Toyota Tundra Discussion Forum banner

1 - 20 of 69 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I see many Tundra owners complaining about their gas mileage and I wanted to throw this out there. I am averaged 12.5 L/100kms on my recent vacation traveling approximately 4000 kms with 80% hiway & 20% city. My bed was full and it was just me and my wife. I get decent mileage on long trips. I normally get around 15L/kms on average cruising around Edmonton but I found a sweet spot when cruising on the highway by setting it at 118kph (73ish mph) with the tach below 2000 getting 12.5L/kms. In comparison, when cruising at 125kph (78ish mph), it goes to 14.8L/kms. The only things I changed was I added the all weather BF Goodrich Advantage TA (20") with a high rotation for increase gas saving. Excellent in deep snow, slush, wet, dry weather but sucks on black ice at normal highway speeds. I changed to the Mobil synthetic 0W20 with a secret additive to boost better gas mileage. I added a picture for some of the sceptics out there.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
10,631 Posts
Google says that's 18.8 mpg. Not bad.
I get 14 MPG and I don't tow anything....<img src="http://tundratalk.net/forums/images/TundraTalk_net/smilies/tango_face_surprise.png" border="0" alt="" title="EEK!" class="inlineimg" /><img src="https://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc86/zippy357/gifs/slapshead.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Facepalm" class="inlineimg" />
Don't worry about it. Getting good mileage is overrated. Oh sure you might save a few dollars by driving slower but millions will be late!
 

·
He Has Risen!
Joined
·
6,318 Posts
Anyone who buys a nearly 3 ton pickup with a NA V8 making close to 400 hp and then complains about fuel economy,
should be shamed and picked on until they shut up.
Especially the ones that seem to think all other manufacturers are making trucks that have 500 hp and get 30 mpg and run on water and have rainbow emissions and have extra WIFIs and constantly say things like "Toyota better up their game".
They should also be shamed and picked on until they shut up or go buy a different truck.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
10,631 Posts
Anyone who buys a nearly 3 ton pickup with a NA V8 making close to 400 hp and then complains about fuel economy,
should be shamed and picked on until they shut up.
Especially the ones that seem to think all other manufacturers are making trucks that have 500 hp and get 30 mpg and run on water and have rainbow emissions and have extra WIFIs and constantly say things like "Toyota better up their game".
They should also be shamed and picked on until they shut up or go buy a different truck.
I disagree. Toyota has been selling the same truck for 12 years, it used to be great in comparison to the competition, but at this point they have gone to the next level.
Even incremental changes would have been nice. Toyota has an 8spd transmission, its not like they need to research it, they could simply offer it but won't.
Android auto, same thing, Johnny come lately.
 

·
He Has Risen!
Joined
·
6,318 Posts
I disagree. Toyota has been selling the same truck for 12 years, it used to be great in comparison to the competition, but at this point they have gone to the next level.
Even incremental changes would have been nice. Toyota has an 8spd transmission, its not like they need to research it, they could simply offer it but won't.
Android auto, same thing, Johnny come lately.
On a serious note:
Question 1: does something need to be changed simply for the sake of being changed, for reasons of marketing and all the psychological hangups and weaknesses of most people,.... or, are their advancements in technology that are leaps and bounds ahead of what the Tundra has?
Question 2: if other trucks have mechanical advantages that are a decade ahead of the Tundra,..... what are they and what advantages do they provide.
And I'm looking for mechanical advantages, not entertainment systems, cute gadgets, creature comforts, etc.

My argument has never been that Toyota has no interest in making changes to the Tundra, but simply that they don't sell enough of them to justify creating a whole new truck every few years simply for the sake of the elusion that they are innovating and offering the lastest space age features and technology.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
393 Posts
I'm getting 17-17.5 mpg in my '19 dc, I'm still running stock 255's though. That's during the weekly commute traveling over 20mi on I-70 and only a few blocks in town. Cruise set at 72 which with 255/70's is probably actually 70mph.... stay away from flex fuel.. I was under 13mpg on it. I'll never fall for that again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,296 Posts
I'm waiting for the car with the thorium based nuclear reactor that never needs refuelling.


Either that or an updated V8 tundra that does 17mpg minimum; whichever comes sooner.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
393 Posts
I'm not sure that it is? It reads 1mph faster than the digital display and 2mph faster than gps. I have a suspicion the 255's weren't originally meant for the truck. It had a yellow sticker in the door jamb notifying something like.. due to modification, the weight limit of this vehicle is reduced by 50lbs.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
10,631 Posts
I disagree. Toyota has been selling the same truck for 12 years, it used to be great in comparison to the competition, but at this point they have gone to the next level.
Even incremental changes would have been nice. Toyota has an 8spd transmission, its not like they need to research it, they could simply offer it but won't.
Android auto, same thing, Johnny come lately.
On a serious note:
Question 1: does something need to be changed simply for the sake of being changed, for reasons of marketing and all the psychological hangups and weaknesses of most people,.... or, are their advancements in technology that are leaps and bounds ahead of what the Tundra has?
Question 2: if other trucks have mechanical advantages that are a decade ahead of the Tundra,..... what are they and what advantages do they provide.
And I'm looking for mechanical advantages, not entertainment systems, cute gadgets, creature comforts, etc.

My argument has never been that Toyota has no interest in making changes to the Tundra, but simply that they don't sell enough of them to justify creating a whole new truck every few years simply for the sake of the elusion that they are innovating and offering the lastest space age features and technology.
On a serious note. Toyota is the biggest manufacturer in the world and very profitable. Therefore it has the money for R&D.
If they want to sell more trucks they need to work for it, be the industry leader, put the money out there to take a bigger chunk of the market.
Here's a thought, build a 3/4 ton.
They build diesels for every market except where they sell the Tundra. They already build some of the best diesels in the world. Hino has a variety of diesel engines, maybe one could be put in a Tundra.
Should they resign every 3 years, no. Every 5 years, maybe. Every 10 years, definitely. That's marketing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
742 Posts
No complaints here , some of wich we all knew about the tundra when we sighed up

16.5 winter , 18.2 ( no higher ) warm weather .
Oem sized tires of coarse , drivin a tad gental for mpg.
I can live with that
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
I get 14mpg pretty much all the time. I got 15mpg on a long road trip once.

I get 7-8mpg pulling the 5er.

No complaints here it’s a truck not a Prius.

My Chevy got 14mpg, my f250 diesel got 16mpg. The people with eco turds that I know get 16mpg the one in a raptor gets 14. The gm guys get 14-16mpg.

Who is really getting 18-20mpg in a full size truck?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
748 Posts
On another serious note.....

In the early years the Tundra had a fairly good crash test ratings among it's peers. In the last 5-7 years the Design and Technology changes made by Toyota's competitors made their trucks SAFER than they had been whereas the Tundra's safety ratings remained the same at best and fell behind at worst. This is one BIG reason why Toyota needs to keep up with design changes and technology.
The chief engineer of the Tundra has often said that reliability is the mandate he has been given by Toyota management. Maybe crash safety should be another mandate from management?

A "mechanical" advantage area that the competition has left Toyota in the dust is cargo and towing capacity. Back when the Tundra was introduced the 1400+ lb cargo and 10K towing capacities were okay. Since then, the Tundra's numbers are woefully behind compared to the competition's 2,000-2,800 cargo and 11K to 13K+ towing capacity with their towing package. Even more sad now that all truck makers are using the same SAE J2807 standards.

Should Toyota totally redesign the Tundra every 3 years. No, that would be financially irresponsible especially since no other truck maker does that either if they want to make a profit. They all do face lifts and add nicey nice interior crap periodically then do more major changes at 5 to 7 years. A 7 to 10 year cycle for significant changes is something Toyota should be doing to keep up safety and truck owner needs.

Last year when I was getting my Tundra inspected I looked at the 2019 models. What I found interesting was the amount of content that was standard equipment on my 2012 that had been removed or changed to an option in a 2019. A quick calculation at the time showed that those features that had been removed would now cost $3-4K more as options. That conversion from standard equipment to options no doubt has enhanced the Tundra's profit margin per unit. The fact that Toyota sells every Tundra they make and does not have to use $10K+ incentives to move them means they probably have a higher per unit margin than the all of the US truck makers. That and not spending huge amounts of money on R&D for most of the last 12 years means Toyota is not hurting for money to invest in a new Tundra that is safer and can haul and tow more.

When it comes to fuel mileage I can get 16-18+ mpg on the highway if I hold the speed to 70-72 mph or less. Around town I get 14-16 in the summer and less in the winter. A few more actual MPGs would be nice if it won't add a lot to the price of a new Tundra, sacrifice reliability or add a lot of cost to ownership.
 

·
He Has Risen!
Joined
·
6,318 Posts
A few more actual MPGs would be nice if it won't add a lot to the price of a new Tundra, sacrifice reliability or add a lot of cost to ownership.
IF.
But we saw that with the eco boost.
It lowered reliability and increased cost.
And all for marginal fuel economy gains.
This has been the case with almost every attempt by the big 3 since 2007, to be "competitive" and introduce new designs and technology.
Higher costs and failures.
So, when I hear people say they wanna see more changes and more competitiveness, I feel like they just want to see something new for the sake of seeing something new. But not for any real real changes that add up to something that I can hold in my hand.
You can only extract so much energy out of a unit of gasoline. Not sure what they can do other than use lighter materials, incorporate forced induction, electronically controlled cylinder diactivation, etc etc, all of which other manufactures did and it drove up costs while yielding more failures than actual improvements to power/fuel economy,.....I'm not sure what people realistically expect Toyota to do, to improve the "competitiveness" of the o truck they don't count on to make money.
All I know is that, like in every other case, once they DO finally answer the call to change the Tundra, people will bitch about what they did.
 

·
He Has Risen!
Joined
·
6,318 Posts
Anyway, my question (s) wasn't about marketing or being competitive.
My question is, what should they do to the tundra to improve it and make real changes?
Like power and fuel economy.
 

·
He Has Risen!
Joined
·
6,318 Posts
Here's and example,....

"They did x, y and z to the Silverado and now it has 520 hp, gets 22 mpg, is reliable as hell and averages $42k.
 
1 - 20 of 69 Posts
Top