User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 02-28-2024, 01:36 AM #1
4skrunner 4skrunner is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: San Diego
Posts: 163
4skrunner will become famous soon enough 4skrunner will become famous soon enough
4skrunner 4skrunner is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: San Diego
Posts: 163
4skrunner will become famous soon enough 4skrunner will become famous soon enough
Larger lighter tire vs smaller heavier tire

Looking to get some new tires this summer and Im contemplating size vs weight. I currently have heavy mt tires and wish to gain some mileage back. What Im proposing is a change from:

285/70/17 Falken wildpeak mt load C 32.8 62 lbs

To:

285/75/17 Firestone destination xt load D 33.9 53.7 lbs

So gaining about an inch in height but losing about 8 lbs per tire.

Any speculation as to what effect this new taller but lighter tire would have on MPGs? Stock gears.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Last edited by 4skrunner; 02-28-2024 at 02:02 AM.
4skrunner is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-28-2024, 03:04 AM #2
02SE 02SE is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Here, There..
Posts: 3,791
02SE is a splendid one to behold 02SE is a splendid one to behold 02SE is a splendid one to behold 02SE is a splendid one to behold 02SE is a splendid one to behold 02SE is a splendid one to behold 02SE is a splendid one to behold
02SE 02SE is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Here, There..
Posts: 3,791
02SE is a splendid one to behold 02SE is a splendid one to behold 02SE is a splendid one to behold 02SE is a splendid one to behold 02SE is a splendid one to behold 02SE is a splendid one to behold 02SE is a splendid one to behold
A milder tread and lighter weight, but larger diameter. From having lots of different tires on 4wd trucks and SUV's, I'm going to guess there won't be much difference in MPG between the two.

Maybe a slight improvement.
02SE is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-28-2024, 10:07 AM #3
Humble Leader's Avatar
Humble Leader Humble Leader is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,209
Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold
Humble Leader Humble Leader is offline
Senior Member
Humble Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,209
Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold Humble Leader is a splendid one to behold
no measurable improvement. any improvement from the weight savings will be so tiny that the multitude of other variables and their impact on fuel economy will come into play (what else you're carrying, what direction the wind is blowing, what you ate for breakfast, etc.)

if we just look at weight, thats 8 x 4 = 32lbs total weight savings. really not very much, less than 1% MPG improvement at the very very best and less than a penny on cost per gallon
__________________
A mistake that makes you humble is much better than an achievement that makes you arrogant
Humble Leader is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-28-2024, 10:33 AM #4
thennen's Avatar
thennen thennen is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,607
thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold
thennen thennen is offline
Senior Member
thennen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,607
thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold thennen is a splendid one to behold
From everything I've read on forums, it seems that deviations from stock always result in MPG reductions. I don't think I can recall anyone ever saying their mileage stayed the same or improved with an increase in tire size.

That said, since you already have tires that are larger than stock, I would speculate that the larger diameter would result in an MPG reduction. I agree that the effect of the actual tire weight would be almost meaningless.
thennen is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-28-2024, 12:08 PM #5
fkheath fkheath is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,439
fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold
fkheath fkheath is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,439
fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold
I put BFG KO2 in load range E in stock size on my 4Runner. Heavy tires. I did not notice any significant degradation of MPG.

What is more important, IMO, is what you intend to do. I got the load range E because I do off road in western Colorado where the rocks are sharp granite, rather than the softer sandstone around Moab.
fkheath is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-28-2024, 01:20 PM #6
thatoneguy's Avatar
thatoneguy thatoneguy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Utah
Posts: 835
thatoneguy has a spectacular aura about thatoneguy has a spectacular aura about thatoneguy has a spectacular aura about
thatoneguy thatoneguy is offline
Member
thatoneguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Utah
Posts: 835
thatoneguy has a spectacular aura about thatoneguy has a spectacular aura about thatoneguy has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by fkheath View Post
I put BFG KO2 in load range E in stock size on my 4Runner. Heavy tires. I did not notice any significant degradation of MPG.

What is more important, IMO, is what you intend to do. I got the load range E because I do off road in western Colorado where the rocks are sharp granite, rather than the softer sandstone around Moab.
Interesting, I've never heard western Colorado offroaders talk about how sharp their rocks are, that's usually what I hear from the Arizona people. I took my '23 on P-metric Wildpeaks on the Alpine Loop near Ouray without result.
__________________
2023 TRD Offroad Premium, nautical blue
Former: 1987 SR5 w/ SAS, 1999 Limited w/ e-locker
thatoneguy is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-28-2024, 01:50 PM #7
KGcobra KGcobra is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: California
Posts: 38
KGcobra is on a distinguished road
KGcobra KGcobra is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: California
Posts: 38
KGcobra is on a distinguished road
Don't expect a change in your MPG from that weight difference alone, if anything you'll maybe notice a slight difference in acceleration and braking feel. Expect changing to a different tread pattern and size will affect it more.

I'm currently running BFG KO2 285/70/17 in load range C. Before that I was running KO2 load range E in the same size, about 7 lbs or so difference per tire. So same tread design, same size, no noticable change in MPG.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk
KGcobra is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-28-2024, 02:17 PM #8
El Dusty's Avatar
El Dusty El Dusty is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Denver
Posts: 308
El Dusty has a spectacular aura about El Dusty has a spectacular aura about El Dusty has a spectacular aura about
El Dusty El Dusty is offline
Member
El Dusty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Denver
Posts: 308
El Dusty has a spectacular aura about El Dusty has a spectacular aura about El Dusty has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4skrunner View Post
Looking to get some new tires this summer and I’m contemplating size vs weight. I currently have heavy mt tires and wish to gain some mileage back. What I’m proposing is a change from:

285/70/17 Falken wildpeak mt load C 32.8” 62 lbs

To:

285/75/17 Firestone destination xt load D 33.9” 53.7 lbs

So gaining about an inch in height but losing about 8 lbs per tire.

Any speculation as to what effect this new taller but lighter tire would have on MPGs? Stock gears.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
For your size change you may be saving weight but you are relocating the weight at a farther radius. IE less weight but increased inertia which counteract each other in terms of mpg changes. More inertia means more resistance to rotational acceleration.

It will probably feel a little less slugish during acceleration and breaking with slightly lower rpm ranges once you are up to speed. This is un-sprung weight savings which most people agree has a significantly larger impact on mpg than sprung weight reduction. I agree with most others here that think you will see no overall mpg change.

For reference those C load wildpeaks are pretty heavy because Falken developed them as one of the stock sizes for the Jeep Galdiator Rubicons when they first came out. I ran a set of their ATs in the same size and took a hit to mpg after that.

I switched to 255/80/17 wildpeaks after that set which is around 8 lb savings per tire. Almost no difference in mpgs I do love the 255s on and offroad though. Just taller than the 285/70s and it feels much lighter driving around town. Much better in snow and slush, the 285s wanted to float too much. I will probably stick with this size or go to 34x10.5 next.

Last edited by El Dusty; 02-28-2024 at 02:33 PM.
El Dusty is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-28-2024, 02:21 PM #9
TRD PANTHER's Avatar
TRD PANTHER TRD PANTHER is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,308
Real Name: BLACK TRD PRO
TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of
TRD PANTHER TRD PANTHER is offline
Senior Member
TRD PANTHER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,308
Real Name: BLACK TRD PRO
TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of TRD PANTHER has much to be proud of
I run the MT Baja Boss AT standard load in 285/70-17. 48 pounds each. Smooth, fairly quiet ride. Great reviews. I have always contemplated a 285/75-17, but the additional weight, cost, modifications, possible regear, speedometer being off as compared to the 285/70-17, spare tire fitment in the well, for ~1/2 more ground clearance is not worth it for me.
TRD PANTHER is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-28-2024, 03:59 PM #10
fkheath fkheath is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,439
fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold
fkheath fkheath is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,439
fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold fkheath is a splendid one to behold
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4skrunner View Post
Looking to get some new tires this summer and Im contemplating size vs weight. I currently have heavy mt tires and wish to gain some mileage back.

So gaining about an inch in height but losing about 8 lbs per tire.
Keep in mind, too, that different size tires will affect the speedometer and odometer. Larger size tires will rack up less miles on the ODO than the actual distance traveled, which would look like you are getting poorer MPG.

Toyota vehicles, for the most part, show speedometer readings 1 to 2 MPH faster than you are really going (at 60 MPH).
fkheath is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-28-2024, 05:13 PM #11
Engineer's Avatar
Engineer Engineer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Midland, MI
Age: 36
Posts: 1,983
Real Name: Charles
Engineer has a spectacular aura about Engineer has a spectacular aura about
Engineer Engineer is offline
Senior Member
Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Midland, MI
Age: 36
Posts: 1,983
Real Name: Charles
Engineer has a spectacular aura about Engineer has a spectacular aura about
Complete speculation but I'd wager no change worth talking about. I am not sure what MPG you get now but take that and add 5-10% and its such a small number that it's really nothing to celebrate.

Anything , imho, in the 285/70-75 range is going to suck. We own 2 5th gen 4runners, my wife's bone stock 2015 TEP and we can eak out high teens on the highway and mid teens intown and my 2014 TEP running 34 KM3, 4.88 gears, roof rack , bumpers, winch, sliders, gear yada yada and I will see low teens intown and mid teens on the highway.

In summary, if the Mpg is truly important, step down to OEM tire sizes, if its not just get what you prefer the look/performance of.

*not sure of the design or true size of those 285/75 but that's generally where rubbing gets more severe so keep that In mind pending what you have done to prevent rub already,
__________________
2014 Trail Edition Premium, 285/70/R17 BFG KM2, RadFlo 2.5" Coilovers and Rear Shocks, 50qt ARB Fridge, OTRATTW Switches, BudBuilt Bumpout Sliders, Gobi Rack + Ladder / 40" Rigid E2 /Rotopax and MaxTrax mounted, ARB CKMTA12, 270amp Alternator, Southern Style Slimline Hybrid Front Bumper w/ Warn Zeon 10S and Front Fogs, Metal Oil Canister, Sound Deadening Insulation w/ Focal Front Speakers,Black Weather Tech mats and custom pin striping & dents (the trees & bushes did it for free)
Engineer is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-28-2024, 05:34 PM #12
comtn4x4's Avatar
comtn4x4 comtn4x4 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 1,041
comtn4x4 is a splendid one to behold comtn4x4 is a splendid one to behold comtn4x4 is a splendid one to behold comtn4x4 is a splendid one to behold comtn4x4 is a splendid one to behold comtn4x4 is a splendid one to behold
comtn4x4 comtn4x4 is offline
Senior Member
comtn4x4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 1,041
comtn4x4 is a splendid one to behold comtn4x4 is a splendid one to behold comtn4x4 is a splendid one to behold comtn4x4 is a splendid one to behold comtn4x4 is a splendid one to behold comtn4x4 is a splendid one to behold
I'd agree with the group. The only example I can give is I ran the same tire in both 285/75 and 305/70 back to back. Same diameter different widths and about a 5# per tire difference. There was only about a 1/4 gallon difference in MPG
__________________
'13 TE w/ KDSS, 4:56 Gears, Dobinson's IMS C59-352/C59-701V, Sonoran Steel KDSS Trac Bar, Overland Custom Design Control Arms. Fuel Revolver 17x9 +1 mm 5" Backspace, Falken Wildpeak A/t3w 285/75r17, Hefty Fabworks Aluminum Front Bumper and Full Skids, C4 Fab Dual Swingout Rear Bumper, MetalTech OPOR Sliders, Northstar, Off-Grid Engineering, SPod, Blue Sea, Rigid, Baja Designs, KC HiLites, Stedi, Aplharex, National Luna, Drifta, Goose Gear, RAD Rubber Designs, Viair, Bandi Mount, URD, Gobi, ARB, Warn, Factor 55, Fourtreks, Axia Alloys, Desert Does It, Agency 6
comtn4x4 is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-28-2024, 10:25 PM #13
///AIRDAM's Avatar
///AIRDAM ///AIRDAM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: vicksburg ms 39183
Posts: 222
Real Name: Adam
///AIRDAM will become famous soon enough
///AIRDAM ///AIRDAM is offline
Member
///AIRDAM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: vicksburg ms 39183
Posts: 222
Real Name: Adam
///AIRDAM will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4skrunner View Post
Im contemplating size vs weight. I currently have heavy mt tires and wish to gain some mileage back. What Im proposing is a change from:

285/70/17 Falken wildpeak mt load C 32.8 62 lbs

To:

285/75/17 Firestone destination xt load D 33.9 53.7 lbs

So gaining about an inch in height but losing about 8 lbs per tire.

Any speculation as to what effect this new taller but lighter tire would have on MPGs?
I can tell you from my line of work, offroad, tire DIAMETER is more of a power killer and fuel mileage killer than weight ever will be.
Example:
have a vehicle with 33 pound 29" tires stock
switch vehicle to 30 pound 31" tires
Vehicle gets slower acceleration and slower top speeds and worse fuel mileage
Diameter of the tire, changes how much load the vehicle senses, and will be harder for the engine to turn it.
Normally, we see going from stock 29-30" tires up to 32-33" tires. People are so invested in weight, and will take the 32" tires and shave and buff the sidewalls, lighten and sipe the treads to save weight and cut the weight of the 32" tire to as light or lighter than the OEM tire.
STILL kills power, acceleration, and top speed. A larger roll out of a tire is more load on the engine. Even if the overall weight is lighter, you are still moving the weight of the tire, belts/tread farther away from the center of the hub. The farther out you go with the weight, the larger the radius, the more power it takes to turn it.
Its been 15+ years ago but there was a GREAT video posted on YT i watched. Professional Import car track racers trying to get the fastest lap times on road courses. They changed brakes, brake diameter, and did dyno and lap times to see what the brakes changed. Smaller diameter brake rotors didnt show up on the dyno, but were measurably faster in acceleration tests on track. They also tried a ton of tire and wheel combos. They used a 15, 16, 17, and 19" wheel. They sourced different companies who had practically the exact weight wheel so they were like within 4 pounds for each set of wheels. They also sourced tires that would remain the EXACT SAME SIZE. So for the 15" wheel they had a tire that was say 28" overall and 10" wide. The same for the 16" wheel. 28" overall and 10" wide. Ect Ect for each set of wheels. This meant the only variable was the diameter of the wheel, because they tried to keep the overall mass of the tire and wheel the same. Dyno each set of wheel and tire and noticed a pretty signifigant change in dyno readings for each set of wheels. The smaller diameter wheel was noticably and measurably higher HP to the tire. The same exact results were seen on the track in lap times. The 15" wheel was measurably faster than the 16" combo. The 16" combo was measurably faster than the 17" combo, and the 19" combo was the slowest of all.

Each set of tire and wheel combo was the same overall height, and within a minimal amount of change in overall mass. Why was the larger wheel lower power on the dyno and slower on the track?

The larger wheel, moves the overall mass of the wheel (the hoop) farther away from the center of the hub, and requires more power to turn it.

The same will happen with your larger diameter tire. Your current setup has xxx amount of weight, and the larger tire, even though the weight might be lower, you are moving the weight (tire tread and steel belts) farther away from the center of the hub which will increase the load, rolling resistance, and no doubt hurt mileage and performance even more than your current tires.
Attached Images
Larger lighter tire vs smaller heavier tire-1646309040013-jpg 
__________________
current
2005 Tundra DC limited + 2008 4R Urban Runner + 2023 4R TRD Sport

past
2008 Tacoma TRD Sport DC TRD supercharged + 2012 4Runner Limited
///AIRDAM is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-29-2024, 07:00 PM #14
MossJenks's Avatar
MossJenks MossJenks is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Lakewood, Colorado
Posts: 661
Real Name: KE0OIC
MossJenks has a spectacular aura about MossJenks has a spectacular aura about MossJenks has a spectacular aura about
MossJenks MossJenks is offline
Member
MossJenks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Lakewood, Colorado
Posts: 661
Real Name: KE0OIC
MossJenks has a spectacular aura about MossJenks has a spectacular aura about MossJenks has a spectacular aura about
This sounds like a great question to put on a calculus test.
__________________
2011 4Runner SR5 Premium
Past:
1988 4Runner 22re, 1992 4Runner SR5 3.slow, 1998 4Runner SR5 5VZ-FE
MossJenks is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Old 02-29-2024, 07:54 PM #15
Bmnorm2 Bmnorm2 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2021
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 405
Bmnorm2 is a jewel in the rough Bmnorm2 is a jewel in the rough Bmnorm2 is a jewel in the rough Bmnorm2 is a jewel in the rough
Bmnorm2 Bmnorm2 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2021
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 405
Bmnorm2 is a jewel in the rough Bmnorm2 is a jewel in the rough Bmnorm2 is a jewel in the rough Bmnorm2 is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4skrunner View Post
Looking to get some new tires this summer and Im contemplating size vs weight. I currently have heavy mt tires and wish to gain some mileage back. What Im proposing is a change from:

285/70/17 Falken wildpeak mt load C 32.8 62 lbs

To:

285/75/17 Firestone destination xt load D 33.9 53.7 lbs

So gaining about an inch in height but losing about 8 lbs per tire.

Any speculation as to what effect this new taller but lighter tire would have on MPGs? Stock gears.
Rotational Inertia of a tire = m*r^2

Falken: I = (28.123kg * 0.4165m^2) = 4.88 kgm^2

Firestone : I = (24.358kg * 0.4305m^2) = 4.51 kgm^2

So, the Firestone will actually take less energy to turn. The Firestone results in ~ 7.5% inertia reduction. Due to the squared radius, often the larger tire will have a higher moment of inertia however in this case the mass is reduced enough for the taller tire to be a lower moment of inertia.

If both tires have the same rolling resistance, you may be slightly better fuel economy with the firestone. I have no idea what their rolling resistances are.

In general, I wouldnt expect to see any notable difference.
Bmnorm2 is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Reply

Tags
lbs , lighter , load , tire , tires

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tire Decisions, Worth it to go Taller/Heavier? Unner 3rd gen T4Rs 61 05-25-2017 01:05 AM
'02 SR5 - Need Tire Recommendations - Want to go Larger cambone 3rd gen T4Rs 6 10-05-2010 10:20 PM
Smaller tire sized brands I should know bak3rme Engines / Suspension / Wheels / Tires / Audio / Accessories 5 02-25-2010 03:43 PM
Anyone go with a smaller tire size? velocty Engines / Suspension / Wheels / Tires / Audio / Accessories 7 09-12-2007 08:40 PM
Smaller Spare Tire? Koz 4th Gen T4Rs 13 06-22-2005 06:03 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.2

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
***This site is an unofficial Toyota site, and is not officially endorsed, supported, authorized by or affiliated with Toyota. All company, product, or service names references in this web site are used for identification purposes only and may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Toyota name, marks, designs and logos, as well as Toyota model names, are registered trademarks of Toyota Motor Corporation***Ad Management plugin by RedTyger
 
Copyright © 2020