Tribute bands are a beautiful thing: talented musicians who use their artistic gifts to duplicate other people's creativity and style for stupid easy money. Toyota’s full-size Tundra pickup is cut from the same cloth. Much like your favorite KISS wannabes, the big T's truck earns its keep by imitating Detroit’s core competency. Supposedly, that ain’t enough; US pickup truck buyers are thought to be more brand loyal than Queen fans (if you pardon the reference). So does the Tundra have what it takes to evoke the masters and rock the house?
The Tundra’s curvaceous sheetmetal hearkens back to the last-gen Ford F150– with only a butch twin-bar grille as a modern concession to big-rig boldness. The soft but hard theme continues downstream, as the curves end in hindquarters that feel distinctly truckish– in the nicest possible way. The Tundra's double cab profile proclaims its intention to haul more than mulch. Meanwhile, the door-mounted "Limited" decals proclaim its buyer’s appreciation of life’s finer things (like you’re too "country" for a Lexus rig). It’s all good, since people who buy a megabuck truck aren’t looking for something that says “tough” like a Texas lawman… Oh wait, they are.
Like a repressed trust fund baby, the Tundra's interior displays a smattering of external influences with no identity of its own. The dash bears more than a passing resemblance to the aforementioned F150, with gauges influenced (ripped off) from a late-90s Explorer. The interior fit and finish is as spotty as 101 Dalmatians; the Tundra sports everything from excess A-pillar flash casting (sans side-curtain airbags) to a fistful of revolting plastic plugs, which date back to the advent of grunge rock. In this age of high dollar design budgets, the polymer droppings littering the dash, steering wheel and console are a major disappointment. I mean, we’re talking 36 large.
While Lexus-like door panels, leather trim, navigation and JBL tunes trick the truck; the Tundra’s interior is still an ergonomic earthquake. Corolla-esque door handles look feminine and require dainty fingers to manipulate without continual restorative manicures. Grabbing too much column-shifter activates the wiper stalk, while a bizarre dash-mounted button is the sole method for manual first gear engagement. Rotary HVAC controls operate without fluidity or grace. The power retracting rear window is the Tundra's sole redeeming feature; it increases the open-air convertible factor and encourages meaningful conversations with your cargo. (Expect another horrid dash plug for Tundra's lacking this option.)
So this rig ain't no Cowboy Cadillac, but does it work hard? You betcha.
The Tundra's relatively trim dimensions make parking lot maneuvering a pleasure. But it's bigger where it counts; the double cab's stunted bed is still the longest in its class. The truck holsters a 4.7L V8 that spreads its 313 ft.-lbs. of torque throughout the rev range like peanut butter on bread. Teamed with a smart five-speed automatic, the V8 is always ready to roll, with quick downshifts and boundless passing power. Tundra's fast-ratio steering feels right, keeping the "Tokyo Drift" limited-slip rear axle in check on wet pavement. Rear drum brakes disappoint on paper, but even with a spongy pedal, stop the Tundra with resounding authority. The Toyota's light-hearted frame ensures a rough road lets the dash, cab and bed all dance to the beat of a different drummer.
The Tundra's hardware is far from class leading, but the rig passes the all-important truck test: towing. While the V8 needs all 32 intelligently-timed valves to tow a 6000lb load, the autobox makes sure multiple downshifts motivate the Tundra to hillclimb like a pack mule. Expect a decent 12mpg with highway towing, down from the 19mpg rating awarded from the EPA. Even with a land-yacht behind it, the Tundra’s mediocre stopping hardware yanked all and sundry to a standstill with zero drama. Yet the Tundra's flexi-flyer frame showed telltale signs of weakness: the bed pulled away from the cab, notably worse than many a Detroit-bred beat-to-shit work truck towing the same load.
Motown still does something right: they know their trucks. While the Tundra performs adequately it doesn’t reassure and impress like one of its homegrown competitors. And the inverse relationship between interior quality and asking price make Toyota’s pickup a not-so-funny joke. After thirteen years of truck know-how, Toyota still doesn't have the juice to school the Big Dogs. Ah but…
Remember Toyota's first minivan? It was a mid-engined deathtrap, no match for Chrysler's baby. But Toyota eventually got it right, building a showroom superstar in the Sienna. The 2007 Tundra is set to bust a move with fresh threads. And it’ll be assembled by folks who know a thing or two about trucks: Texans. For now, Ford's class-leading F150 can rest on its laurels. Next year, who knows? Imitation may soon prove to be the sincerest form of market share.
[Toyota provided the vehicle reviewed, insurances, taxes and a tank of gas.]
I had one for 10 months. It was ok. For someone like me that was stepping up from an S-10/nissan sized vehicle, it was good. Like you said, it didn’t really accel at much. I think the new design is too funky, so I will not be returning to Tundras anytime soon. Knock on GM all we can, but the Silverado is exceptionally priced for what you are getting. I love the Ram, the Ford’s design has regressed to a box on wheels, while its engineering has progressed. I like the Titan, but it is trouble prone. Uh, do I have a point? No. I’ll get back to work then.
The next gen tundra will bring better compitetion to Ford and Chey. The current is getting old and bland, but yet Toyota still keeps it fresh.
I’d like to see someone take on the truck market by innovating above and beyond what GM and Ford have done. I don’t think replicating them is the answer to competing with them at all. The truck market is so boring, somebody needs to shake it up.
Hmm, an article about a $36,000 “work” vehicle right after a article about “beaters”, which is all about the cheapest reliable point A to B transportation to be found. Seems kind of reversed.
Call me old fashioned, but $36k for something to beat up that’s not even rated to carry more than a ton?
Not to mention, rather ugly both inside and out. I don’t get it.
“Tokyo Drift” LSD? That’s awesome. I love it! Very well written article!
The first picture is rather oversized.
It’s being built in Texas, but barely. In the latest issue of Ward’s, they don’t even have half the workers needed to run the plant, much less the surrounding supplier network they have set up. So I would assume there are still alot of Texan’s not succombing to the force called Toyota, and just because they are built in Texas doesn’t mean they were designed or engineered by Texans. Besides, the new Tundra stole from the Ram this time, just look at the bulbous grill/nose. But anyways, I’d like to know when the plant begins to run 100%, and production is supposed to start in 4 months, so we’ll see.
The Titan is still a better truck, problems aside. Significantly more power, better looking, and much more utilitarian.
the titan is ucking fugly! it tries so hard to be macho. But yea I suppose it is stronger. But keep in mind the Tundra was introduced like in the 90’s, or something like that. Obviously it won’t be up to par with its more modern competitor, and I don’t mean those obsolete Chevys and GMC whatevers.
Doesn’t the wood trim look tacky, though? :P Anyway, hopefully the new V8 is going to like blow the competition away.
I refuse to call anything without a properly proportioned bed a “truck”, if you can’t have sex in the back of it comfortably at the drive in (feet not sticking out past tail-gate), it’s not worth it. While the laughable “bed” may be longest in its class, four doors basically makes any truck into a half-assed eunich. I’m sure there are SOME people who want and/or need the extra people hauling “features”, but to me it’s just perversion, and not in a good way.
The F-I-L has had two of these – overall ok, but I’m not impressed except for, or course, reliability. Personally I think the F-150 is by far the best looking truck out there…..I’ve seen some pics of the new Chevy, and it doesn’t do anything for me.
Can’t be as bad as calling the Honda Ridgeline a truck.
The Tundras I see on dealer lots all have fairly substantial discounts on them, not as big as those on Detroit trucks, but still pretty substantial. I don’t think they’re selling all that well.
tomcat,
if we can’t call the ridgeline a truck, we’d have to come up with some stupid meaningless name for it. like ‘crossover’. i think we’d be better off to just continue calling vehicles with beds ‘trucks’.
yea, compared to american trucks Tundras don’t sell well, but I don’t think that’s why they are so heavily discounted. All double cabs in the dealerships around here have been marked down 12k max, usually around 7-8k for the cheaper models.
it’s because the tundra pretty outdated. i’d wait for the new one to come out even if the tundra was discounted 20k.
oh, btw, ridgeline is more of a truck than that baja thing subaru has :P
damn that thing is tacky.
Oh and I agree. F-150 has a really beautiful interior and exterior. the dash and console is like land-roverish. on the regular cab models, however, it looks like the door is extremely short and stubby, just wide enough for a person.
There are two things the Japanese just do not understand: Pickup trucks and rock ‘n roll. Their end product in both invariably has the proper specs, looks equally good (if not better) on paper, but once it’s time to get the job done, the American product invariably comes up better. Even if it does have too much hard plastic on the interior.
The Tundra and Loudness – perfect examples of the above.
Syke
Deranged Few M/C
NamDuong: the woodgrain isn’t tacky, its Chrysler Cirrus tacky. They poured that crap down the center of the console too.
About the Ridgeline: I don’t consider it a truck, even if it was the Truck of The Year. 5000lb towing capacity with a six-cylinder torque peak well over 4000rpm? That’s gotta be a hard sell, but I’d like to slap a trailer to it, see how truck-like it is in the real world.
Last time I checked, the Tundra was a distant fourth in sales. Brand loyalty runs deep for the Ford vs. Chevy truck crowd, so far its well deserved. We’ll see what changes next year.
Sajeev, here’s your answer:
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060712/BLOG06/60712002
9 mpg while towing…
9.5 MPG is what our carbureated 1987 F-150 achieved when towing our 5th-wheel trailer. Not much has changed in 20 years!
jdizzle: not surprised by that. If it can’t tow, it shouldn’t be called a truck. Maybe a four-door El Camino is more fitting.
If the Tundra couldn’t top 10mpg, I’d seriously question the use of a high rpm, high flow 32 valve motor in a truck. Then again, if it got over 14mpg, I’d call for the demise of the turbo-diesel.
What should we call 4cyl Colorado’s, Rangers, and Frontiers, since they tow even less than the Ridgeline? I guess those aren’t trucks, so we’re gonna need a new name for them.
Seriously, if a Jeep Wrangler and a Cadillac Escalade can both be SUV’s, and a Kia Rio and a BMW M5 can both be sedans, I think a Ridgeline and an F150 can both be trucks.
FunkyD, I think the difference is that you would expect to get 9 mpg in an ’87 F-150, but the idea of a Honda that drinks gas like that could cause some people’s heads to explode.
I thought Chrysler & VW learned in the early 80’s that a FWD econobox platform with a bed doesn’t make a good truck.
The Toyota Tundra is a well-built half-ton pickup truck. However, the Nissan Titan has a 9,000 pulling capacity (can tow up to 9,000 pounds). It may look odd and get ratty gas mileage – 12 mpg city and 18 mpg highway – but for those who need a heavy-duty work truck, it would seem the Titan wins over the Tundra.
to Terry: You have hit it when you say for those that need a truck of this size. In the future we will go back to the past. Those that pull horse trailers, construction activities etc. will buy the big trucks, nothing else works. But those who used them as second cars to go to work, will have to bale.When the gas gets closer to European $5.00 per gallon, even the big trucks will get diesels and othe fuel improving devices, but the segment will be smaller. You know GM built suburbans in the 1930’s, they didn’t get much interest, because only those who need’t one bought one. Well we are just going back to the future. As to how the manufacturers make as much profit selling smaller lighter vehicles, I don’t know.
“What should we call 4cyl Colorados, Rangers, and Frontiers, since they tow even less than the Ridgeline? I guess those aren’t trucks, so we’re gonna need a new name for them.”
Hutton, those trucks (yes indeed) are significantly cheaper than the Ridgeline, and serves a very truck-like need for many individuals. Painted in fleet white, they are the ideal form of transport for small businesses and a large chunk of corporate America. The Ridgeline ain’t no Tundra, and is far from a Ranger too.
About the Titan: it sounds way more truck-like than the Tundra on paper, but it hasn’t set the sales charts on fire. Only one gas-hog V8, limited cab/bed configurations, and it is pretty damn ugly inside and out.
Isn’t Ford bring the Ergonomic layout from the Range Rover over for the F-150?
That wouldn't surprise me, but I've heard nothing about that. The F150s interior is already a modern luxo truck-tough theme like the Land Rover, just on a tight budget.
Trucks? Yes in the heavy duty, Toyota does not have want it takes yet untill 01/01/07. Then we will see Ford, Chevy, Ram run for cover. Nissan Titan is all ready running, to the lemon law. If what to talk about Reliabilty, you can not touch Toyota. The Ford F-150 and Titan are the 2 worst turks on the market. Ram Hemi? thats great but the tranny and read end die at about 50k. Chevy Silverado, talk about out dated. the inside looks like it came out of a 1987 S-10 Blazer.
Just had one of these in at the shop. A 4X4 TRD version. The front wheel bearings, which are impressively large, are of the precision radial sealed kind. Nice, but inappropriate. When, like this example, you fill it full of mud (note to Toyota – seals!), you can’t rebuild it. Replace at a cost of nearly $600 (all-in). Toyota – this is a working truck, not a toy. Typically Toyota, the interior is just like a blown-up version of a car (a Toyota car). Same with the seats – car seats. Door handles – I could go on. It’s supposed to be a truck. And of course, one of my pet hates – drum brakes (beyond sad). The good points? It was quiet and felt together, which is no mean feat considering the frame turns to C-Channel at it’s mid point (ultra poor engineering design). And what a great engine! Super smooth, with excellent delivery and plenty of power and low-end(ish) torque. Verdict, buy a Dodge Ram (unless your a girl and fall for that non-confrontational wishy-washy curvy look!).
I have owned 2 of the big 3 (chevy & ford), and currently own tundra. I can honestly say that I have experienced good and bad from the three trucks I have owned. Notice I said trucks, and not a fru fru, tranverse mounted V6, front wheel drive, which is nothing more than a minivan with a chopped rear end you call a bed. That my friend is not a truck. A base model S10, colorodo, ranger, frontier, tacoma, is more truck than the ridgeline will ever be.
I currently own a Tundra (double cab, TRD 4×4 model), and for what I needed in a truck, the Tundra is the best truck on the road. My Tundra is used for recreation, not work. I rarely tow anything, and the only “work” I do is hauling bedfulls of firewood out of the Colorado mountains. I use it to haul my ski buddiesto the slopes in the winter. I put a fiberglass shell on it and sleep in the bed in the summer. For offroading, it has more clearance than anything else does stock. It’s narrower than the competition, so you can sqeeze through more obstacles and have a wider choice of lines to take. And contrary to what SexCpotatoes thinks, it is quite comfortable to get laid in the bed. (I am 6’2″ and have experienced no problems back there)
The worst 1/2-ton truck is the Ram. Like many Chrysler vehicles, the Ram looks fantastic in the showroom, but is often literally falling apart before reaching 80,000 miles. You’ve got to be retarded to buy a Ram for work OR for play, IMO. The Titan does not come with a double cab AND six-and-a-half foot bed, and that 9,000# tow rating is pretty optimistic, to put it nicely. Anyone actually towing that much seems to have rear end problems. The Silverado/Sierra was another interesting option to me, because I have seen some of them looking great at 150,000 miles, and others needing loads of work by 100,000. Seems like Chevy makes a solid truck, but a lot of owners just don’t take care of theirs. And Ford… Ford is the only manufacturer who makes a 300+hp feel underpowered. I have never once complained about the Tundra being underpowered.
It does have it’s problems, of course. I really wish they would offer a manual transmission, for example. I hate how it will start in first gear when starting from a stop in 4-lo, when second or third would be more suitable. I wish they offered a manual transfer case, though to be fair I haven’t had any trouble with my push-button system. I loathe the hill descent “feature” where the truck downshifts when you tap the brake when the truck is pointed downhill. If I want to downshift to hold a speed down a hill, I will do it myself, TYVM. But for my dollar, and at 17.5mpg on average, the Tundra is the pickup for me!