Topic: Used Vehicle Review: Toyota Tundra, 2014-2018

[bridgecity]

So, I've been looking, just for fun, and what I'm seeing is that any Tundra double cab (I'd need double cab, because family) with 200k+ kms goes for at minimum, $15000.  To me, this seems crazy, spending $15k on a vehicle with >200k kms. 

IS that crazy?  There's no way I'd spend that much money on a Ford or a Dodge or a Chevy with those kinds of kms.  Do these Tundras really have that much life left that spending that kind of dough on them is justified, or even sensible?

I LOVE the idea of a newer Durango R/T in two years, but damn, they're a lot of money.  I'd be willing (and my wife supports this) to buy a higher mileage Tundra instead, ending up with basically no car payment.  As long as I could drive it for another 5 years/ 150k kms, then I suppose it would make sense?

This is just my experience, but if you want a truck that'll last the Tundra is the one to get.  Buddy across the street has a 2007 Chevy with similar km to mine and much lighter use (little towing).  The last two years have been one item after another.  He's sunk thousands in repairs just this year.  Buddy two houses over got rid of his '09 GM because it was one thing after another.  GM drivetrains are good, after that....  Of course these are just a couple examples, but reliability from CR gives a good indication that the Tundra's are strong trucks.

My truck is solid after 11 years. As time goes on I realize more and more how well its put together.  Suspension/steering is still tight.  Heck I'm still on the original front brake pads at 170k (will be replacing soon). I drove a '14 a few years back and my '07 felt just as solid.  It's likely my next truck will be a Tundra, but I'm more about having a solid build than worrying about features.  No doubt the current Tundra is lacking in that department, as well as efficiency. 

And ya, it'll tow a decent trailer.  I have no issues with my 31' RV.

I'm thinking in 2 years I may just buy the best Tundra I can find for $15k cash, drive it and the van (both payment free) for two years, then four years from now get rid of the van and splurge on something nice if we're in a good position. 

I WANT a Durango R/T, but I'm not sure it would be the best choice, saddling myself with some high payments (even if I put $15000 down, I would STILL have $1000/mo payments over 5 years...that's crazy!!!)

A used Tundra would meet the need of being pretty cheap, and still having a ton of life left in it.

I'm sure you could find a solid GM/Ford that would serve you well for a couple years.  I guess my point was that as these trucks age, the Tundra will be your best option for the long term.  If only needing something for a couple years I would likely find the truck in the best shape for the cheapest dollar.

[johngenx]

The 5.7 oil leak issue is rare, but I have heard of the Toyota Mothership chipping in quietly for people out of warranty. Otherwise, these are super solid drivelines.

While used prices are high, I think they're more realistic than the Taco prices. And considering that the Taco, despite being smaller, doesn't have much of a fuel economy advantage, means a Tundra is actually a better buy.

If I were a tradesperson and needed a truck, I'd buy the best used Tundra I could afford.

I had an off road Tundra and now have an off road Tacoma.  Doing exact same driving I averaged 16.4L/100ms in Tundra and now I'm at 11.9L/100 kms in the Tacoma.

That's really good economy for a Tacoma. It's a super popular truck in the climbing/skiing crowd, and most report mileage more like 14-15L/100km. The insane resale prices and Ho-hum economy have kept me from owning one. Mostly the unreal resale.

[EV-Light]

I love the old original Tundra - just "right size" for me.  The old 4.7L is amazing.  But, damn, those trucks are old now.  So many out there with 500K or a lot more.  A friend of mine bought a 2001 new - his first new vehicle in his life - and it's a work truck as he's in trades, so it's far from babied.  It's at about 600K now and still going strong.

Your friend might be waiting a looooooooooong time for a new truck.  Lucky for his bank balance.

...the ones that didn’t split in half...

I haven’t seen a Tundra in a while, and the old ones in at least 4y now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Seafoam]

I love the old original Tundra - just "right size" for me.  The old 4.7L is amazing.  But, damn, those trucks are old now.  So many out there with 500K or a lot more.  A friend of mine bought a 2001 new - his first new vehicle in his life - and it's a work truck as he's in trades, so it's far from babied.  It's at about 600K now and still going strong.

Your friend might be waiting a looooooooooong time for a new truck.  Lucky for his bank balance.

...the ones that didn’t split in half...

I haven’t seen a Tundra in a while, and the old ones in at least 4y now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Plenty around here. A friend had a 2004 . Toyota put  a new frame under it even after it was 12 years old. At least they stand behind their vehicles.

[Fobroader]

I love the old original Tundra - just "right size" for me.  The old 4.7L is amazing.  But, damn, those trucks are old now.  So many out there with 500K or a lot more.  A friend of mine bought a 2001 new - his first new vehicle in his life - and it's a work truck as he's in trades, so it's far from babied.  It's at about 600K now and still going strong.

Your friend might be waiting a looooooooooong time for a new truck.  Lucky for his bank balance.

...the ones that didn’t split in half...

I haven’t seen a Tundra in a while, and the old ones in at least 4y now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Look on Kijiji, they will be the ones worth $10k more than a comparable Ranger/S10/Dakota

[ArticSteve]

The company I rent my shop from has eight Tundras for their sales guys who travel all over. Surprisingly out of the eight they've replaced two engines, one had a head issue (extremely rare) and the other spun a rod bearing. They're slowly replacing them with ecoboost F150's, it'll be interesting to see how that goes lol.


 

 



The only issue is difficult to replace rear axle seals and the gas consumption.  But in the "1/2" ton market it's been a tank.  Far better power train and build quality than the BIG 3 todate.  No debate.  It's just that Toyota charges premium for them as they run at 100% production capacity (Taco/Tundra being all the same to Toyota) and it's debatable if the cost is worth it.

PPL must realize that the rear end ratios in these units have run between 3.93 to 4.10 depending on year.  So that is always a mpg killer.

If I was buying a 1/2 ton strictly as a car or crossover replacement I'd buy the new RAM.   Transaction prices in the US for the new unit are up $4000.  FCA is reconsidering it's plant in Mexico as they cannot meet demand.   

[Serniter]

...the ones that didn’t split in half...

I haven’t seen a Tundra in a while, and the old ones in at least 4y now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Look on Kijiji, they will be the ones worth $10k more than a comparable Ranger/S10/Dakota

The Tacoma is comparable in size to the Ranger, S10 and Dakota. I know Tacomas have had frame issues. Tundras as well?

[dirtyjeffer]

FCA is reconsidering it's plant in Mexico as they cannot meet demand.

i assume you mean that they are considering using extra capacity in Mexico to make the new RAM, as the 2019 models are made at their Sterling Heights, MI plant?

[greengs]

The 5.7 oil leak issue is rare, but I have heard of the Toyota Mothership chipping in quietly for people out of warranty. Otherwise, these are super solid drivelines.

While used prices are high, I think they're more realistic than the Taco prices. And considering that the Taco, despite being smaller, doesn't have much of a fuel economy advantage, means a Tundra is actually a better buy.

If I were a tradesperson and needed a truck, I'd buy the best used Tundra I could afford.

I had an off road Tundra and now have an off road Tacoma.  Doing exact same driving I averaged 16.4L/100ms in Tundra and now I'm at 11.9L/100 kms in the Tacoma.

That's really good economy for a Tacoma. It's a super popular truck in the climbing/skiing crowd, and most report mileage more like 14-15L/100km. The insane resale prices and Ho-hum economy have kept me from owning one. Mostly the unreal resale.

The new generation Taco has the smaller engine and a 6 speed auto.  Should have no trouble getting 12L/100km combined.  The old 4.0L in previous gen was thirsty but a lot more truck like.  The new 3.5L has more power but it needs to be above 4,000 rpm to feel any of it and that's why a lot of people complain about the new one being "gutless" compared to the old one.   

[Great_Big_Abyss]

The 5.7 oil leak issue is rare, but I have heard of the Toyota Mothership chipping in quietly for people out of warranty. Otherwise, these are super solid drivelines.

While used prices are high, I think they're more realistic than the Taco prices. And considering that the Taco, despite being smaller, doesn't have much of a fuel economy advantage, means a Tundra is actually a better buy.

If I were a tradesperson and needed a truck, I'd buy the best used Tundra I could afford.

I had an off road Tundra and now have an off road Tacoma.  Doing exact same driving I averaged 16.4L/100ms in Tundra and now I'm at 11.9L/100 kms in the Tacoma.

That's really good economy for a Tacoma. It's a super popular truck in the climbing/skiing crowd, and most report mileage more like 14-15L/100km. The insane resale prices and Ho-hum economy have kept me from owning one. Mostly the unreal resale.

The new generation Taco has the smaller engine and a 6 speed auto.  Should have no trouble getting 12L/100km combined.  The old 4.0L in previous gen was thirsty but a lot more truck like.  The new 3.5L has more power but it needs to be above 4,000 rpm to feel any of it and that's why a lot of people complain about the new one being "gutless" compared to the old one.

That's why I liked the 4.0 SOHC in my '06 Ranger.  It didn't have much in the way of power at the top end (207 max), but it had GOBS of torque down low.  It was a great truck to teach people how to drive stick on, because you basically couldn't stall the damn thing. 

Anyway, getting off topic here.  Back to the Tundra.

I've been looking at specs and used models, and with a 2014, the 4.6L may be the more reliable engine, but based on towing numbers, I think the 5.7 is the one to have.  The 5.7L V8 has about 3000 - 3500lbs more towing capacity than the 4.6L across all trims that both engines are available in. 

That is a significant difference.  I'm looking at trailers that are around 5500 - 8000lb GVW.   A 5500-6000lb trailer would be towable by a 4.6L Tundra, but would be pretty close to the 6500lb max tow rating.  And forget about anything heavier than 6000lbs.  My goal is to not be limited by weight in the 24' - 28' travel trailer class.

A 4x4 Double Cab with the 5.7L can pull 9800lbs, while a CrewMax can pull 9000lbs (rated according to SAE J2807).  The 4.6L is down closer to the 6500lb range

I'm also having a hard time finding any used examples out there with the 4.6L.  I think with the Double Cab and CrewMax (which are the two cabs I'd be looking at), the 5.7L was waaay more popular than the 4.6L. 

[ArticSteve]

FCA is reconsidering it's plant in Mexico as they cannot meet demand.

i assume you mean that they are considering using extra capacity in Mexico to make the new RAM, as the 2019 models are made at their Sterling Heights, MI plant?

It was only last year that FCA was contemplating closing the Mexican plant, but yes they need more capacity pronto.  Me thinks that e torque is peaking ppl's interest.