recall or headlights recall IMO.

 

I'm left to wonder why Toyota didn't offer a supercharged 5.7 straight from the factory, with a mild tune to keep the fun factor but preserve durability/longevity. I suppose they figured it would open a Pandora's box of warranty issues and liability. Fkn lawyers, probably. LOL.

 

21 unverified reports out of 44k sold.......seems reliable

 

Just a thought, but how many of the new 3rd Gen owners were actually thinking about gas mileage during the run-up to the New Gen coming out? I thought the hype was about the long awaited new platform, I don't really remember anyone hoping for better gas mileage way back when, did they/you?

 

Real world never lines up with EPA.

 

I mean I got 10 mpg in my 21 pro. I'm sure my 22 pro will be better than 13.5

But continue to use the 21/ 44k Fuelly references. I'll just continue to watch this site and the Tundra FB groups where more than 20 get EPA or better.

 

While 25% is significant, welcome, and greatly appreciated, saying 25% is more optimistic sounding because it leaves room for hope of what gas savings might be.

The real numbers will vary from person to person, but they’ve been reiterated a bit to no avail already, more or less.

Saving $1,000 a year is a more concrete real world number than saying 25%.

That’s $83.33 a month.

$83.33 is a lot less impressive of a number than 25%, even though they’re the same number…

Factor in how much your monthly payment went up if you make payments, or how much you paid in difference if you pay cash.
Factor in higher insurance costs, etc.

There is zero savings. Not real world. Not for over a decade for most people. And most people upgrade again by then.

So yes, some like the new truck and that’s awesome. As some have stated it’s about the new platform, new tech, new advancements, new suspension, etc.

But 100 lbs of payload or a few mpg… in those regards it evens out to about the same truck. No sense in over stating it.

I’d be stoked for 3.5 mpg better in my 2016 Tundra. Super happy about it. Would enjoy the extended range, I keep things light and care about gas mileage a lot.

It’s just always better to use real numbers rather than opinions or feelings when talking about numbers.

Night, homies

 

I’m not sure of a larger or better sampling of fuel mileage conscious users than Fuelly. Would be open to a better resource to reference.

An average over more samples is always better than less. Peace.

 

It’s not just mpg, the mpg is just an added bonus.

22 pro is selling for the same or a few thousand more 21 pro and it’s miles apart. Not even in the same league.

any time you move to a new car you’re going to spend more or your payment will go up, that’s a terrible argument

 

It’s certainly a terrible argument for those who buy new and finance and upgrade frequently. You’re absolutely correct and have me there.

For those who don’t finance, and/or save money and buy used, and/or upgrade every 10-15-20 years it is a huge factor.

That is an entirely separate discussion and to each their own, but we usually keep our Toyotas well into the 350-450k miles range and into the 20+ years old range and only upgrade because we simply get tired of waiting for them to have enough problems to warrant a trade in haha.

 

It is just the mpg. The '22 Pro is substantially more than the '21 Pro. The off-road performance tools are meant for those that really can't drive all that well. Crawl control isn't needed and locker is debatable as many for years have went places without lockers.

That said, the interior is nice but all those gadgets in there are just more things to break down the road.

https://youtu.be/DmjSivdD90A
For example.

 

Was it the 22R/RE version?

I 89 and an 83 yota truck with them in it... Both stupid easy to fix, and ran well forever. The 83 died to rust after all was said and done around 250K. That 89 pushed 32's with its little 22RE and a 5 speed for a couple hundred K. Then was sold off after I rolled it. I saw it a few years later, trying to be sold as if nothing was ever wrong. I pointed out the welds. Guy kicked me off the lot.

 

Yup, 22RE. Mine is running ok, but it consumes more oil than gas at this point. I took it down to Moab a couple months ago and it is drinking quarts of oil in a couple hundred miles. Mine is on 37's now. It did have 33's.

 

Great engine



Just wish it could do 80/uphill/headwind/or pass or zero to sixty in less than a week

 

I love that truck. I'm keeping a casual eye out for one in good condition for a good price. Cheaper than a side by side and perfect for hunting/firewood gathering/bush running.

 

My wife kind of took it over haha I taught her to drive manual in it and I’ve barely driven it since. She’s claimed it! I’ve had it for over a decade and it’s been a great little go kart

 

My 22 is pumping out 2x better fuel mileage around town and sometimes 3x better. Highway is about 4-5MPG increase and towing is slightly up. New truck is a beast and so far superior to the older models. Reliability will go down with new tech, but its a toyota.

 

Further confirms my suspicions that the hybrid is the way to go.

 

It’s definitely what I’d get. If they’re still on the road and reliable in 15 years I’ll grab one used

 

IF you can swing it, get the Fox 2.5DSC, the stock Pro Fox rides great, amazing really compare to Sport/other trims, I decided to swing go for the Fox 2.5 DSC and the billet uca, it was like "wow" compare to stock fox, it rides quieter, smoother, and the faster you go, the smoother it is, on hwy it rode better than various bmw's I've had, rough roads blew my mind as well, well worth the investment.

I think you guys should vote with your wallet, progress is inevitable, couple things on new one can be better but that's the beauty of these vehicles, you can make it the way you want much easier than you can with the big 3s, I'm seriously tempted to change my new Pro order to a SR base model and slap on set of wheels/tires and suspension.

 

That must've been the same logic Toyota used when they pulled tow hooks and trans coolers

 

Driving behavior effects 5.7 as well. That can be said with any vehicle.

 

I do think Hybrid technology is a positive aspect and welcomed to the Tundra line up. However, I’m not impressed with how Toyota actually implemented in the Tundra. They set it up for towing power and not as a regular hybrid.,while all good for towing, everyday driving is not benefited as much. Also why Toyota doesn’t put a “Hybrid” badge on the Tundra. Hopefully future versions will have a drive mode selector so the driver may select towing, max mpg, etc so that the hybrid motor can be italicize in a variable manner. The. Best of all worlds with max towing or encrodible mpg. Just a thought.

 

It still gets better fuel efficiency than the non hybrid in mixed driving. I like lots of power where it is useable, and the iForce Max delivers that. Any max fuel economy variant would probably need a very different hybrid system with a larger battery. Plus it would cost more.

I think they struck a good balance and correctly prioritized maximum power under the curve.

 

I think the batteries used will change in the future when supply chain issues get back to normal. The current battery choice is old tech and was a punt due to current world conditions.

I disagree with the need to make major changes (except the batteries). The electric motor is in-line the drive chain and can easily be controlled by software for different driving conditions. More expensive, perhaps, but only due to need for additional tech.