Any 5.7L Tundra owners out there?

[jwl019]

2 hours ago, edwin said:

I'll also echo the Tundra love - my 07 Limited was a great ride for 135k, my 15 Platinum was been nice as well.    

 

The interior of the 15 is more plush, likely won't wear as well as the 07 did.  Also, wasn't a huge fan of the non-sliding back seats at first but that hasn't proven to be an issue at all.  Only inconvenience is no storage space behind the back seat.  I'll be honest - I flip up the seat bases way more than I would've expected and it opens up to make a very useable space.  

Only beef of the 15 is that the power steering seems more assisted (actually over assisted) compared to the 07.  At highway speeds, it takes concentrated focus to not wander a bit in the lane.  It was worse with the stock Dunlop tires, better with Michelin LTX M/S...but still doesn't track like the 07.  

I have noticed the steering seems a lot different too, was thinking it was just me.

[nyryan2001]

just a couple points to be fair-

The 3.5L Eco with tall gears (3.55 or 3.73) will solidly out-tow the Tundra... by a country mile.  slightly more expensive and not near the Toyota QAQC yet.  I'm on the fence between another Tundra, the 3.5L Eco and just jumping up to a 3/4 ton F250.  I hold QAQC in such high regard... I donno.  Another aspect for me is that the crewcab F150 with shortbed comes in nearly 12" shorter than the Crew Tundra.  Easier for a daily driver which it would be for me.  I don't need the longer bed.

The Titan XD with the 5.0 Cummins is a neat concept.... but reportedly weak on power in most every regard.  Fail on the 5.0 hp/tq relative to the heavy 5/8ton chassis.

The GM 6.2L is also a tow monster... but $5-7k more for the same truck.  I don't think you can get a 6.2L GMC/Chevy crewcab 4x4 well equipped even with cloth seats under $45k as compared to the $38k SR5.

[Fman]

4 hours ago, nyryan2001 said:

just a couple points to be fair-

The 3.5L Eco with tall gears (3.55 or 3.73) will solidly out-tow the Tundra... by a country mile.  slightly more expensive and not near the Toyota QAQC yet.  I'm on the fence between another Tundra, the 3.5L Eco and just jumping up to a 3/4 ton F250.  I hold QAQC in such high regard... I donno.  Another aspect for me is that the crewcab F150 with shortbed comes in nearly 12" shorter than the Crew Tundra.  Easier for a daily driver which it would be for me.  I don't need the longer bed.

The Titan XD with the 5.0 Cummins is a neat concept.... but reportedly weak on power in most every regard.  Fail on the 5.0 hp/tq relative to the heavy 5/8ton chassis.

The GM 6.2L is also a tow monster... but $5-7k more for the same truck.  I don't think you can get a 6.2L GMC/Chevy crewcab 4x4 well equipped even with cloth seats under $45k as compared to the $38k SR5.

A good friend of mine just picked up a new 2016 F150 Eco, its a cool truck no doubt but I just can't trust Fords for longevity and a 10,000 lb towing capacity for me is more than enough.  Plus I prefer the overall look of the Tundra to the Ford and Chevy, and Dodge has always been a terrible looking truck imo (sorry Dodge owners just my opinion).  I hang on to my vehicles for 8-10 years, have had my Sequoia for 10 years now and its been rock solid.  Infact every Toyota vehicle I have ever owned has been relatively problem free, even after 250k miles.  That being said after looking at used trucks I am on the fence about going 4-5 years old for $33-35k or just going all in on a new 2016 Limited/Platinum w/3 year warranty.  I found a 2016 Limited for $43k which seems like a pretty good deal.  I might even wait until after the holidays and see what I can come up with in January which always seems like a good time to buy a vehicle when dealers are a little more aggressive on pricing.  I wish they had the 0% for 60 months, but it looks like it is not available on the Tundras right now.  I did see the 2016 Tundras in CA have a 38 gallon fuel tank which is nice for long tows.

Edited October 18, 2016 by Fman

[tjklein]

Tundras are good trucks, but like all Toyotas they're holding onto the same drivetrain too long.  In 2007 it was outstanding...in 2017 it is virtually unchanged and the mileage and power numbers have fallen behind the competition.  Reliable...no doubt, but certainly dated compared to the others.  It's good business as most people don't care but it's true across most of their line.  I mean how long is the 4Runner going to have the same V6 and a 5spd auto....

Anyway, good vehicles, I just wish they'd invest a little more into updating their powertrains.  You're going to need that 38 gallon tank on that 5.7 Tundra because it is NOT efficient.  (6spd transmission as well compared to 8spd or soon 10 in others)

 

FYI - SR5 has a 3.91 ratio where the Limited has a 4.30.  It will make a difference for towing.

 

Edited October 18, 2016 by tjklein

[saxton15]

The 2018 tundra is supposed to be their first major redesign of the truck.  Aside from the obvious diesel option, it looks like they are going towards a new tranny to help the MPG, updated interior, etc.  As a daily driver for me, improved overall MPG is a deal breaker. It's too bad Toyota has been waiting so long to redesign the Tundra, it's a great truck, but just doesn't get its credit. 

[malibu2004]

13 hours ago, nyryan2001 said:

just a couple points to be fair-

The 3.5L Eco with tall gears (3.55 or 3.73) will solidly out-tow the Tundra... by a country mile.  slightly more expensive and not near the Toyota QAQC yet.  I'm on the fence between another Tundra, the 3.5L Eco and just jumping up to a 3/4 ton F250.  I hold QAQC in such high regard... I donno.  Another aspect for me is that the crewcab F150 with shortbed comes in nearly 12" shorter than the Crew Tundra.  Easier for a daily driver which it would be for me.  I don't need the longer bed.

The Titan XD with the 5.0 Cummins is a neat concept.... but reportedly weak on power in most every regard.  Fail on the 5.0 hp/tq relative to the heavy 5/8ton chassis.

The GM 6.2L is also a tow monster... but $5-7k more for the same truck.  I don't think you can get a 6.2L GMC/Chevy crewcab 4x4 well equipped even with cloth seats under $45k as compared to the $38k SR5.

I know 3 people with the ECO boost and none of them will buy another one. To many problems with the motor. That being said Ford sure does sell allot of them. 

[Fman]

I will take less fuel economy for a proven, reliable engine/trans, especially for a long term purchase.  I give props to Toyota for not fixing something that isn't broken.  Juse like the 4.7L that was proven for years getting 300,000+ miles on that engine.   Hopefully if they do release a new powertrain in 2018 it will be well thought out and tested.

No surprise on the Fords, look at the 6.0 they introduced a few years back which was a total disaster and required a bulletproof kit to actually make it work properly and not burn it up.  My dad owns this truck/engine, he wont be going back to a Ford again.

[85 Barefoot]

1 hour ago, Fman said:

I will take less fuel economy for a proven, reliable engine/trans, especially for a long term purchase.  I give props to Toyota for not fixing something that isn't broken.  Juse like the 4.7L that was proven for years getting 300,000+ miles on that engine.   Hopefully if they do release a new powertrain in 2018 it will be well thought out and tested.

No surprise on the Fords, look at the 6.0 they introduced a few years back which was a total disaster and required a bulletproof kit to actually make it work properly and not burn it up.  My dad owns this truck/engine, he wont be going back to a Ford again.

 13/17 mpg is "not broken" compared to more power and better MPGs from other manufacturers?  Toyota sells a fraction of what the other makes do.  Literally a fraction.  Toyotas are reliable.  Everyone gets it.  But why not look at other trucks with more power, more mpgs, better warranty, and better interior, ...for, in my experience, less money.  It seems I'm not the only one given the sales numbers.  

 

PS, get a Ram.  Just don't look at it if you don't like its look...hahaa

[Fman]

I guess if you need to tow more than 10,000 lbs probably should look elsewhere.  Not to mention the resale on Toyota is always good.  To each is own, I figured Ford and Dodge would inevitably get brought up in this thread, no thanks, will take the 13/17 gas guzzling mileage all day long over any of the other 3.  I guess I am used to it after driving my 13/15 Sequoia for the past 10 years .

[85 Barefoot]

2 minutes ago, Fman said:

I guess if you need to tow more than 10,000 lbs probably should look elsewhere.  Not to mention the resale on Toyota is always good.  To each is own, I figured Ford and Dodge would inevitably get brought up in this thread, no thanks, will take the 13/17 gas guzzling mileage all day long over any of the other 3.  I guess I am used to it after driving my 13/15 Sequoia for the past 10 years .

 Just look.  I would have never imagined myself in a Ram...until I drove it.  Coil suspension is so smooth, interior is amazing, great engines, more tranny speeds, more options for less, again, better warranty.  All I'm suggesting is...go look.  I've now put almost 100k on both of mine (combined) and I've never had an issue.  Am I lucky, maybe, but really, other than the Ford 6.0 disaster, who has widespread engine issues anymore?   

[twitchee2]

I am in search for a truck and i have been sense I sold my duramax last year. I got by this summer by using my moms truck, but I recently blew the motor on that truck towing my sslxi up the Tejon pass for a bachelor party (early ford 5.4L, spark plug problems). I also DD a 2002 4runner with 240k on the clock, I understand the simple and reliable side as well.

I have narrowed my search down to 3 trucks.  

1. Just because I am a diesel guy and I miss it.  2013+ RAM megacab cummins 3500 with the Aisin trans. Pros: Awesome truck, nice interior, great millage for a truck.  It is a real truck.  Cons: Diesel and the exhaust junk, I live in CA. $60k rig. This is my dream rig.

2. 2015+ f150 with the 5.0L  Pros: New, nice interior, good millage, decent reliability. Cons: Newer truck, has its problems. ~$45k for what I want new (XLT, supercrew, 4x4, long bed)

3. Likely what I will end up with. 2012+ 5.7L tundra for all the reason in this thread.  Pros: reliability and longevity. Cons: Old drive train, very thirsty, has a tiny bed, early model years had rack and pinon problems.  ~$35k for what I want (SR5 or limited, crewmax, 4x4)

edit. My last trip with the boat is when the motor went on the old ford.  I used my cousin 2009 crewmax 5.7 for the rest of the trip.  I was running fairly heavy on gear with this trip with a few big coolers full of beer, boat toys, all my camping gear, fire wood etc. I bet I was a solid 5,000lbs on the trailer + 500ish in the bed. Nothing to extreme, but a typical representation of a extended weekend trip for me. Other than the small bed the truck was fantastic in terms of towing. I did feel the brakes were slightly lacking, especially coming down the Tejon pass.  It is likely the brakes were already warped, they started to shake.  Nothing a little down shifting could not handle but it is something to note. Also, It was sagging quite a bit and i did feel the bump stops a time or two.  I had a few people flash me for brights, but again some air bags would help here. I have no idea on MPG, but I know I barely got 200 miles on a tank. It was one of those trips I did not care about fuel millage, my gut said I might have hit double digits.  2009, SR5 Crewmax 2wd with 160K on the clock.

Edited October 18, 2016 by twitchee2

[twitchee2]

2 minutes ago, 85 Barefoot said:

 Just look.  I would have never imagined myself in a Ram...until I drove it.  Coil suspension is so smooth, interior is amazing, great engines, more tranny speeds, more options for less, again, better warranty.  All I'm suggesting is...go look.  I've now put almost 100k on both of mine (combined) and I've never had an issue.  Am I lucky, maybe, but really, other than the Ford 6.0 disaster, who has widespread engine issues anymore?   

I agree here. I heard all the bad things about RAMs for years. I gave all 4 companies a shot when i was narrowing my search. I was pleasantly surprised with the new RAM's they have stepped their game up. Will I buy one? Time will tell.

Edited October 18, 2016 by twitchee2

[John I.]

It seems that too many of the engine / transmission changes made by manufacturers in the name of fuel efficiency make the vehicles less effective at towing, regardless of the horsepower/torque claims and tow rating. Sometimes simpler is better.

[tjklein]

32 minutes ago, Fman said:

I guess if you need to tow more than 10,000 lbs probably should look elsewhere.  Not to mention the resale on Toyota is always good.  To each is own, I figured Ford and Dodge would inevitably get brought up in this thread, no thanks, will take the 13/17 gas guzzling mileage all day long over any of the other 3.  I guess I am used to it after driving my 13/15 Sequoia for the past 10 years .

 

True enough I suppose, but let's not get too caught up in reliability.  EVERY 1/2 Ton TRUCK IS RELIABLE these days...even the EcoBoost, which has had a few issues.  Sure, some are more reliable than others but the failure rate is still very low from every manufacturer when it comes to drivetrains and most of the vehicle.  

I would agree that Toyota might be the king of reliability (at the cost of performance, it's conservative in the approach), but if it's the difference between .05% and 1% it's not really a big difference.  Anyhow, the Tundra is a great truck, really reliable and plenty capable.  It just bothers me a little when manufacturers tout reliability from their 1/2 ton - according to them each of theirs is the best.  Truth is they're all pretty good...hence why they all claim to be really reliable.

[Pnwrider]

Changing drive trains can be a slippery slope. Just look at the ford diesel line over the last 15 years. Try selling a 10 year old f250/350 with a 6.0 powerstroke vs a 10 year old tundra and see which takes a greater hit in resale. 

[MadMan]

31 minutes ago, tjklein said:

True enough I suppose, but let's not get too caught up in reliability.  EVERY 1/2 Ton TRUCK IS RELIABLE these days...

Yep.  My standard buying method is to buy used, and stay away from the "anointed" vehicles on Consumer Reports or JD Powers buy it lists.  You get killer deals on reliable vehicles this way.

[oldjeep]

1 hour ago, twitchee2 said:

I agree here. I heard all the bad things about RAMs for years. I gave all 4 companies a shot when i was narrowing my search. I was pleasantly surprised with the new RAM's they have stepped their game up. Will I buy one? Time will tell.

I'm not sure I'll buy another one, the current one has been so good for the last 7 years and 137K that I've got no reason to replace it   Being it is a 2009 it has a lifetime powertrain warranty that I haven't gotten to use yet.

[shawndoggy]

47 minutes ago, Pnwrider said:

Changing drive trains can be a slippery slope. Just look at the ford diesel line over the last 15 years. Try selling a 10 year old f250/350 with a 6.0 powerstroke vs a 10 year old tundra and see which takes a greater hit in resale. 

I dunno.... a low miles (say 150k) 06 6.0 vs a 150k 06 Tundra?  the F250 4x4 supercrew had a sticker of about 40k and would sell in the mid-high teens today.  The 07 Tundra limited (first year of new body style) sold for 40ish and would sell now for mid-to-high teens.  I mean if KBB and edmunds are to be believed.

That said, I think that there are a lot more Tundras out there that are still low mileage and in real good shape vs the F250s because the F250s were bought for working purposes and run hard (high mileage, high abuse), vs. Tundras which don't seem to see as much fleet sort of "work truck" use.  As a % of ownership I'm sure there are more tundras owned by doctors and accountants than F250s, if you see what I'm saying?  Seems very common to see 10 year old diesel trucks with 250-300k, but not so common to see so many miles on a Tundra.  Not that they won't go that far (I'm sure they will), rather that they aren't used in the same way.

I like the Tundras -- they are very nice trucks!  There does seem to be a "toyota premium" cooked into the price, though, vs. at least what you could get in a RAM or F150.  GM seems real proud of their trucks too at least as far as I can find.  Judging from the low miles used market, none of the full size pickups depreciate much in the short term.... save maybe for the gasser F250 with the 6.2.  And that truck, while it'd sure tow well, isn't going to ride like a toyota for the 99% of the time that you aren't towing.

 

 

 

[oldjeep]

Shawdoggy has an excellent point.  When I made my decision in 2009 it was between the Tundra and the Ram, which I viewed as pretty much equal except for that really cool rear window in the Tundra.  The choice came down to a 10K plus difference in price at the time.  Now this was during the Chrysler bankruptcy so they were making some exceptional deals.

[nyryan2001]

I'm not seeing this Toyota price premium you guys are referencing.

its slightly cheaper than the 3.5 Eco F150. Way Cheaper than the 6.2 GMs. About the  Same as the 5.7 Rams.

and the MPGs are about the same 12-15.

 

so, not higher priced, and about the same MPGs.  A bit less power than the others.

 

[oldjeep]

40 minutes ago, nyryan2001 said:

I'm not seeing this Toyota price premium you guys are referencing.

its slightly cheaper than the 3.5 Eco F150. Way Cheaper than the 6.2 GMs. About the  Same as the 5.7 Rams.

and the MPGs are about the same 12-15.

 

so, not higher priced, and about the same MPGs.  A bit less power than the others.

 

Maybe different in other areas, but around here you can pick up a Crewcab 5.7 Hemi/8 speed Ram Outdoorsman for just over 37K on a 46K sticker.  Or a Laramie for 40K on a 53K sticker The Toyota stuff seems to sell pretty close to sticker and it is pretty rare to find one that they didn't check all the boxes on.

Edited October 18, 2016 by oldjeep

[twitchee2]

I sent two emails and had an F150 at 41K down from 52K.  Typically you can get ~20% off of a domestic and ~5% toyotas, if any at all.

[nyryan2001]

Guys, check cars.com

 

you'll find ~$38k for SR5

$44k for a Limited(Laramie, Lariat)

$50k for a Platinum

All 2017, Crew, 5.7, 4x4.

 

if you go work truck version... ~$35k

[oldjeep]

Just now, nyryan2001 said:

Guys, check cars.com

 

you'll find ~$38k for SR5

$44k for a Limited(Laramie, Lariat)

$50k for a Platinum

All 2017, Crew, 5.7, 4x4.

 

if you go work truck version... ~$35k

That pretty much proves the point doesn't it? 10% higher price for a Limited vs Laramie for a nice truck that doesn't pull nearly as much.

[nyryan2001]

Ok I'll bite Old Jeep.

 

post up a screen shot of a 2017 Laramie 5.7L Crew for $40k??