Why the f*ck doesn't Toyota just give us the same mid size trucks that they sell around the rest of the world like the Hilux to save R & D costs instead of the Tacoma, and build a bigger version of the Hilux in the Tundra? Boom - R & D costs saved, way tougher, sturdier trucks, they just gotta get the engines by emissions testing. They can do it in Australia and other developed companies which have some emissions standards, why can't they do it here?

The mid size trucks from other parts of the world would never sell in the US. USA buyers like stuff that is distinctly American, I do find it interesting that the Hilux and Tacoma are sold side-by-side in Mexico.

The Hilux has more payload capacity than the Tundra for f*cks sakes!

The Hilux is not stuck with an inferior c-channel frame. Plus, Toyota trucks around the world are used differently than in the US. The T100 had more payload the current Tundra, and the T100 was a boxed frame.

 

The mid size trucks from other parts of the world would never sell in the US. USA buyers like stuff that is distinctly American, I do find it interesting that the Hilux and Tacoma are sold side-by-side in Mexico.

The Hilux is not stuck with an inferior c-channel frame. Plus, Toyota trucks around the world are

used differently than in the US. The T100 had more payload the current Tundra, and the T100 was a boxed frame.

your ignorance regarding trucks is getting laughable. .
.......fyi the tundra has over a 2000 pound higher gvwr than the paper thin t-100.

 

The mid size trucks from other parts of the world would never sell in the US. USA buyers like stuff that is distinctly American, I do find it interesting that the Hilux and Tacoma are sold side-by-side in Mexico.

your ignorance regarding trucks is getting laughable. .
.......fyi the tundra has over a 2000 pound higher gvwr than the paper thin t-100.

But pound for pound, the T100 was able to haul more with a slightly higher payload capacity. T100 Xtra cabs were rated for a 2150...I wonder what the payload rating would be of 07-13 if it had a full boxed frame.

 

$2800 is misleading. If the diesel is an option on a loaded $50,000 Laramie but not on a $25,000 Express, then what's the point of having a diesel option. That makes it a $27,800 option. I'd consider one if I could get it in a lower trim level.

 

Other than a few Tundra nutthuggers, does ANYONE really think that Toyota can take enough of the HD/Diesel truck market share to improve their bottom line? Hell no they can't. They stick with what they know, and what they can sell. The Ford, Chevy, and Dodge nutthuggers are brand loyal and they will never switch sides.

 

Tundra is only for North America and not sold by Toyota anywhere else. Very small market share compared to all the vehicles Toyota sell all over the world. Hence, not profitable for them to develop a diesel engine solely for use in north America. They can use Cummins on the Tundra as Cummins diesel is already certified clean diesel engine here in the U.S.

And as far as T-100 higher payload capacity, the standards back then are not nearly the same as today. So you can go ahead and load T-100 to its max and let us know how it performs on the road, highway, uphills, downhills. braking and acceleration.

 

WOW, LOL

get'r done

 

But pound for pound, the T100 was able to haul more with a slightly higher payload capacity. T100 Xtra cabs were rated for a 2150...I wonder what the payload rating would be of 07-13 if it had a full boxed frame.

why do you keep harping on the fully boxed frame and payload?

it's not the frame design that limits this on the tundra.

the p-rated tires would pop before the frame gave out just for starters.

 

$2800 is misleading. If the diesel is an option on a loaded $50,000 Laramie but not on a $25,000 Express, then what's the point of having a diesel option. That makes it a $27,800 option. I'd consider one if I could get it in a lower trim level.

Do we know yet if the engine is or is not available on all trim levels? It would be a mistake, in my opinion, to go the GM route and only offer the best engine in the most expensive trim package.

Honestly, the 28 mpg highway isn't that amazing. Rather than a more expensive diesel engine and more expensive diesel fuel I would prefer if Toyota found a way to get better economy out of the current 5.7 V8. I'm not sure what could be tweaked. GM uses cylinder deactivation, perhaps that could help Toyota's highway mileage a little better. I keep hearing how wonderful direct injection is for fuel economy too. If Toyota could find a way to get low 20's on the highway and still be able to produce the higher power, they can increase their market share even more. When you figure the higher cost of fuel and the higher charge for the diesel engine, its going to take some time to reach break even point... especially if you offer a gas engine that gets 22 or 23 mpg on the hwy.

As it stands now, if Toyota would offer higher payload (talking 2000 lbs or higher), then I would be very interested in trading my 2010 in. The 5.7 makes GREAT power and is comparable in engine output and fuel mileage to the Ford 6.2 and the GM 6.0 V8's that are offered in their 3/4 ton trucks. Increasing mileage by a couple mpg and beefing up the frame and/or suspension and Toyota suddenly has a great 3/4 ton truck. If they could find a way to upgrade to the higher payload for only a $2500-$3000 price increase I think they would sell a great deal of trucks. Figure a grade trim reg cab longbed Tundra with 2200 lbs payload and the 5.7 V8 starting at $26K... fleet managers would eat that up!!!

 

spoon059, per a Ram webpage the diesel will be available on the Tradesman, SLT, Outdoorsman, BigHorn, Laramie, and Laramie Longhorn. I had not previously seen the webpage when I last posted. Ram will have a 6'4" bed available on the crewcab models.

This is good news for Fiat/Dodge/Ram buyers.

link: 2014 RAM 1500 EcoDiesel V6 | Diesel Engine Truck | RAM Trucks

There is a signup on the webpage for the latest news. Might be worth it if Ram throws extra cash on it for potential buyers. I had Ford give me $750 on any F150 when I signed up for their updates.

 

Funny reading this.

Toyota knows that us Americans drive our trucks down nice paved roads 90% of the time and 10% of the time off the road. Toyota also knows that not many "mericuns" are going to buy a no frills solid axled, solid framed, truck with a manual transmission, and bulletproof diesel engine. (funny just described a dream truck) Us "mericuns" for a large majority are skeered of diesels still. Also for your "most common" "mericuns" they want all the bells and whistles, 100MPG, and a soft ride from our TRUCKS.

You can't have all the bells and whistles in a truck that rides and drives like a complete buckboard. I drove a HILUX, and I LOVED it, but damn is it unrefined. Built for different reasons in mind.

Just my 2c. You will see improved mileage in a bit. Toyota doesn't pepper their advertising with false claims like other guys. We'll see though.

 

Toyota doesn't pepper their advertising with false claims like other guys. We'll see though.

I agree with a lot of the other stuff you said but I am getting right what is on my sticker on my ram, which is 15 city, 21 highway, 17 mixed.

nothing false about that...

 

Toyota also knows that not many "mericuns" are going to buy a no frills solid axled, solid framed, truck with a manual transmission, and bulletproof diesel engine. (funny just described a dream truck)

Wow, someone actually understand why Toyota does not offer a diesel in NA. The higher cost to the MSRP will just skew people away. The bare bones, vinyl floor, manual window Tundra sells like crap as it is, just imagine the higher cost of a diesel engine. Now, there might be a small market for a Land Cruiser diesel, but then the MSRP would just go up.

I drove a HILUX, and I LOVED it, but damn is it unrefined. Built for different reasons in mind.
.

Totally different use than the North American Tacoma

 

$2800 is misleading. If the diesel is an option on a loaded $50,000 Laramie but not on a $25,000 Express, then what's the point of having a diesel option. That makes it a $27,800 option. I'd consider one if I could get it in a lower trim level.

Standard dealer operating procedure---if something's in high demand it must be milked for everything it's worth--lol!

A possible solution to the SDOP BS is to special order exactly what you want (without all the luxury BS). Many Ford/Chevy/Ram dealers aren't too fond of special orders because they don't want to lose out selling you the fully-optioned, big profit unit on the lot. If you've got the time to call around, and you're willing to drive a few miles, you can always find a Ford/Chevy/Ram dealer somewhere that's willing to cut you a good deal on a special order to make a quick, low-hassle $1000-$2000 profit. On special orders, the more you're willing to put down (or cash) the better deal you'll get. With a large down-payment (or cash), some dealers see it as a low-risk way to make a quick dollar without the overhead of carrying inventory.

FWIW, with very little work you can get a Dodge Ram 1/2 ton Quad-Cab 5.7 Hemi 2WD with just basic options like cruise, tilt, power windows/locks, nice wheels, etc. for $24,000-$25,000 (before taxes). With this in mind, seems reasonable to believe a few "cooperative" dealers might be willing to special order this same truck with the $2800 diesel option for 30,000 or even less.

 

As it stands now, if Toyota would offer higher payload (talking 2000 lbs or higher), then I would be very interested in trading my 2010 in. The 5.7 makes GREAT power and is comparable in engine output and fuel mileage to the Ford 6.2 and the GM 6.0 V8's that are offered in their 3/4 ton trucks. Increasing mileage by a couple mpg and beefing up the frame and/or suspension and Toyota suddenly has a great 3/4 ton truck. If they could find a way to upgrade to the higher payload for only a $2500-$3000 price increase I think they would sell a great deal of trucks. Figure a grade trim reg cab longbed Tundra with 2200 lbs payload and the 5.7 V8 starting at $26K... fleet managers would eat that up!!!

Bingo! This is more likely what we will see in this generation of Tundra. I, as much as anyone would love to see a diesel option in the Tundra, but more than likely will have to settle on the above mentioned changes.

 

As it stands now, if Toyota would offer higher payload (talking 2000 lbs or higher), then I would be very interested in trading my 2010 in. The 5.7 makes GREAT power and is comparable in engine output and fuel mileage to the Ford 6.2 and the GM 6.0 V8's that are offered in their 3/4 ton trucks. Increasing mileage by a couple mpg and beefing up the frame and/or suspension and Toyota suddenly has a great 3/4 ton truck. If they could find a way to upgrade to the higher payload for only a $2500-$3000 price increase I think they would sell a great deal of trucks. Figure a grade trim reg cab longbed Tundra with 2200 lbs payload and the 5.7 V8 starting at $26K... fleet managers would eat that up!!!

Bingo! This is more likely what we will see in this generation of Tundra. I, as much as anyone would love to see a diesel option in the Tundra, but more than likely will have to settle on the above mentioned changes.

I can certainly see why some folks would find more payload for the Tundra an attractive option. However, if Toyota did offer a 2000++ lb. payload option for the Tundra, then Toyota would be in effect entering the 3/4 ton segment. There's already massive competition from Ford/Chevy/Ram in this segment, especially in the commercial area. The Tundra would never be taken as a serious contender in the 3/4 ton segment with only lackluster success in the 1/2 ton segment. If they entered the 3/4 ton segment without a full-on big liter diesel engine, full-on 3/4 ton chassis/suspension, and a full complement of aftermarket support for commercial shells, beds, flatbeds, accessories, etc. . . . they'd be doing the same thing they did with the Gen1 Tundra. The Gen1 was never considered a "real" 1/2 ton truck by the Big 3 and most consumers. It was just a heavy-duty Tacoma.

IMO, Toyota has to get their 1/2 ton sales up to 150,000 to 175,000 units before they'll be taken seriously in the truck world. To do that, they need to be innovative and start taking some risks by investing in more R&D. Unfortunately, Toyota has officially said they're perfectly content with their current sales position in the truck world. There's obviously not much innovation oozing out of the 2014 Tundra, so I believe they're being true to their word.

Regardless, I honestly don't think a 2014 Tundra with bigger springs is gonna set the truck world on fire.

 

You are right, I'm not holding my breath that Toyota will listen to my ideas, but I think it would do a great job of breaking into fleet sales. The 3/4 ton market doesn't require a diesel engine, it doesn't tow enough weight or have enough payload to justify the diesel engine to a lot of people. Once you get into the 1 ton market with 3000 lbs or more payload and over 15 or 16,000 lbs towing is where the diesel goes from a "luxury" item to a necessity.

Look at the Ford Ecoboost with max payload package, they are selling pretty well as HD half tons. But again you are right, if they want to be taken seriously they need to build a legitimate 3/4 ton truck. That requires an upgrade to the frame, the suspension the brakes and the wheels.
I think that the drivetrain and axles are probably solid enough to use in a heavier truck, they just need 6 lug spindles instead of the current 5. Then offer it with 6 lug wheels and 10 ply tires.
Honestly... how much more research does it take to beef up the frame? Using a heavier gauge steel or boxing certain segments of the frame will upgrade the frame for a relatively low upgrade price.
The springs, wheel bearings etc aren't much more to get heavier duty versions. Heck, they can upgrade the front springs and just use overload springs in the back.
The brakes, while much larger than other 1/2 tons, need to be much larger to compete with the HD market area. The true measure of braking performance is in swept area. The Tundra has too small a swept area to be taken seriously without upgrade.

Honestly, all that can be done for $2000 or so. I realize that truck buyers are fiercely loyal and its hard to break in to market share. Fleet owners, people that have to worry about longevity and overall cost are easier to win over. Toyota has shown that the engine and trans are dependable and relatively low maintenance. Putting that into a heavier platform and starting off at a lower price point than Ford, Chevy and Dodge offer and I promise you that some fleet managers are going to give it a shot. I think that there is a decent portion of the population that will be interested in a 3/4 ton Tundra.

We can hope, can't we???

 

You are right, I'm not holding my breath that Toyota will listen to my ideas, but I think it would do a great job of breaking into fleet sales. The 3/4 ton market doesn't require a diesel engine, it doesn't tow enough weight or have enough payload to justify the diesel engine to a lot of people. Once you get into the 1 ton market with 3000 lbs or more payload and over 15 or 16,000 lbs towing is where the diesel goes from a "luxury" item to a necessity.

Look at the Ford Ecoboost with max payload package, they are selling pretty well as HD half tons. But again you are right, if they want to be taken seriously they need to build a legitimate 3/4 ton truck. That requires an upgrade to the frame, the suspension the brakes and the wheels.
I think that the drivetrain and axles are probably solid enough to use in a heavier truck, they just need 6 lug spindles instead of the current 5. Then offer it with 6 lug wheels and 10 ply tires.
Honestly... how much more research does it take to beef up the frame? Using a heavier gauge steel or boxing certain segments of the frame will upgrade the frame for a relatively low upgrade price.
The springs, wheel bearings etc aren't much more to get heavier duty versions. Heck, they can upgrade the front springs and just use overload springs in the back.
The brakes, while much larger than other 1/2 tons, need to be much larger to compete with the HD market area. The true measure of braking performance is in swept area. The Tundra has too small a swept area to be taken seriously without upgrade.

Honestly, all that can be done for $2000 or so. I realize that truck buyers are fiercely loyal and its hard to break in to market share. Fleet owners, people that have to worry about longevity and overall cost are easier to win over. Toyota has shown that the engine and trans are dependable and relatively low maintenance. Putting that into a heavier platform and starting off at a lower price point than Ford, Chevy and Dodge offer and I promise you that some fleet managers are going to give it a shot. I think that there is a decent portion of the population that will be interested in a 3/4 ton Tundra.

We can hope, can't we???

spoon059, absolutely nothing wrong with hoping and wishing the best for the Tundra. We all have our opinions and views on what we feel would make the Tundra more successful. I respect that. You make a very good technical argument for a 3/4 ton Tundra.

Unfortunately, there is the emotional factor that very much plays into the market . . . and, it's this intangible force that wrecks havoc with the best intellectual intentions.

To be successful in the mass market pickup truck market, one has to connect with the Average Joe out there. The Average Joe probably buys more on emotions and gut feeling than anything else. That's why I've pushed fuel economy so hard in my posts. IMO, there is no easier way to connect with the Average Joe than through his wallet---through the biggest, boldest numbers on the window sticker--the EPA city/highway/combined mileage numbers.

The OP started this thread with an emotional plea to Toyota for a diesel. There's a reason why there are more gas mileage threads on Tundrasolutions than any other single topic. Gas mileage (especially the lack thereof) brings out emotions. When the Average Joe thinks diesel he thinks good things like fuel economy and pulling power. The Average Joe says screw the details show me the gas mileage!

Dodge Ram is going to get a lot of good PR out of this 1/2 ton diesel truck. This is the kind of attention, hoopla, and feel-good emotion that sells trucks--lots of 'em. As for what Toyota is up to . . . well . . . who knows.

 

Look at the Ford Ecoboost with max payload package, they are selling pretty well as HD half tons. But again you are right, if they want to be taken seriously they need to build a legitimate 3/4 ton truck. That requires an upgrade to the frame, the suspension the brakes and the wheels.
I think that the drivetrain and axles are probably solid enough to use in a heavier truck, they just need 6 lug spindles instead of the current 5. Then offer it with 6 lug wheels and 10 ply tires.
Honestly... how much more research does it take to beef up the frame? Using a heavier gauge steel or boxing certain segments of the frame will upgrade the frame for a relatively low upgrade price.

Toyota could very easily put a fully boxed frame in the Tundra, Toyota had a fully boxed frame in the T-100 and 80's and 90's compacts and they still have a fully boxed in the overseas trucks. The sore point for the Tundra is the lousy c-channel frame, all of the others competitors have boxed frames and Toyota is the only one without it, remember the truck market it about bragging rights. Even the GM HD trucks now have fully boxed frames and I think RAM has it too.

There are other glaring issues with the Tundra. The reg cab Tundra is the worst reg cab on the market, it it just way to big. The crew cab is pointless as the cab is too big and the bed is too small, Toyota is the only truck maker with this design and nobody else offers it. Very limited gearing options for Toyota. The marketing of the 07-13 was laughable.

Overall I really love the new Tundra, especially the new interior and the double cab TRD is my favorite, but we have to be honest when it comes to the Tundra, the 07-13 Tundra never lived up the expectations.

 

Unfortunately, there is the emotional factor that very much plays into the market . . . and, it's this intangible force that wrecks havoc with the best intellectual intentions.
...
That's why I've pushed fuel economy so hard in my posts. IMO, there is no easier way to connect with the Average Joe than through his wallet---through the biggest, boldest numbers on the window sticker--the EPA city/highway/combined mileage numbers.

You are 100% right about the emotion aspect of it. I think better mileage will help some, but not much. For starters the Tundra has the worst mileage available right now. We are behind Ford, GM, Ram and will soon be behind the Titan with the Cummins engine. Its going to take about 4mpg better just to be on par with those guys. That's going to be hard to accomplish. Then when you figure American truck buyers are fiercely loyal to their brand, its even harder to crack into their market share. If fleet managers buy them and these guys drive them at work, its easier to sway them away from the Big 3 and into a Toyota for a personal car. Ain't too many fleet managers buying half ton Tundra's right now.

Once that Ram diesel comes out and offers upper 20's, we are going to be even further behind the curve. I agree 100% that better fuel economy will sell more trucks, but I think it is a lot easier (and cheaper) to develop a 3/4 frame and suspension and put it under the same body style than it is to coax at least 4 mpg (just to get to average) or develop a US EPA friendly diesel. I think that Toyota either needs to be willing to let go of the Tundra and discontinue it (not likely since they have a newer plant in Texas just for trucks) or else they need to see the writing on the wall and be innovative.

Its pretty inexpensive (compared to R&D for a new engine/trans) to swap out some parts and make the Tundra a 3/4 ton and open their market share. It will open up choices for guys like me that need more payload than the current Tundra offers, but don't want to be forced to buy Ford/GM/Ram. I don't see Toyota selling a million 3/4 ton trucks a year anytime soon, but I can see 100,000 a year as an attainable goal for the first couple years. The engine and trans are on par with the Ford 6.2 and GM 6.0.

Its more expensive to R&D new engine, new trans, new axle ratios, lighter components to get significantly better fuel economy. I agree 100% that its a task that Toyota needs to undertake if they want to be successful in the long term. The current 5.7 is perfect for a 3/4 ton, but mileage is too low for average half ton buyers. I might suggest that Toyota attempt to rework the 4.6 for better mileage and continue to offer the 5.7 for people that don't care. Either way, they need better mileage and need it bad.

 

I for one do not like a diesel in anything be it car or truck. I feel most think my way. The diesel would sell
to a very few at least. It would be a bad move for Toyota to invest in a limited seller. Leave the Tundra
alone. If you want a diesel so bad buy another brand.