Best speculation of a 2023 6th generation I have seen

[Annolino122]

That’s generally been Toyota’s strength and/or strategy, however. Their vehicles rarely are at the extremes of anything in their class — best acceleration, best handling, most capacity, biggest size. None of that is typically the Toyota. It’s a harmonious execution without major flaws (coupled with the assumed reliability and resale value) that seems to tip the scale towards Toyota for the general consumer.

The Highlander and the Mazda CX-9 are good examples. The CX-9 is frequently the benchmark for handling and composure. Reviewers gush all over it. The Highlander is smaller, doesn’t handle quite as well, doesn’t get as many compliments about design, lacks some of the Mazda’s luxury features, and can be more expensive. Yet the Highlander stomps all over it from a sales perspective.

I think there was a lot of expectation built up around the Tundra and it probably fell short to some who were expecting something revolutionary, like a Cybertruck. I also think Toyota has attempted to make strides to connect at a different level with buyers — the current Camry, for example, is actually desirable beyond being a reliable appliance.

On that subject — Toyota’s traditional approach opens the doors to competition that can introduce something revolutionary and appeals on more levels than Toyota. Tesla is a good example of this, IMHO.

To add to this and to add to the appliance comment - Toyotas are a household appliance, they do what they are meant to do, they do it well, they do it reliably, and as you mentioned the sales numbers account for it.

The 4Runner is no expectation, besides the updates on the 2020+'s, they were outdated, crap MPG, and behind the curve yet everyone wanted one. A company like Toyota isn't going to be innovative, they are going to be reliable and consistent.

 

[Annolino122]

In what areas does the new Tundra outperform any of the domestic trucks? (don't say reliability b/c that's a tired argument here and unproven on a new vehicle)

This is a 4Runner Forum and do not want to deviate from that.

Its not tired or unproven, Toyotas history with engines, turbos, diesels, transmissions, everything is proven. They will not put anything in their car that does not far exceed consumer expectations or testing on reliability.

But the burden of proof is not on me buddy. You tell me how its not competitive in a market owned by domestic vehicles that have been around for decades longer.

 

[Jetboy]

That’s generally been Toyota’s strength and/or strategy, however. Their vehicles rarely are at the extremes of anything in their class — best acceleration, best handling, most capacity, biggest size. None of that is typically the Toyota. It’s a harmonious execution without major flaws (coupled with the assumed reliability and resale value) that seems to tip the scale towards Toyota for the general consumer.

Toyota wasn't always this way. The last tundra when released was top of class in pretty much everything. It was the biggest, fastest and most powerful is half ton truck you could buy. It wasn't until the TRX that a truck came out that ran a faster quarter mile. Even the new tundra hybrid is more than 50hp short of what you could buy in 2007.

In 2003 the 4runner was faster than the fastest Porsche cayenne. Every generation of 4runner had two engine options except the 5th gen. - I know technically there was a 4cyl 2wd that was sort of a joke in 2010. But every other generation had the average mid grade engine and a premium engine. It's possible that even the 6th gen will still be slower and less powerful than the 4th gen 25+ years later. Every past gen of 4runner had a 7 years product cycle. The 5th gen wasn't really a full new model. It's close to a major refresh of the 4th gen. And we're now at year 12 with at least 2 more years before an update.

IMO, this isn't normal. The 2.4 turbo should have been introduced in 2017. If we're skipping a generation, fine. I don't think it makes sense to just go with the 2017 update in 2023/4. IMO that's what the new tundra represents. A truck that would have been class leading in '17 but is marginally competitive in 2022. And a 270hp turbo 4 as the top spec will be marginally competitive at best in 2024. A 30hp hybrid attached isn't going to be good enough.

 

[thro1]

It's interesting comparing the 6th gen thoughts here vs. the earliest posts on the 5th gen board speculating their future in the late 2000's. Good stuff.

 

[Jetboy]

Thanks for the insult. And what about the Tundra disappointed you? I'm curious.

Edit: saw your following post with a lot of words and not much comparison besides the camping battery. Little confused by the criteria you're claiming as making a useless outdated truck.

Where do I start?

It took longer to design than Tesla took to go from the first roadster up to today.

It has less power than tundra had in 2007.

It has a mild hybrid as the top option - battery is small, old tech, and packaged under the rear seat.

No EV or PHEV option. It's 2021... Everyone else has an EV or a 30mpg powertrain. Or both.

It has less power than the 3.5 in the LC 300. Why detune it?

The extra low power tune in the base anti consumer - Toyota literally spent more money to make a shittier tune. That's just a crappy business choice.

It uses a smaller rear axle.

Its already a generation behind in driving tech - no advanced driver assistance. Does it even have auto headlights? (Many 4runners still don't have them...)

The hybrid lacks the utility that Ford offers - and Toyota also offers in the sienna.

33" tires on the off-road model? Do we have to cut the body mounts to fit a decent size tire?

On a more technical note - the lack of front LCA caster to correct for mild lifts is annoying. The stock ride height shouldn't be +3* caster with the cams at zero. Has anyone ever complained that they had too much caster and they couldn't align to spec? The cams have around 6 degrees of caster adjustment potential within camber spec. Instead of going from 0-+6 at stock height, all it would take is to design to go from +2 -+8 at stock height and then the OEM arms could accommodate the common lifts without aftermarket UCAs.

While we're talking front suspension - why is steering flutter still a problem? Again - decades to fix and still not doing it?? Is it an inside joke of some sort of can Toyota engineers not figure it out?
Oh - how hard could it be to use high quality hardware? You know, like cam hardware that doesn't seize in the first 2-3 years. Is that so much to ask? And maybe just toss some decent coatings on the rest of the chassis too.

No AWD or auto transfer case option? Kinda standard in the segment for the higher trims. And it's in the parts bin.

That's a list to start.

On the plus side, the 1794 dropped the pumpkin interior. I never really understood that color interior.

 

[qs933]

Toyota wasn't always this way. The last tundra when released was top of class in pretty much everything. It was the biggest, fastest and most powerful is half ton truck you could buy. It wasn't until the TRX that a truck came out that ran a faster quarter mile. Even the new tundra hybrid is more than 50hp short of what you could buy in 2007.

It was reportedly the fastest, but definitely not top of class "in pretty much everything." There was a Motor Trend comparison in 2007 against the Silverado, where they ranked it second -- they praised the drivetrain and quickness, but docked it points for price (several thousand dollars more comparably equipped), handling, cheap-feeling interior, and carrying less than the Silverado.

The new Tundra hybrid has 437 hp and 583 lb-ft of torque. I'm not a big truck fan, so I don't really follow the Tundra or any of the others, but there was a 2007 Tundra that had 487 hp?

 

[Jetboy]

It was reportedly the fastest, but definitely not top of class "in pretty much everything." There was a Motor Trend comparison in 2007 against the Silverado, where they ranked it second -- they praised the drivetrain and quickness, but docked it points for price (several thousand dollars more comparably equipped), handling, cheap-feeling interior, and carrying less than the Silverado.

The new Tundra hybrid has 437 hp and 583 lb-ft of torque. I'm not a big truck fan, so I don't really follow the Tundra or any of the others, but there was a 2007 Tundra that had 487 hp?

Toyota offered the OEM supercharger. 504hp 550tq. So I guess closer to 70 more ponies.

 

[Annolino122]

It has less power than tundra had in 2007.

It has less power than the 3.5 in the LC 300. Why detune it?

The extra low power tune in the base anti consumer - Toyota literally spent more money to make a shittier tune. That's just a crappy business choice

Both those statements are wrong, it has more power than the 5.7 and 4.6, it also has a lot more torque. Why do you want more horsepower? Torque is what you feel, torque is utility, (reference diesels for more information)

So lack of HP is a lack of a solid argument. If you understand engineering and physics you understand it takes torque to move something, and do it quickly, HP us purely used for maintaining speeds, or reaching "higher" speeds" which most consumers wont do.

It took longer to design than Tesla took to go from the first roadster up to today./QUOTE]

LOL - no. we started designing it back in 2018, it took 1.5 years to design, and 1.5 years to make and install the manufacturing equipment.

Obviously have no insight to the automotive world beyond your garage.

It has a mild hybrid as the top option - battery is small, old tech, and packaged under the rear seat.

No EV or PHEV option. It's 2021... Everyone else has an EV or a 30mpg powertrain. Or both.

The hybrid lacks the utility that Ford offers - and Toyota also offers in the sienna.

The hybrid technology has changed a lot but no to the naked eye who looks at batter location and material types, and unlike other manufacturers, Toyota was a pioneer of hybrid tech.

As for EV, PHEV - why would a company compete in a sector thats not practical? Why would someone want to restrict their camping or offroad truck to a plug in station? you ever try to go cross country in an EV OR PHEV? yeah lol doesnt happen. understand your customer base and build around it. Toyota is working on PHEV and EV on other vehicles, doesnt need to ruin one of the best trucks in the US.

As for the technology, super it may be missing a feature or two but thats nothing that cant be added later - like 75% of the stuff added to Toyotas. I cant tell you the last time i saw a ford rock crawling or overlanding or 4wheeling like you do Toyotas, so IDK man - pick your battles there.

Also not all trim levels or features have been announced, so you have 0 clue as to whats going to be available

It uses a smaller rear axle.

Its already a generation behind in driving tech - no advanced driver assistance. Does it even have auto headlights? (Many 4runners still don't have them...)

33" tires on the off-road model? Do we have to cut the body mounts to fit a decent size tire?

Smaller rear axle but increased strength, what does size matter? advancements in materials have allowed stronger, lighter, and smaller components, so your point is mute.

Its got plenty of driving assistance - but you haven't driven one so that doesn't surprise me that you dont know

CPU (cost per vehicle) its a business in the end - Toyota makes amazing vehicles buy they are not going to load all the vehicles with all the options, its not financially smart.

On a more technical note - the lack of front LCA caster to correct for mild lifts is annoying. The stock ride height shouldn't be +3* caster with the cams at zero. Has anyone ever complained that they had too much caster and they couldn't align to spec? The cams have around 6 degrees of caster adjustment potential within camber spec. Instead of going from 0-+6 at stock height, all it would take is to design to go from +2 -+8 at stock height and then the OEM arms could accommodate the common lifts without aftermarket UCAs.

While we're talking front suspension - why is steering flutter still a problem? Again - decades to fix and still not doing it?? Is it an inside joke of some sort of can Toyota engineers not figure it out?
Oh - how hard could it be to use high quality hardware? You know, like cam hardware that doesn't seize in the first 2-3 years. Is that so much to ask? And maybe just toss some decent coatings on the rest of the chassis too.

Again - youre looking at a small group of people who buy these vehicles and care about camber or caster or toe in/out on their vehicle.

Weird to expect a company to spend millions of dollars on something that doesn't add any value to the vehicle. Toyota is continously fixing problems and producing the most reliable vehicles on the road but you cant please everybody. (obviously)

No AWD or auto transfer case option? Kinda standard in the segment for the higher trims. And it's in the parts bin.

That's a list to start.

On the plus side, the 1794 dropped the pumpkin interior. I never really understood that color interior.

Man your ignorance and aggressiveness towards engineers is awesome. You definitely should be one with all this insight and knowledge. Maybe you should take a look into what it takes to design and manufacture a vehicle, before you go insulting people and making empty comments.

Sorry you hate Toyota Tundras so much... glad youre on a 4Runner Forum

:first:

 

[Annolino122]

Toyota offered the OEM supercharger. 504hp 550tq. So I guess closer to 70 more ponies.

lol doesn't work that way buddy - it had less HP and less torque from the factory , putting a dealer added supercharger from Magnuson isn't a fair comparison.

 

[mideastbeast61]

Man your ignorance and aggressiveness towards engineers is awesome. You definitely should be one with all this insight and knowledge. Maybe you should take a look into what it takes to design and manufacture a vehicle, before you go insulting people and making empty comments.

Sorry you hate Toyota Tundras so much... glad youre on a 4Runner Forum

:first:

Annolino, I have been reading the thread comments and it seems to me that you have information about the 6th gen 4Runner. I am curious what you are even allowed to tell us because nothing you've mentioned is remotely concrete. Curious Toyota did the same thing in 2009 by cutting manufacturing of the 4th gen the year before the 5th gen redesign. Seems like a perfect time to retool and move over to 6th gen production given current supply chain issues

Thoughts and insight?

 

[Jetboy]

Both those statements are wrong, it has more power than the 5.7 and 4.6, it also has a lot more torque. Why do you want more horsepower? Torque is what you feel, torque is utility, (reference diesels for more information)

So lack of HP is a lack of a solid argument. If you understand engineering and physics you understand it takes torque to move something, and do it quickly, HP us purely used for maintaining speeds, or reaching "higher" speeds" which most consumers wont do.

I guess we need to go back to physics 101 here. Torque is not what you "feel" when you are feeling acceleration despite your channeling of the VW commercials from the 90's. Without a time component the value of torque has no meaning in terms of accelerating an object like a truck. Once you add that time component - it's called power. Power applied is what you feel. The way you describe this makes me question whether you're an engineer.

What I think you mean to say is the new engine makes more power at low-medium rpms so drivability is improved, but it's still slower because of the lack of peak power.

LOL - no. we started designing it back in 2018, it took 1.5 years to design, and 1.5 years to make and install the manufacturing equipment.

Obviously have no insight to the automotive world beyond your garage.

So toyota thought in 2007 - hey, this truck is pretty good. It'll be fine until the early 20's, let's all go home and come back in a decade and think about an update? Maybe we'll toss another hood scoop on the hood scoop and give it a custom color mid-cycle for fun.

I think you're proving my point here. This is the refresh that should have happened in 2017 if Toyota was trying to stay current with the market. If it in fact only took a couple years, then it would have been time appropriate to start the re-design around 2010/11 under normal Toyota product cycles. So that would put it on lots in 2015ish.

The hybrid technology has changed a lot but no to the naked eye who looks at batter location and material types, and unlike other manufacturers, Toyota was a pioneer of hybrid tech.

As for EV, PHEV - why would a company compete in a sector thats not practical? Why would someone want to restrict their camping or offroad truck to a plug in station? you ever try to go cross country in an EV OR PHEV? yeah lol doesnt happen. understand your customer base and build around it. Toyota is working on PHEV and EV on other vehicles, doesnt need to ruin one of the best trucks in the US.

As for the technology, super it may be missing a feature or two but thats nothing that cant be added later - like 75% of the stuff added to Toyotas. I cant tell you the last time i saw a ford rock crawling or overlanding or 4wheeling like you do Toyotas, so IDK man - pick your battles there.

Also not all trim levels or features have been announced, so you have 0 clue as to whats going to be available

I think this is just an excuse for "we didn't plan very well so we can't source enough lithium battery cells." The problem with using the cheap batteries is that they are less energy dense and you can't use as much of the name plate rating without dramatically shortening the life. A 1.9kwh nameplate nimh has a lot less useful capacity over repeated cycles than a 1.9kwh lithium battery - ion or iron.

Toyota was a pioneer in the hybrid space. Why did it take so long? And why is the hybrid less functional than Ford's? This would have been groundbreaking in 2007, and still ahead of the market in 2015. In 2022 it's pretty late to the game.

Battery location in the cab is just annoying to take up the space. But also it makes expansion kinda tricky. If Toyota is going to offer a PHEV they can't put the batteries in the same spot. There's not room for 20kwh under that rear seat. And I don't think Toyota can sell this tundra until 2040 without a full EV and PHEV model. I'd be surprised if it makes it to 2030 with current tech. So is this the last tundra generation? Just run it out and cancel the product line? Or is Toyota going to be a little more aggressive in electrification?

As far as driving cross country or camping with a PHEV - what issue would you suggest is the problem for either of those tasks? PHEVs would be the ultimate overlanding platform for many reasons. But only if you go Ford's route where you let customers have access to the battery system for powering auxiliary functions. And it opens up a lot of options for things like deep water fording on EV drive, etc.

Smaller rear axle but increased strength, what does size matter? advancements in materials have allowed stronger, lighter, and smaller components, so your point is mute.

Moot. Also - is it actually increased in strength? If it's strong enough - great. But I'd bet a dollar it's just the same 9.5 from the last gen with a different gear ratio and a locker option from the LC parts bin. We'll see when we get to put one on a bench and compare. And Toyota's still going with the 10.5 on the hybrid. So apparently the strength limit is somewhere between the two?

Its got plenty of driving assistance - but you haven't driven one so that doesn't surprise me that you dont know

Level 2 is becoming industry standard. GM and Ford are already offering it. Does the Tundra have more than lane keep assist and radar cruise? If it does - Toyota should really tell people about it.

CPU (cost per vehicle) its a business in the end - Toyota makes amazing vehicles buy they are not going to load all the vehicles with all the options, its not financially smart.

It's not about shooting for the moon. It's just keeping up with current competitor offerings. The Tundra didn't really get there IMO. It waited too long and did too little.

Again - youre looking at a small group of people who buy these vehicles and care about camber or caster or toe in/out on their vehicle.

Weird to expect a company to spend millions of dollars on something that doesn't add any value to the vehicle. Toyota is continously fixing problems and producing the most reliable vehicles on the road but you cant please everybody. (obviously)

This one has no incremental cost. Just a little critical thinking from the engineering team. Toyota cares about it - it's selling its own lift kit with caster correction upper control arms. There's a dozen aftermarket upper control arms because a lot of people want to fix the geometry. Do the people at Toyota designing the lift not talk to the people designing the chassis?

Man your ignorance and aggressiveness towards engineers is awesome. You definitely should be one with all this insight and knowledge. Maybe you should take a look into what it takes to design and manufacture a vehicle, before you go insulting people and making empty comments.

Sorry you hate Toyota Tundras so much... glad youre on a 4Runner Forum

:first:

Sorry you're offended by an honest take on the Tundra. I don't hate it. I just expected something more after so long. I can't see how this update can possibly carry the model for another 15 years.

 

[Annolino122]

Annolino, I have been reading the thread comments and it seems to me that you have information about the 6th gen 4Runner. I am curious what you are even allowed to tell us because nothing you've mentioned is remotely concrete. Curious Toyota did the same thing in 2009 by cutting manufacturing of the 4th gen the year before the 5th gen redesign. Seems like a perfect time to retool and move over to 6th gen production given current supply chain issues

Thoughts and insight?

Take a look at numbers for 4Runners - they're at all time highs actually. There is no "shortage" of 4runners, the difference (in my mind) is that the 2020+ models brought a lot of features people wanted in their 4Runner. The desire to buy new was at an all time high (why supply is so low) - but compared to previous years it's actually more 4Runnera sold, meaning it was purely a supply issue not a shortage of production.

Then you take this demand for the updated 4Runner and influx of used 4Runners on the market at decent prices, coupled with shortages of other vehicles (Toyotas and other manufacturers) and the prices just rose

But if you take the prices away, there was purely a demand for 4Runners that supply wasn't ready to meet haha

And yes I do have insight but cannot speak in definitely without risking a lawsuit or NDA issue. I have left Toyota for an industry change but that doesn't mean I am not obligated to not give away information

 

[Jetboy]

lol doesn't work that way buddy - it had less HP and less torque from the factory , putting a dealer added supercharger from Magnuson isn't a fair comparison.

Toyota claimed it as "factory performance parts installed through a dealer." And Toyota sent out press models to everyone with the supercharger installed as an OEM option. First Test: 2008 Toyota Tundra TRD Supercharged

It's a gray area. TRD Pro parts added at the port - are they "factory"?

Whatever the case may be - the SC was certainly an option you could go buy at any dealer on a new Tundra and drive away with 504hp.

 

[mideastbeast61]

And yes I do have insight but cannot speak in definitely without risking a lawsuit or NDA issue. I have left Toyota for an industry change but that doesn't mean I am not obligated to not give away information

Lol okayyyy. I am extremely skeptical but whatever I guess. I'll just wait :juggle:

 

[Annolino122]

I guess we need to go back to physics 101 here. Torque is not what you "feel" when you are feeling acceleration despite your channeling of the VW commercials from the 90's. Without a time component the value of torque has no meaning in terms of accelerating an object like a truck. Once you add that time component - it's called power. Power applied is what you feel. The way you describe this makes me question whether you're an engineer.

What I think you mean to say is the new engine makes more power at low-medium rpms so drivability is improved, but it's still slower because of the lack of peak power. If that's not what you mean to try to explain, then you need to revisit physics 101.

lol okay - look up the derivative of acceleration - is "jerk", the change in acceleration. What emulates jerk in a vehicle? Its "jerkiness" for laymans terms? torque.... take a look at a power curve. under 3500rpm (your typical drive) you arent making anymore than 200hp, your "peak" HP desire for a big number does no good for the day to day driving.

So toyota thought in 2007 - hey, this truck is pretty good. It'll be fine until the early 20's, let's all go home and come back in a decade and think about an update? Maybe we'll toss another hood scoop on the hood scoop and give it a custom color mid-cycle for fun.

I think you're proving my point here. This is the refresh that should have happened in 2017 if Toyota was trying to stay current with the market. If it in fact only took a couple years, then it would have been time appropriate to start the re-design around 2010/11 under normal Toyota product cycles. So that would put it on lots in 2015ish.

Yes - why change what's working. make minor updates and work on your TNGA platform for a global change. You're looking at Trucks only - look at Toyota/Lexus as a whole globally, we have changed models constantly almost every year if not 2 vehicles a year.... you cant just magically work on all vehicles at once. my team of engineers worked on 5 launches in 6 years, learn the industry before you go poking holes in what you think is a bad way to conduct business.

I think this is just an excuse for "we didn't plan very well so we can't source enough lithium battery cells." The problem with using the cheap batteries is that they are less energy dense and you can't use as much of the name plate rating without dramatically shortening the life. A 1.9kwh nameplate nimh has a lot less useful capacity over repeated cycles than a 1.9kwh lithium battery - ion or iron.

Toyota was a pioneer in the hybrid space. Why did it take so long? And why is the hybrid less functional than Ford's? This would have been groundbreaking in 2007, and still ahead of the market in 2015. In 2022 it's pretty late to the game.

Battery location in the cab is just annoying to take up the space. But also it makes expansion kinda tricky. If Toyota is going to offer a PHEV they can't put the batteries in the same spot. There's not room for 20kwh under that rear seat. And I don't think Toyota can sell this tundra until 2040 without a full EV and PHEV model. I'd be surprised if it makes it to 2030 with current tech. So is this the last tundra generation? Just run it out and cancel the product line? Or is Toyota going to be a little more aggressive in electrification?

As far as driving cross country or camping with a PHEV - what issue would you suggest is the problem for either of those tasks? PHEVs would be the ultimate overlanding platform for many reasons. But only if you go Ford's route where you let customers have access to the battery system for powering auxiliary functions. And it opens up a lot of options for things like deep water fording on EV drive, etc.

No its ignorance from your position, you have 0 understanding of what goes into engineering or how to produce a vehicle. and who says the tundra has to be the EV/PEHV? Why cant there be another? these are all sorts of possibilities, i mean just design and engineer it right?

You love fords so much, should just go buy one lol

Level 2 is becoming industry standard. GM and Ford are already offering it. Does the Tundra have more than lane keep assist and radar cruise? If it does - Toyota should really tell people about it.

It's not about shooting for the moon. It's just keeping up with current competitor offerings. The Tundra didn't really get there IMO. It waited too long and did too little.

This one has no incremental cost. Just a little critical thinking from the engineering team. Toyota cares about it - it's selling its own lift kit with caster correction upper control arms. There's a dozen aftermarket upper control arms because a lot of people want to fix the geometry. Do the people at Toyota designing the lift not talk to the people designing the chassis?

Sorry you're offended by an honest take on the Tundra. I don't hate it. I just expected something more after so long. I can't see how this update can possibly carry the model for another 15 years.

TSS only utilizes 10-15% of its capability because contrary to popular belief, a lot of the time those level 2 systems are turned off while driving unless its on long trips. And their systems are perfectly capable of self driving, they have put 10+ million miles testing their capability, so that its safe for consumers and works, but again, you make a comment from your chair without research

And im not offended by any stretch, I just love listening to people with 0 experience in the industry come up with ground breaking ideas that should shape the automotive world. Of course engineers have brought up many aspects you haven't even thought about or realized and discussed it but it doesn't mean its practical or logical to add every single item on some random persons wish list to their vehicles.

Toyota hits 90% of its demographics successfully with options that appeal to the masses, and is what people actually use the truck for. the other 10% (insatiable people like you) get to complain about it and go modify it anyways.

Just like my wifes TRD Pro shes building... why spend that much money just to rip everything off? well cause it doesn't work for us (tthe 10%) but for the 90% its MORE than they will EVER use.

So why don't you go ahead and get a degree in engineering, Ill help you get a job at the R&D facility for Toyota, and you alone with all your great ideas can make Toyotas perfect for everybody.

 

[Annolino122]

Lol okayyyy. I am extremely skeptical but whatever I guess. I'll just wait :juggle:

Thats fine lol its not your lively hood at stake so of course you get to wait lol

The new 4runner will be different and has seen delays:

 

[RPDBluemoon]

I find current 4Runner chassis tows 5k lbs + pretty well. It's the drivetrain that's not up to the job. The 1GR is just so anemic in the hills and gets terrible mpg at the same time. A turbo 4 should be better. A modern transmission would be a huge upgrade too.

It's always hard to compare to a capacity to other brands. Because some of them rate them so differently. The best example is the new Land Rover Defender. They claim an 8k lb tow capacity. But the manual says that the hitch is only certified for about 375 lbs. Figure out how to tow 8,000 lb with a 375 lb tongue weight safely...

Unfortunately I think most of the recent experience tells us that Toyota is not going to give us the engines we want. There's no reason they couldn't put that 3.5 twin turbo in the 4Runner. Or something comparable to Ford's 2.7 EcoBoost. But most likely all we're going to get is a turbo 4 and a hybrid that are both under sized for what a lot of us want to do with the 4Runner. That seems to be the formula. The 2.4 in the NX is not impressive in the much lighter vehicle. It'll be pretty disappointing in a 4runner is my guess.

I have no experience with towing a 4Runner (I don't have one) but I have a friend who owns one and has towed a S550 Mustang (which is the one I have). He has told me that the car sags and its pushing the towing capacity of the car. He said if you are going to tow it, don't go for long distances. His other car is a Tacoma and he says that the Tacoma is way more capable which shouldn't be a surprise. He uses an aluminum trailer which is ~1.7k lbs + the Mustang which is ~3,700 lbs.

My other car is a Scion tC and I am will be in the market next year for a new car. The redeeming quality of the 4Runner is that it has good resale value. I'd honestly buy the Lexus GX over the 4Runner for the V8, but it looks so ugly. I'd consider getting a 4th gen V8 but I really dig the 5th gen styling.

I agree that Toyota has fallen way behind compared to the Big 3 in the Truck/Cool SUV market. The Tundra is a step in the right direction, but I agree that it is lacking compared to the competition.

I agree that we should get something like the Twin Turbo V6 for the 4Runner, even if it was limited to the TRD PRO, I'd be fine. I am doubtful that we will see something very exciting, but one can only hope. I would buy a domestic but I always have problems with their cars. Even my Mustang I bought brand new with 2 miles on it has been back to the dealership more times than my tC in 6 years of ownership. First world problems I guess lol. I am planning on getting the TRD PRO so I guess if the 6th gen is really good I can just trade it in at a later time. I just really like the idea of having a capable car that I can take off-roading for fun and also take my other car (Mustang GT350) to the track. I like track racing but its expensive. Off-roading is alot cheaper and easier to get into.

 

[Blackwatch]

It sounds like the 6th gen will come with the 2.4 turbo Lexus engine. I mentioned in another thread that the 2022 Land Cruiser kept the 4.0 litre rather than utilize this Lexus engine. That seems to be a bit of a red flag for me. I would like to know what percentage of LC 300s get the 3.44 tt vs diesel vs 4.0 litre.

 

[Jetboy]

lol okay - look up the derivative of acceleration - is "jerk", the change in acceleration. What emulates jerk in a vehicle? Its "jerkiness" for laymans terms? torque.... take a look at a power curve. under 3500rpm (your typical drive) you arent making anymore than 200hp, your "peak" HP desire for a big number does no good for the day to day driving.



Yes - why change what's working. make minor updates and work on your TNGA platform for a global change. You're looking at Trucks only - look at Toyota/Lexus as a whole globally, we have changed models constantly almost every year if not 2 vehicles a year.... you cant just magically work on all vehicles at once. my team of engineers worked on 5 launches in 6 years, learn the industry before you go poking holes in what you think is a bad way to conduct business.



No its ignorance from your position, you have 0 understanding of what goes into engineering or how to produce a vehicle. and who says the tundra has to be the EV/PEHV? Why cant there be another? these are all sorts of possibilities, i mean just design and engineer it right?

You love fords so much, should just go buy one lol



TSS only utilizes 10-15% of its capability because contrary to popular belief, a lot of the time those level 2 systems are turned off while driving unless its on long trips. And their systems are perfectly capable of self driving, they have put 10+ million miles testing their capability, so that its safe for consumers and works, but again, you make a comment from your chair without research

And im not offended by any stretch, I just love listening to people with 0 experience in the industry come up with ground breaking ideas that should shape the automotive world. Of course engineers have brought up many aspects you haven't even thought about or realized and discussed it but it doesn't mean its practical or logical to add every single item on some random persons wish list to their vehicles.

Toyota hits 90% of its demographics successfully with options that appeal to the masses, and is what people actually use the truck for. the other 10% (insatiable people like you) get to complain about it and go modify it anyways.

Just like my wifes TRD Pro shes building... why spend that much money just to rip everything off? well cause it doesn't work for us (tthe 10%) but for the 90% its MORE than they will EVER use.

So why don't you go ahead and get a degree in engineering, Ill help you get a job at the R&D facility for Toyota, and you alone with all your great ideas can make Toyotas perfect for everybody.

You're still talking about force with a time component. That is called power. Adding a second time derivative - is not torque. I don't believe there is a formal name for the time derivative of power in this context. The closest analog in electronics is called the slew rate. But I'm not sure that's relevant to this discussion. We're talking about power.

Both the V35A and the hybrid system should deliver really great low rpm power. Obviously the long stroke V35A is a low rpm design. The electric side is so limited though. It can deliver a 40hp boost for maybe 2 miles at highway speed? So it's not really helpful on things like pulling a trailer on a long grade. With a 10kwh or 20kwh battery it could be a game changer in terms of offering diesel comparable performance towing. It's so close, but yet seemingly so far away. That's the sort of thing I think consumers were hoping for. And were talking about around ~$1k in battery cells here plus the balance of system that's mostly already in the works.

Product cadence is an issue despite frequent redesigns of a few models. Toyotas BOF products are stale. It's not just me. Dealers are complaining too. Ted Ogawa has publicly acknowledged that product cadence is a big issue at Lexus. Cadence and cost competitiveness were the two biggest problems according to him. Hopefully he's trying to fix it. I'm sure Toyota can do more than one thing at a time.

The A750F is a pretty good example. I think it's the only 5AT still offered by anyone. It's odd that it still only uses 5 gears. Just a minor mid-cycle update in the 4R to use all 6 gears and put a 4.56 gearset in the diffs. It would be very popular for almost no cost. Final drive would be nearly identical. Samgong already made them for the 8.2 diff IIRC. And they told me they can cut a few other ratios from existing forgings for me so you could go 4.30 and have a little taller gear at the top along with the lower range.

"Its hard" and "you don't understand how hard it is" seems to be the core of why your telling me Toyota isn't doing more. That may be true. But when everyone else is doing it or has already done it, it's kinda hard to fall back on the justification of "it's just too hard for us." Sometimes doing hard things is necessary in a competitive market.

Nothing on my list is unusual or exceptional. These are mostly industry standard product offerings that do not appear from the initial launch to be offered on the Tundra. And almost all of which are already offered on other Toyota models.

Are we going to see Teammate in the Tundra or does that have to wait for the 2040 update?

I already have a degree in physics. An applied science degree like ME might be incrementally useful, but I'm not sure the time would be well used on an undergrad degree. I think changes at Toyota to improve the product cadence and innovation need to start at the C level. And there appears to be minimal interest in the BOF product line.

 

[Annolino122]

You're still talking about force with a time component. That is called power. Adding a second time derivative - is not torque. I don't believe there is a formal name for the time derivative of power in this context. The closest analog in electronics is called the slew rate. But I'm not sure that's relevant to this discussion. We're talking about power.

Both the V35A and the hybrid system should deliver really great low rpm power. Obviously the long stroke V35A is a low rpm design. The electric side is so limited though. It can deliver a 40hp boost for maybe 2 miles at highway speed? So it's not really helpful on things like pulling a trailer on a long grade. With a 10kwh or 20kwh battery it could be a game changer in terms of offering diesel comparable performance towing. It's so close, but yet seemingly so far away. That's the sort of thing I think consumers were hoping for. And were talking about around ~$1k in battery cells here plus the balance of system that's mostly already in the works.

Product cadence is an issue despite frequent redesigns of a few models. Toyotas BOF products are stale. It's not just me. Dealers are complaining too. Ted Ogawa has publicly acknowledged that product cadence is a big issue at Lexus. Cadence and cost competitiveness were the two biggest problems according to him. Hopefully he's trying to fix it. I'm sure Toyota can do more than one thing at a time.

The A750F is a pretty good example. I think it's the only 5AT still offered by anyone. It's odd that it still only uses 5 gears. Just a minor mid-cycle update in the 4R to use all 6 gears and put a 4.56 gearset in the diffs. It would be very popular for almost no cost. Final drive would be nearly identical. Samgong already made them for the 8.2 diff IIRC. And they told me they can cut a few other ratios from existing forgings for me so you could go 4.30 and have a little taller gear at the top along with the lower range.

"Its hard" and "you don't understand how hard it is" seems to be the core of why your telling me Toyota isn't doing more. That may be true. But when everyone else is doing it or has already done it, it's kinda hard to fall back on the justification of "it's just too hard for us." Sometimes doing hard things is necessary in a competitive market.

Nothing on my list is unusual or exceptional. These are mostly industry standard product offerings that do not appear from the initial launch to be offered on the Tundra. And almost all of which are already offered on other Toyota models.

Are we going to see Teammate in the Tundra or does that have to wait for the 2040 update?

I already have a degree in physics. An applied science degree like ME might be incrementally useful, but I'm not sure the time would be well used on an undergrad degree. I think changes at Toyota to improve the product cadence and innovation need to start at the C level. And there appears to be minimal interest in the BOF product line.

Mhm mhm mhm :thumb3: all valid points, good work. You win.