[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Toyota Recalls Certain Toyota Tundra and Lexus GX and LX Vehicles - V35A Redux (Page 3 of 3)
|
Quoted: Not sure if this would actually prevent this issue but you will never convince me a brand new engine doesn't need an oil/filter change pretty much right away with another a few k miles later before you go to a 5k interval. Buying a brand new vehicle and going 10k before the first oil change seems like madness to me. I took my new truck back in for an oil change with less than 500 miles on the odometer. I had two years of free oil changes included with purchase and the service advisors were losing their minds. They thought I was crazy to do it, it wasn't needed, it wouldn't count under my two free years, on and on. After several minutes of this I just told them to do it anyway and if it wouldn't count toward my free oil changes I'd pay for it myself. It may have been a complete waste of oil and a filter. Or, it could have gotten metal shavings out that didn't belong. Either way, about ten years later it's going strong and I'm glad I did it. No new engine *should* need it, and an early oil change may not have saved these new engines, but it was cheap insurance for me. |
|
Quoted: Watched it yesterday. No way this is machine debris. Those rod bearings were fine and the mains were trashed. Cams looked good also. Quoted: Watched it yesterday. No way this is machine debris. Those rod bearings were fine and the mains were trashed. Cams looked good also. Quoted: There really isn't one. The engine appeared to be in good shape other than it spun two main bearings. So like most every other recall bracket V35A that failed. Tho I've seen some with wider damage. There's more than a few explanations of why one and three seem to be primary failures. Ahmed - Car Care Nut is the one that's most accessible, |
|
We will try to keep the 2019 Sequoia and 2015 GX forever. My kids will drive the 1996 LC and 2012 Avalon for a while as well. I thought about the new LC or newish LS, but man, too much for not much, no inventory, faux scarcity and no reliability. 2020s Toyota/Lexus can get fucked. |
|
Quoted: There really isn't one. The engine appeared to be in good shape other than it spun two main bearings. Quoted: Quoted: So hampered by connectivity I've only watched in broken series - but I'm not sure what we are seeing here that we havnt seen prior? Mains Whats the aha moment? There really isn't one. The engine appeared to be in good shape other than it spun two main bearings. This. The damage was limited to ONLY those 2 things. Let's say there was casting sand in a particular place, I would expect the damage to be worse in those places, but I don't understand how the damage would be limited to ONLY those places. Oil travels and takes the debris with it. I suppose it's possible after the bearing the oil (and debris) goes straight to the oil filter and gets filtered out but I don't know the oil path in that motor. Upon further thought, there was more than a small amount of glitter in the oil pan indicating the oil filter did not take all the particles from the oil (some settled vs being filtered out). |
Since we're posting tear down vids, toe of my favs that get flopped out whenever there's: Lexus Turbo Engine Blown at 66,000 Miles? What Happened? (A) a Turbo haters thread. End up it was 46k OCI that did it in   Toyota Engine DESTROYS Itself at 69k Miles! (B) General Toyota hate. Bigbore - I get you are just providing more information, which is always useful. But YouTubers need to drive clicks so content ends up kinda clickbaity. Many take away things from titles that aren't born out in the vid. Tho somtimes they are. I thought for sure I'd find some Perry Mason moment in that vid. Then I thought I missed it. Becuse I can't conceive how someone can provide a hot vid that merely reflects all the various finds previous. But that's why I'm not making millions on YT  Still all are anecdotal and we don't always get information like the lack of maintenance in Ahmeds first vid. I do like and respect him, but he's competing in the same low effort marketplace the rest are. So even he succumbs to the title shading. I thought we might have garnered some insight from the class action filed in July but . . . Attached File |
|
Quoted: This. The damage was limited to ONLY those 2 things. Let's say there was casting sand in a particular place, I would expect the damage to be worse in those places, but I don't understand how the damage would be limited to ONLY those places. Oil travels and takes the debris with it. I suppose it's possible after the bearing the oil (and debris) goes straight to the oil filter and gets filtered out but I don't know the oil path in that motor. Upon further thought, there was more than a small amount of glitter in the oil pan indicating the oil filter did not take all the particles from the oil (some settled vs being filtered out). There's that kind of metal laden oil pocket lodged in the head in the video and damage noticeable on cams a few other places. Hard to inspect via vid. There's a good number of photos of out there of inventory short blocks scoped with internal debris and burrs still attached at and in passages up travel from those bearings. So despite various speculative assurances it can't be - from cursory observations of third party evidence - the only positive indication is this debris. Is there something else going on? Possibly, but saying it 'can't be' isn't really proof. In my personal experience I've observed where complex systems have failed. I've been assured "it could not be" X, so it was discarded. In the end, it was exactly X, but resulting in some manner/from exception, that it was very difficult to suss out actual causation and was undiscoverable with less than exacting inspection initially. I wouldn't bet my ass it hasn't been something beyond debris, but I've been shown nothing to hang my hat on that it's anything else. |
|
This is what happens when you don’t do a 500mi break in oil change. *I’m obviously making a joke in this case. But, the only new purchase vehicle I have ever had motor trouble with was a vehicle that I didn’t do a 500mi oc on. Now, it was a Ford, so the oil change probably wouldn’t have helped. |
|
Quoted: If it's in the passages/ leading directly to those bearings. There it's embedded in the bearing coatings, initiate metal erosion, and eventually those particles continue the work. Failures in this mode are like BKs - slowly slowly slowly then all at once. I'd love to see a few 5-10k mile examples where the bearings are in a very early state of damage. There's that kind of metal laden oil pocket lodged in the head in the video and damage noticeable on cams a few other places. Hard to inspect via vid. There's a good number of photos of out there of inventory short blocks scoped with internal debris and burrs still attached at and in passages up travel from those bearings. So despite various speculative assurances it can't be - from cursory observations of third party evidence - the only positive indication is this debris. Is there something else going on? Possibly, but saying it 'can't be' isn't really proof. In my personal experience I've observed where complex systems have failed. I've been assured "it could not be" X, so it was discarded. In the end, it was exactly X, but resulting in some manner/from exception, that it was very difficult to suss out actual causation and was undiscoverable with less than exacting inspection initially. I wouldn't bet my ass it hasn't been something beyond debris, but I've been shown nothing to hang my hat on that it's anything else. Quoted: Quoted: This. The damage was limited to ONLY those 2 things. Let's say there was casting sand in a particular place, I would expect the damage to be worse in those places, but I don't understand how the damage would be limited to ONLY those places. Oil travels and takes the debris with it. I suppose it's possible after the bearing the oil (and debris) goes straight to the oil filter and gets filtered out but I don't know the oil path in that motor. Upon further thought, there was more than a small amount of glitter in the oil pan indicating the oil filter did not take all the particles from the oil (some settled vs being filtered out). There's that kind of metal laden oil pocket lodged in the head in the video and damage noticeable on cams a few other places. Hard to inspect via vid. There's a good number of photos of out there of inventory short blocks scoped with internal debris and burrs still attached at and in passages up travel from those bearings. So despite various speculative assurances it can't be - from cursory observations of third party evidence - the only positive indication is this debris. Is there something else going on? Possibly, but saying it 'can't be' isn't really proof. In my personal experience I've observed where complex systems have failed. I've been assured "it could not be" X, so it was discarded. In the end, it was exactly X, but resulting in some manner/from exception, that it was very difficult to suss out actual causation and was undiscoverable with less than exacting inspection initially. I wouldn't bet my ass it hasn't been something beyond debris, but I've been shown nothing to hang my hat on that it's anything else. One would think if this was a manufacturing process defect it would be fairly easy to isolate with the tear down of engines straight off the manufacturing and they would have fixed it by now. It's in their best interest to do so. The fact that it continues into 2025 leads to the conclusion it's more than that. There are even reports of replaced long blocks failing. Toyota is really doing themselves no favors with how they're handling this. The refusal to recall the hybrid power trains and requiring those to go through a short block rebuild is not a good look. I get it things happen and engines are complicated systems but for a company that is charging a premium based on a reputation of long term reliability they risk becoming just another in the pack. |
|
Quoted: One would think if this was a manufacturing process defect it would be fairly easy to isolate with the tear down of engines straight off the manufacturing and they would have fixed it by now. It's in their best interest to do so. The fact that it continues into 2025 leads to the conclusion it's more than that. There are even reports of replaced long blocks failing. Toyota is really doing themselves no favors with how they're handling this. The refusal to recall the hybrid power trains and requiring those to go through a short block rebuild is not a good look. I get it things happen and engines are complicated systems but for a company that is charging a premium based on a reputation of long term reliability they risk becoming just another in the pack. Previously discussed the "*These vehicles received repairs with affected service part engines." notation on various NHSTA dealer forms.It's an interesting conclusion. But, as in my post directly prior, what's "more" than the ostensible reason put forth by Toyota under law? The Vermont class action didn't proceed. Generally if there's opportunity, which actual evidence beyond Toyota's notification to the NHSTA would certainly be, why wasn't that opportunity taken? Until someone - including Toyota - indicates a failure mode other than described, it's at best idle speculation. I'm down for actual details that would explain the failure pattern, defect distribution, etc laying out with objective analytical points. "Has to be something else" doesn't do it for me, tho open to further proof. I've mirrored your disappointment on i-Force MAX. Tho I realize the legal rationale under recall provisions (no immediate loss of motive power, nor control) I'm not alone when I've indicated there should be a program. But they are being remedied under warranty and I've heard of goodwill cases outside warranty period. Still, like you, my belief is it should be a formal program. By replacing 100% of bracket engines, instead of inspection triggered replacement and doing all of this in a much shorter period than other mfgs they do show some difference. When compared to Ford, Nissan, GM, Mazda or MB, some credit should be granted for effort and scope. Stellantis has, similarly, 113K units with sand contamination issues with 2023-2025 Jeep Grand Cherokee4XE and 2024-2025 Jeep Wrangler 4XE announced two weeks ago. I've not seen a single mention here in GD. Perhaps I've missed it - and third recall on those motive systems. Toyota's recall garnered at least 5 threads, and many more subsequently. Maybe it's expectation, which would run against your concern of Toyota risking reputation.  Tho Toyota has had a similar engine interlude, they've failed to join the overall recall levels seen recently, nor has any of the other public relative quality measures suffered. Nor sales 14.2% Sept, 15.9% Q3 and YTD bit over 8%. Tundra is 7k units behind last year tho. Peeps who pay attention, including myself, having detailed reasons, are bothered. Most of the buying public do not. So I'm unsure of the impact and that's little indication of issue.mTho by measuring GD attention alone, you'd expect catastrophic effects. But there's nothing. Even reputational. But yes - despite, I share your sentiment and it's sad buyers don't. |
|
Quoted: You've recapped previous comments well . Previously discussed the "*These vehicles received repairs with affected service part engines." notation on various NHSTA dealer inform. It's an interesting conclusion. But as in my post directly prior, what is it that "more" than the ostensible reason put forth by Toyota under law? The Vermont class action didn't proceed. Generally if there's opportunity, which something beyond Toyota's notification to the NHSTA would certainly be, why wasn't that opportunity taken? Until someone - including Toyota - indicates a failure mode other than described, it's at best idle speculation. I've mirrored your disappointment on i-Force MAX. Tho I realize the legal rationale under recall provisions (there won't. Be loss of motive power nor control) I've. It been alone when I've indicated there should be a program. But they are being remedied under warranty and I've heard of goodwill cases outside warmth period. Still. Like you, my belief is it should be a formal program. But by replacing 100% of bracket engines, instead of inspection triggered replacement and doing all of this in a much shorter period than Other mfgs. When collared to Ford, Nissan, GM, Mazda or MB, some credit shouted be granted for effort and scope. Stellantis has, similarly, 113K units with sand contamination issues with 2023-2025 Jeep Grand Cherokee4XE and 2024-2025 Jeep Wrangler 4XE Lunt I've not seen a single mention here in GD. Perhaps I've missed it - and third recall on those motive systems. Toyota's recall garnered at least 5 threads. Maybe it's expectation, which would run against your concern of Toyota risking reputation. Toyota has had a similar engine interlude, they've failed to join the recall levels seen recently, nor has any of the other public relative quality measures suffered. Nor sales 14.2% Sept, 15.9% Q3 and YTD bit over 8%. Tundra is 7k units behind last year tho. Peeps who pay attention, including myself, having detailed reasons, are bothered. Most of the buying public do not. So I'm unsure of the impact and songwriting three wasn't indication of issue,. Tho by measuring GD attention alone, you'd expect catastrophic effects. But there's nothing. Even reputational. But yes despite, I share your sentiment and it's sad buyers don't. Quoted: Quoted: One would think if this was a manufacturing process defect it would be fairly easy to isolate with the tear down of engines straight off the manufacturing and they would have fixed it by now. It's in their best interest to do so. The fact that it continues into 2025 leads to the conclusion it's more than that. There are even reports of replaced long blocks failing. Toyota is really doing themselves no favors with how they're handling this. The refusal to recall the hybrid power trains and requiring those to go through a short block rebuild is not a good look. I get it things happen and engines are complicated systems but for a company that is charging a premium based on a reputation of long term reliability they risk becoming just another in the pack. It's an interesting conclusion. But as in my post directly prior, what is it that "more" than the ostensible reason put forth by Toyota under law? The Vermont class action didn't proceed. Generally if there's opportunity, which something beyond Toyota's notification to the NHSTA would certainly be, why wasn't that opportunity taken? Until someone - including Toyota - indicates a failure mode other than described, it's at best idle speculation. I've mirrored your disappointment on i-Force MAX. Tho I realize the legal rationale under recall provisions (there won't. Be loss of motive power nor control) I've. It been alone when I've indicated there should be a program. But they are being remedied under warranty and I've heard of goodwill cases outside warmth period. Still. Like you, my belief is it should be a formal program. But by replacing 100% of bracket engines, instead of inspection triggered replacement and doing all of this in a much shorter period than Other mfgs. When collared to Ford, Nissan, GM, Mazda or MB, some credit shouted be granted for effort and scope. Stellantis has, similarly, 113K units with sand contamination issues with 2023-2025 Jeep Grand Cherokee4XE and 2024-2025 Jeep Wrangler 4XE Lunt I've not seen a single mention here in GD. Perhaps I've missed it - and third recall on those motive systems. Toyota's recall garnered at least 5 threads. Maybe it's expectation, which would run against your concern of Toyota risking reputation. Toyota has had a similar engine interlude, they've failed to join the recall levels seen recently, nor has any of the other public relative quality measures suffered. Nor sales 14.2% Sept, 15.9% Q3 and YTD bit over 8%. Tundra is 7k units behind last year tho. Peeps who pay attention, including myself, having detailed reasons, are bothered. Most of the buying public do not. So I'm unsure of the impact and songwriting three wasn't indication of issue,. Tho by measuring GD attention alone, you'd expect catastrophic effects. But there's nothing. Even reputational. But yes despite, I share your sentiment and it's sad buyers don't. Did a drunk AI write this?
|
|
Quoted: Did a drunk AI write this? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: One would think if this was a manufacturing process defect it would be fairly easy to isolate with the tear down of engines straight off the manufacturing and they would have fixed it by now. It's in their best interest to do so. The fact that it continues into 2025 leads to the conclusion it's more than that. There are even reports of replaced long blocks failing. Toyota is really doing themselves no favors with how they're handling this. The refusal to recall the hybrid power trains and requiring those to go through a short block rebuild is not a good look. I get it things happen and engines are complicated systems but for a company that is charging a premium based on a reputation of long term reliability they risk becoming just another in the pack. It's an interesting conclusion. But as in my post directly prior, what is it that "more" than the ostensible reason put forth by Toyota under law? The Vermont class action didn't proceed. Generally if there's opportunity, which something beyond Toyota's notification to the NHSTA would certainly be, why wasn't that opportunity taken? Until someone - including Toyota - indicates a failure mode other than described, it's at best idle speculation. I've mirrored your disappointment on i-Force MAX. Tho I realize the legal rationale under recall provisions (there won't. Be loss of motive power nor control) I've. It been alone when I've indicated there should be a program. But they are being remedied under warranty and I've heard of goodwill cases outside warmth period. Still. Like you, my belief is it should be a formal program. But by replacing 100% of bracket engines, instead of inspection triggered replacement and doing all of this in a much shorter period than Other mfgs. When collared to Ford, Nissan, GM, Mazda or MB, some credit shouted be granted for effort and scope. Stellantis has, similarly, 113K units with sand contamination issues with 2023-2025 Jeep Grand Cherokee4XE and 2024-2025 Jeep Wrangler 4XE Lunt I've not seen a single mention here in GD. Perhaps I've missed it - and third recall on those motive systems. Toyota's recall garnered at least 5 threads. Maybe it's expectation, which would run against your concern of Toyota risking reputation. Toyota has had a similar engine interlude, they've failed to join the recall levels seen recently, nor has any of the other public relative quality measures suffered. Nor sales 14.2% Sept, 15.9% Q3 and YTD bit over 8%. Tundra is 7k units behind last year tho. Peeps who pay attention, including myself, having detailed reasons, are bothered. Most of the buying public do not. So I'm unsure of the impact and songwriting three wasn't indication of issue,. Tho by measuring GD attention alone, you'd expect catastrophic effects. But there's nothing. Even reputational. But yes despite, I share your sentiment and it's sad buyers don't. Did a drunk AI write this? |
|
Quoted: I'm barely awake and voice to text sucks for me generally, worse with the chatter here. I'm worthless without editors anyway . Somewhat revised Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: One would think if this was a manufacturing process defect it would be fairly easy to isolate with the tear down of engines straight off the manufacturing and they would have fixed it by now. It's in their best interest to do so. The fact that it continues into 2025 leads to the conclusion it's more than that. There are even reports of replaced long blocks failing. Toyota is really doing themselves no favors with how they're handling this. The refusal to recall the hybrid power trains and requiring those to go through a short block rebuild is not a good look. I get it things happen and engines are complicated systems but for a company that is charging a premium based on a reputation of long term reliability they risk becoming just another in the pack. It's an interesting conclusion. But as in my post directly prior, what is it that "more" than the ostensible reason put forth by Toyota under law? The Vermont class action didn't proceed. Generally if there's opportunity, which something beyond Toyota's notification to the NHSTA would certainly be, why wasn't that opportunity taken? Until someone - including Toyota - indicates a failure mode other than described, it's at best idle speculation. I've mirrored your disappointment on i-Force MAX. Tho I realize the legal rationale under recall provisions (there won't. Be loss of motive power nor control) I've. It been alone when I've indicated there should be a program. But they are being remedied under warranty and I've heard of goodwill cases outside warmth period. Still. Like you, my belief is it should be a formal program. But by replacing 100% of bracket engines, instead of inspection triggered replacement and doing all of this in a much shorter period than Other mfgs. When collared to Ford, Nissan, GM, Mazda or MB, some credit shouted be granted for effort and scope. Stellantis has, similarly, 113K units with sand contamination issues with 2023-2025 Jeep Grand Cherokee4XE and 2024-2025 Jeep Wrangler 4XE Lunt I've not seen a single mention here in GD. Perhaps I've missed it - and third recall on those motive systems. Toyota's recall garnered at least 5 threads. Maybe it's expectation, which would run against your concern of Toyota risking reputation. Toyota has had a similar engine interlude, they've failed to join the recall levels seen recently, nor has any of the other public relative quality measures suffered. Nor sales 14.2% Sept, 15.9% Q3 and YTD bit over 8%. Tundra is 7k units behind last year tho. Peeps who pay attention, including myself, having detailed reasons, are bothered. Most of the buying public do not. So I'm unsure of the impact and songwriting three wasn't indication of issue,. Tho by measuring GD attention alone, you'd expect catastrophic effects. But there's nothing. Even reputational. But yes despite, I share your sentiment and it's sad buyers don't. Did a drunk AI write this? I was laughing as I figured you were tired. [I'm on my 8th Yota so it's not like I hate them or anything.] I am a big fan of NA low stressed engines in trucks though. Toyota has a lot of experience in turbos around the world but something is off with some of the ones that are US models. I just hope the 4 banger Taco/LC/4Runner doesn't have issues crop up. Holding onto my 15 Taco now for a bit to see how the replacement turbo 4 does as I was never a fan from day one on the 3.5 engine/trans combo and never will be. [which is why I bought the last year of the 4.0] |
|
Looks like several people were good this year and are getting twin turbo V6 engines for Christmas! Attached File |
|
Quoted: So whats the bottom line on these GEN3 Tundras? I've been on the fence with needing a newer truck and I always thought Toyota was the king of reliability. @Alacrity Bottom line is they are awesome, Hella fun to drive, and get great mileage. I don’t miss any of my V-8’s anymore honestly. In fact, every single engine I own now is a V6 or an in-line six.. that’s kind of weird to think about actually… The TLDR; is A few people broke a V 35a’s and the world stopped spinning. Yet in every single town, there’s a pile of broken eco-boosts with cam phaser issues, the never-ending list of Ford recalls, and all the V-8s with AFM systems that are fucked up and nobody cares…. And the gm’s that eat themselves….So yeah…. This whole conversation might be one of the most over blown Toyota hate topics ever. I drove a max force V8 the other day… God, I forgot how damn slow them things are compared to the V 35A is. Y’all can keep them. Seriously. Every time I jump in a naturally aspirated vehicle these days they feel like total boat anchors. Slow as hell, no torque, shitty shifting, the whole bit. Everybody likes to shit on all this new technology, yet everybody seems to completely gloss over the fact that it is way fucking better and literally every measurement imaginable other than the check you have to stroke to buy the damn thing. My Wagoneer is the same way. What a fucking incredible experience to drive that machine. It’s unreal. It’s a marvel of technology. A 6000+ pound vehicle has no business being that absurdly fast. Yet, all we hear is her turbos are bad, and they’re little engines are “pushed”, and all the other stupid ass derp that people keep repeating to cope. These feel about like the least pushed engines I’ve ever experienced. I’ve come to the conclusion that I just like things that are bad ass. I don’t even give a fuck who makes it. I like quality and I like shit that works really damn well that gives a great experience. Sitting in a V35A truck right now with 54,000 miles on the clock. Two turbos, two liquid intercoolers, a stupid fast 10 speed with air ride rear keeping the hops away on those dashes from a stop. Lots of idling and nothing but a diet of 85 octane fuel…. lol.. haterz gonna hate I guess. This shit was race car fucking parts 20 years ago and nobody seems to appreciate the fact that we get to have this kind of cool shit in a daily now, with a fucking warranty that runs on regular fucking fuel. And yet people are longing for slower, less efficient…. Just because…. Holy fucking shit what a great time to be alive. Seriously. We get to drive around a vehicles that make serious power on pump fuel and I get to talk to the fucking thing to make phone calls, texts and create reminders and calendar events for myself without ever looking at my phone. Count me out I guess. I have no desire to go backwards. All I’m gonna say is probably don’t drive one unless you’re ready to pull the trigger. It’ll ruin you. It sure ruined me. |
|
Quoted: So whats the bottom line on these GEN3 Tundras? I've been on the fence with needing a newer truck and I always thought Toyota was the king of reliability. @Alacrity My brother in law had a 2021 Tundra, last of the V8's. He traded it in on a new one about 8 months ago. He has already gotten rid of the new one, and got a 2006 Dodge 1 ton diesel to replace it. According to him, if you're running around town/ going to the mall with the new ones, they're fine. If you're trying to tow a medium sized excavator as he does most days, not so much. His 2021 Tundra did it and did it well, but the 2025 he bought was "a gutless pig" when he towed with it. He said the new trucks are not for work, they are for cruising the city and highway. He got the Dodge because the 2021-down Tundras in good shape are what everyone wants now, and if you find one in good shape they are $$$$. He also said he wanted simpler and more reliable (cummins are pretty simple), and that was more important to him than comfort/ bells and whistles. He said had he been able to get HIS 2021 Tundra back he would have in a heartbeat, but it was long gone. I'll stick to my 83 and 95 GMC's. They work fine for my uses and I'm not someone who needs the latest greatest thing to impress my bros. The wife has a 2019 GX and asked about getting an LX/Sequoia/GX550. I told her no. The tiny turbo'd engines would probably be fine for her grocery getting but I never buy a new design until enough time has passed to work out the bugs, and obviously with the recall in the OP, the bugs are still quite prevalent in the new designs. |
|
Quoted: My brother in law had a 2021 Tundra, last of the V8's. He traded it in on a new one about 8 months ago. He has already gotten rid of the new one, and got a 2006 Dodge 1 ton diesel to replace it. According to him, if you're running around town/ going to the mall with the new ones, they're fine. If you're trying to tow a medium sized excavator as he does most days, not so much. His 2021 Tundra did it and did it well, but the 2025 he bought was "a gutless pig" when he towed with it. He said the new trucks are not for work, they are for cruising the city and highway. He got the Dodge because the 2021-down Tundras in good shape are what everyone wants now, and if you find one in good shape they are $$$$. He also said he wanted simpler and more reliable (cummins are pretty simple), and that was more important to him than comfort/ bells and whistles. He said had he been able to get HIS 2021 Tundra back he would have in a heartbeat, but it was long gone. I'll stick to my 83 and 95 GMC's. They work fine for my uses and I'm not someone who needs the latest greatest thing to impress my bros. The wife has a 2019 GX and asked about getting an LX/Sequoia/GX550. I told her no. The tiny turbo'd engines would probably be fine for her grocery getting but I never buy a new design until enough time has passed to work out the bugs, and obviously with the recall in the OP, the bugs are still quite prevalent in the new designs. Interesting comparison: 1 ton diesel to a half ton gasser truck. Going to guess he bought the wrong vehicle type not the vehicle itself. |
|
Quoted: Interesting comparison: 1 ton diesel to a half ton gasser truck. Going to guess he bought the wrong vehicle type not the vehicle itself. I mentioned that was a big change. He said the old Tundra did the job fine, but that the newer one couldn't begin to do it, and since he was "downgrading" he figured he'd get something older, heavier, and simpler. But given his direct comparison to a 2021 Tundra with the 5.7, and a new Tundra with the squirrel in a cage on meth, for towing, there was no comparison. That was having owned both. He said my wife would probably be fine getting groceries with the current offerings. I'd rather find a 2021ish LX570 for her with low miles. |
|
Quoted: Interesting comparison: 1 ton diesel to a half ton gasser truck. Going to guess he bought the wrong vehicle type not the vehicle itself. Quoted: Quoted: My brother in law had a 2021 Tundra, last of the V8's. He traded it in on a new one about 8 months ago. He has already gotten rid of the new one, and got a 2006 Dodge 1 ton diesel to replace it. According to him, if you're running around town/ going to the mall with the new ones, they're fine. If you're trying to tow a medium sized excavator as he does most days, not so much. His 2021 Tundra did it and did it well, but the 2025 he bought was "a gutless pig" when he towed with it. He said the new trucks are not for work, they are for cruising the city and highway. He got the Dodge because the 2021-down Tundras in good shape are what everyone wants now, and if you find one in good shape they are $$$$. He also said he wanted simpler and more reliable (cummins are pretty simple), and that was more important to him than comfort/ bells and whistles. He said had he been able to get HIS 2021 Tundra back he would have in a heartbeat, but it was long gone. I'll stick to my 83 and 95 GMC's. They work fine for my uses and I'm not someone who needs the latest greatest thing to impress my bros. The wife has a 2019 GX and asked about getting an LX/Sequoia/GX550. I told her no. The tiny turbo'd engines would probably be fine for her grocery getting but I never buy a new design until enough time has passed to work out the bugs, and obviously with the recall in the OP, the bugs are still quite prevalent in the new designs. Interesting comparison: 1 ton diesel to a half ton gasser truck. Going to guess he bought the wrong vehicle type not the vehicle itself. And TBI chevys… If we’re going to do the good old days of Chevy trucks, can’t we at least get into the vortec’s? Those were way better than the TBI throttle body ignition engines… I do have a soft spot for Tonawanda 454 TBI trucks though… About the tiny turbo engines… Ford eco-boost is a 15-year-old idea… can you point to the millions of broken ones? Ford sells about three-quarter million F150s a year. Seems like quite a lot of them are eco-boosts. So are there or are there not millions of broken Eco boosts out there? |
|
Quoted: I mentioned that was a big change. He said the old Tundra did the job fine, but that the newer one couldn't begin to do it, and since he was "downgrading" he figured he'd get something older, heavier, and simpler. But given his direct comparison to a 2021 Tundra with the 5.7, and a new Tundra with the squirrel in a cage on meth, for towing, there was no comparison. That was having owned both. He said my wife would probably be fine getting groceries with the current offerings. I'd rather find a 2021ish LX570 for her with low miles. Quoted: Quoted: Interesting comparison: 1 ton diesel to a half ton gasser truck. Going to guess he bought the wrong vehicle type not the vehicle itself. I mentioned that was a big change. He said the old Tundra did the job fine, but that the newer one couldn't begin to do it, and since he was "downgrading" he figured he'd get something older, heavier, and simpler. But given his direct comparison to a 2021 Tundra with the 5.7, and a new Tundra with the squirrel in a cage on meth, for towing, there was no comparison. That was having owned both. He said my wife would probably be fine getting groceries with the current offerings. I'd rather find a 2021ish LX570 for her with low miles. Isn’t that what the hybrid is for; making up the difference in torque? |
|
tl;dr: bullshit The non-hybrid V6 makes essentially the same horsepower and torque as the 5.7 V8 and the hybrid shits all over the V8 in both horsepower and torque. A stock 2006 Dodge won't ever see the sunny side of 300 horsepower. Its saving grace is the straight six diesel torque, and even then it might have 100-120 pounds more than the V8 and V6 non-hybrids. Now a 20 year old 3/4 or 1-ton is going to tow heavier trailers better but the delta isn't as large as this friend makes it sound. Toyota may claim up to 12,500 towing capacity but most Tundras are well under 10k. If he bought a Tundra to tow 10k regularly it wasn't the powertrain that was lacking. Source: I have around 2.5 million miles with a trailer behind me, I drove 16 different new Tundras of all flavors last week, and my daily driver is a 200 Series Land Cruiser with the 5.7. |
|
I have 15K on my replacement engine. I sent in a sample for a UOA with 5K miles on the oil. I change every 5K. Total wear metals are 4.4 Oxidation is 16.67 but I have 2.23 fuel dilution, which lowered my 5-30 viscosity to 8.35 @100 degrees DI engines have fuel dilution. If my 30 was diluted down to 20 at 5k miles, if I used a 20 at factory recommended 10K intervals would that be equivalent using 0W-10 at that point? FWIW - My trip to work and back is 22 miles, 18 of which are on the highway at 75mph. |