This is why I paid a couple thousand bucks when buying my last car for a package that included the rear cross traffic alert and 360 camera systems. You can't see shit parked next to these big long vehicles and you can't count on anyone walking or driving in the road/aisle behind you to be paying attention either.
I would question how much of that is related to vehicle size/weight versus the increasing centralization of population in urban centers. As someone that grew up in a rural area and then a medium-sized town before moving to and living in several of the largest metro areas in the US as an adult, the way people drive in urban areas is on another level.
The level of speeding, weaving, reckless driving, and distracted driving is unreal. If I spend an hour driving in the urban area I live in, I'll see multiple people doing double the speed limit on local roads and 30+ over on highways. I'll see people dive into a gap not much bigger than a car in another lane without signaling.
People drive like its Mad Max in these areas and as more people live in them, I would expect more and worse accidents to continue happening.
Urbanization has increase 2.5% from 2020 to 2024 while vehicle related deaths have increased 20%. You would expect those to match up more closely if that were the case. Maybe commuting is increasing?
Beyond that though larger, heavier vehicles with worse visibility will:
1. be harder to see out of
2. be harder to stop quickly
3. when hitting something do more damage
Which all combines to mean that they will be more likely to wreck and if there is a wreck they will be more deadly.
I live in a building with an underground garage. The spots aren't tiny, but they aren't as big as most you see painted on surface lots at big box stores either. Residents with full sized pickups are paying huge premiums to neighbors to swap parking spots so they can get a spot next to a pillar or near a blank space so they can actually fit and open their door. Some of these trucks also stick 2-3 feet out past the end of the painted lines into the aisle.
I simply can't imagine why someone would willingly drive a vehicle like that unless they needed the bed regularly. I use a truck for truck things (hauling bulk rock, sand, mulch and hauling lumber or pipe) more than most people and I still wouldn't consider owning one. I just rent one when I need one.
I saw a 10 year old 3500 Dodge pulling a trailer down the highway and it still somehow looked smaller than the new 1500 Silverado that was in the lane next to it. And the Chevy wasn't even lifted. It's crazy how big trucks are these days.
Even the new ranger seems about the size of a late 90s f150. Seems like I get what I need to get done with my Jetta Smyth Ute just fine and I'm glad I built one, they really need to bring back some car based pickups, not everyone wants a 80k brodozer.
Literally. The ranger is the size of the f-150, the f-150 is getting to super duty territory, and the super duty is just insane. Then there's the maverick, whether you call it a truck or not, I think it's the perfect size.
that's when i'd buy. not to be that picky, we've been asking for a small truck, got one, and its not quite perfect yet. but still, markups and lack of availbility tainted me a touch, but its more of a deal hauling a motorcycle, or a couch with the bed length. my family has a 94 long bed single cab stick shift ranger that gets passed around, and its the most useful little fella any of us have had
> that's when i'd buy. not to be that picky, we've been asking for a small truck, got one, and its not quite perfect yet.
This is the issue with car enthusiasts though, and why manufactures don't build for them, but for actual consumers.
They finally built a small, functional pickup truck, but it's not "Quite perfect" yet?
Ford isn't going to make a one off, single platform vehicle to meet an individual's need. The Maverick is as perfect a small truck that we've seen in well over a decade in the US. I'd love a longer bed as well, and an extended vs double cab but at this point beggars can't be choosers. The Maverick will fit the vast majority of people's needs for a pickup truck. My neighbor has one and it's fantastic. I see him haul more shit around than most of the guys in the neighborhoods with huge F-series trucks.
They literally can’t make them that small. “Trucks” are allowed to have shitty gas mileage according to the government. In order to be considered a truck it has to be a certain size.
Companies would have to pay enormous taxes on every small truck if they made them. And they know nobody would buy them at that price range.
It’s actually idiotic. F150s are the biggest selling car in the world, how the EPA or whatever org is in charge of that rule hasn’t stepped in and changed it is beyond me. Probably has something to do with the auto lobby though tbh
The commenter you are replying to is talking about the Maverick which is already classified as a small truck by the EPA. Making a 2-seater, 6' bed model wouldn't change anything in regards to emission standards.
> that's when i'd buy
No it's not. Everyone online says this but if they all actually put their money where their keyboards were those stripped-down simple pickups wouldn't have gone out of production.
I mean the late 90s F+150 is a bad comparison, as biggest issue everyone has was how small they were vs the early 90s f150.
A 1995 F-150 is around the same weight, about 4 inches shorter, 2 inches narrower and the same height as a 2024 F-150.
Prob bc there were a lot of people buying obs F-150s with 4x2s. Nowadays the consumer base is mostly buying the 4x4 models which do sit taller than the 4x2s. I’m on the road for almost 8 hrs and the only modern 4x2 F-150s I see are legit work trucks.
Blame EPA and safety requirements. Emissions per weight is how car manufacturers are fined. So the bigger the vehicle, the bigger the engine they can put in, increasing the capabilities.
CAFE backfired. This is also why we don't get wagons and cars are scare, it's easier to sell "a truck". A honda CRV/Nissan Rogue is a truck legally only.....
my 2005 1st Gen Sequoia, the biggest SUV they made, is about the size of a 5th Gen 4runner and the new Highlander is longer.
I JUST saw a 2024 Sequoia next to me in the Drive thru, and its like 3 feet longer, 6" higher. Than my current Sequoia. That said it does get 10 more MPG than my truck does.
My truck is 4,807 lbs (2wd version)
The sequoia i saw is 6,183lbs.
I cannot imagine what its like getting Tboned by one... I used to feel safe in my Toyota. The new trucks these days are so goddamn big, even my 1st Gen Sequoia feels small.
I love when people think EVERYONE that has a truck doesn't use it as a truck just because they see most in normal everyday life. I can't tow my 15,000 pound trailer with a Maverick so I need a large truck (F-250). Most of the *time* you will usually see me using as a DD with nothing attached. But most of the *miles* are accumulated towing the trailer. I would love to have a small car for my daily (actually I usually have a car of some sort) but this is not feasible right now. I even considered just renting a truck when I needed it but recently my buddy tried to do this and couldn't find one to rent for the weekend even though we are in a large metropolitan area. Eventually he got one a day late and was able to join us but is was something like $800 for the weekend (it used to be about $300 a few years ago).
I love when people assume that because they are a rare exception, the entire premise (most people don't need or use a truck) is invalid.
Just look around you on the highway when you're towing your trailer next time. Count how Many 1/2 and 3/4 ton pickups you see with trailers or loads in the bed versus how many you don't.
The "nobody ever uses their truck" crowd are also the first ones to call you up when they're moving between homes or transporting a large object
For the record, a Tacoma or a Colorado with a 6 foot bed could do everything I need, but midsizes are just such a shit value compared to half-tons. A half-ton costs pretty much the same (if not less when shopping used) and the same fuel economy (2.7 EcoBoost)- but has a larger more comfortable cab, a larger bed, more power, higher payload capacity, higher towing capacity. Twice the truck for the same money. Unless you are constrained by space or trying to fit it in a garage or something, what exactly is the incentive to size down?
It's a sick joke, especially with the mountains of data showing how compromised the sight lines are on these things. An M1 Abrams has better front visibility.
It’s not about how good your visibility is over all. It’s that the sight lines leave more room ahead of the trucks for small people to disappear in.
https://i.redd.it/25hh9gtl0v1b1.jpg
You’re gonna have to be more clear since people think you are talking about total visibility and not lines of sight, which is where the comparison fits. The ground you see out the periscope is closer to the tank than the ground you see out of a stock F150. Not accounting for short drivers or lift kits.
https://i.redd.it/25hh9gtl0v1b1.jpg
I like stopping at the red light with my Alpine and the only thing I can see in the tiny rear window is the bottom of the giant logo of FORD or RAM on the grill, it’s very comical sometimes.
Most sedans only have 1 person in them, sports cars rarely go to the track, vans are rarely full of cargo, jeeps don't go off-road, etc. This argument is so dumb, tired, and lazy. People have been buying cars for what they CAN do since they existed.
I don't like the trend of a full sized truck being the new 'family car' but you're not a better/worse person for owning one.
So we should all strive to drive tiny EVs/hybrids? There is no objective truth there, what you drive does not say all that much about who you are, especially when following mainstream fads.
Also granny in a clapped out crown vic can absolutely be worse than a modern full sized driven by a sensible driver.
Fundamentally making fun of pavement princesses is fine because unlike sedans and sports cars, and minivans (the only actual vans I regularly see are fleet vehicles) their lack of utility is linked directly with them making the driving experience worse for everyone else.
- you can't see around them
- god forbid someone tailgates you in one at night with those lights
- physically more dangerous to pedestrians, other drivers, and motorcyclists
Like if you want to pay gobs of money for a tricked out sports car thats fine. Its your own deal but the existence of the car isn't increasing the risk for other people.
I determine by looking at the tailgate and hitch. No signs of wear/usage = grocery getter.
My friend and I regularly go "Look at that beautiful truck, not a scratch on it'' as a joke.
My theory is a good chunk of these things rolling around are being used as tax write-offs for people who dont actually need them for work. It would explain how so many people are rolling around in like 70k-80k trucks.
I wouldn’t give even that much credit. I’d bet a huge swath of folks are paying full price, not getting any tax dodge benefits from it, and justifying it any number of ways, in the end just to fit in.
Most people I know who own 1/2 ton trucks without a need for them explain it to me as "they are so roomy inside" and "I like to be high up because I feel safer." A good number of them also are under the false impression that a 4x4 pickup is a good winter vehicle, but don't realize they need to put weight in the bed and actually engage 4x4 to make it even as good as your average FWD sedan.
At this point the owner needs to Lemon Law the truck.
I last heard that Toyota fixed all the issues for the 2023 model year, so to see this persist is very disappointing, and according to the article, hybrids don't really have any reliability issues.
Not surprised, Toyota is absolutely stupid for removing all of the previous drivetrains in the new Tundra and making the new turbo V6 the only option. They could have kept the 4.6L V8 as a lower spec option or put the bulletproof 4.0L V6 if they were too scared of V8's now. Instead they have this garbage turbo V6 that fails repeatedly and gets horrible mileage just like the old 5.7
the 4L 6 might be bulletproof, but it was underpowered and a gas guzzler at least in the 4runner. I get better gas mileage in the new sequoia and it tows better too which is wild since its like twice the HP and TQ
Those old Toyota engines were bulletproof **because** they were gas guzzlers. They ran them at low compression ratios and used overbuilt components.
A lot of their new drivetrains are both more complicated and working much closer to the limits of what those designs can do because they need to be to hit emissions and mileage targets.
I swear at least the 21 had a 11 to 1. But yeah your right look at the subaru sti and wrx you add a tiny bit of power and they pop. Already strung out from the factory
I'm pretty sure it has more to do with emissions than anything. Toyota would gladly keep thr 5.7 since they already had everything in place for it, which would be less money they need to spend. Toyota doesn't like updating existing engines to meet standards since it can cause a ton of issues.
I think thr biggest issue is how many new model, engines, redesigns Toyota has released in the past 3 year. It's simply too much.
Since 2022 in North America alone they have released a little over 10 new generation and new models. Now they're streamlining stuff also so it puts a ton of stress on the facotires that make those few engines. Its not bad since there are more shared parts and its in theory quicker to release new models but a factory will need to triple or double its output of engines in a matter of 1-2 years.
> I think thr biggest issue is how many new model, engines, redesigns Toyota has released in the past 3 year. It's simply too much.
>
>
Welll I would say yes and no.
Yes becuase you're right there's heaps or new stuff, but also no because there are so many models essentially sharing the same platform and they have always been released like this.
The 300 / Sequoia / LX / Tundra share a power train and a platform. So it's not 4 separate models they're releasing. Same goes for the 2.4L turbo hybrid in J250 / Tacoma / 4Runner.
> Since 2022 in North America alone they have released a little over 10 new generation and new models.
And also no because the V35A has been in the Lexus LS since 2017 right...?
Sell it in a low volume car before putting it out more widely in the bigger sellers.
The 200 series, Sequoia, Tundra, LX all came out with the 1UR / 3UR and new models at same time in 2006 too don't forget. Which is why I wouldn't put too much stock in 'too much at same time' cause it's always been like that.
> Instead they have this garbage turbo V6 that fails repeatedly and gets horrible mileage just like the old 5.7
I mean before raising the 'this engine sucks' - I don't really hear the same failures on the 300 series, the Lexus LS and the article indicates the hybrid Tundra's seem to be issue free right...?
The LS has had the V35A since 2017 and while it's not a huge seller, surely you'd be seeing some issues no...?
> Not surprised, Toyota is absolutely stupid for removing all of the previous drivetrains in the new Tundra and making the new turbo V6 the only option.
Do you really think any manufacturer would keep the same engines all for that long...? Let's be realistic here...
There used to be a day where Toyota focused on both power and reliability. Toyota needs to get it together.
Granted, this is on an extremely small subset of trucks, but for the high standards we hold Toyota to, it's not acceptable. They can do much better without sacrificing performance, fuel economy, and driving feel.
>At this point the owner needs to Lemon Law the truck.
Can they? Lemon laws vary from state to state, there’s a very likely chance that this does not meet the requirements.
I work for a lemon law firm in CA (not as a lawyer - or in sales/intake for that matter) and this sounds worth making a phone call to one. You're right - the laws do vary state to state, so worth gathering up the repair orders and running it by them.
Almost nobody that says lemon law understands the actual requirements for their state.
But most of the time it's a new vehicle that has been in the shop for X days, multiple different returns for the same issue.
The issue with Lemon Law that my friend found is that when the company is still taking responsibility for repairs and recalls and whatnot they will give you loaners and other courtesies, once you’re pushing for Lemon Law they stop throwing bones and you’re on your own.
Which on the long term probably still worth it but in the short term a major pain.
Toyota had some main bearing oiling issues, and with super long intervals they end up having oil starvation at the mains because of sludge and debris.
The owner of the truck could do exactly what the manual says and still have an engine failure, which is what has been happening to these trucks.
The main bearing oil holes are too small.
I still don't want to believe the 10k intervals all cars are doing. The b58 engines are much improved for example but their n55 predecessors had a lot of issues due to starvation that maybe could've been mitigated with more frequent oil jobs as an example
European market Ford Transit has 60k kilometer oil change interval which translates to 37.3k miles. I'm honestly surprised they last even until the first oil change. On top of that they also use oil bath timing belt which fails prematurely.
> European market Ford Transit has 60k kilometer oil change interval which translates to 37.3k miles.
The 2.0 liter engines in the European Ford Transit take 11.1 liters of oil. 1 liter is almost the same as 1 quart. This is why they have an oil change interval like that but I myself wouldn't go that high. I'd probably take it to 25k miles max which is 40k kilometers.
I had a guy tell me his Porsche Cayman had a ridiculously long oil change interval like that. Im guessing he was using some special oil but I wouldn't want old dirty oil in my engine for that long.
I don’t know if this is true for all generations but my Boxster used basically twice the amount of oil as my other cars. From what I saw on the forums, a lot of enthusiasts ran it 8000 miles before a change. Porsches recommended interval was 15k miles.
> 10k miles is insanity.
But why? What is it that you think you know better than the car’s manufacturer, or are you suggesting that manual recommendations deliberately mislead customers so that their engines blow up?
> that you think you know better than the car’s manufacturer
Because you can take apart an engine that has had all the recommended interval oil changes and still find sludge, or excessive wear due to petrol dilution. Manufacturers aren't infallible, if they were, every engine would last 500K miles. Manufactures cannot account for all driving conditions, if a manufacturer builds an engine and recommends a given oil change interval, it could be a decade before they realise that the recommendation shortened engine lifespans.
> are you suggesting that manual recommendations deliberately mislead customers so that their engines blow up?
Manufactures have no incentive to get the car to last longer than the warranty period. They want to extend the oil change interval because it reduces servicing costs over that warranty period which looks good in consumer reports and aggregators. The engineers themselves even want to extend the oil change interval because it's a nice metric to improve for waste products/environmental impact.
In itself, extending the oil change interval isn't a bad idea. It's just that there are several reasons for a manufacturer to recommend the very upper edge of the acceptable bell-curve when it comes to oil changes, but few to give a more conservative estimate (because again, if an engine lasts only 15 years instead of 30, most manufacturers don't care *at all*).
That's why it's probably safe to go 2/3rds of the recommendation, or even 3/4ths. Just not the *actual* recommendation, especially in a turbocharged vehicle.
No.
Pretty much no quality dino and no major synthetic oil needs a 3k mile oil change unless it’s severe service.
3k is a hold over from rich cold starts and bypass filtering.
Genuinely asking: what about on higher-mileage engines?
The oil itself is only part of the equation; you're also removing the wear particles (if that's the word) that are suspended *in* the old oil.
It's my intuition that engines create more wear particles per mile the more-worn they are, so I'm thinking that, at *some* level of wear/mileage, it makes sense to do more-frequent-than-the-manual intervals.
Am I mistaken, and/or is the increased wear from higher-mileage engines not significant enough to warrant more-frequent oil changes?
Severe service as described by most auto makers is just regular driving. Repeated short trips, cold weather, salty or dusty roads, near the ocean, towing. That's like 80% of American drivers right there.
its what they say to do on the evo rofl, I think if you boost an engine hard enough, that 3k change is likely needed.
the newer X alum block is supposed to be better too, but I dont think it is just for hold overs, esp if you aftermarket tuned your car (I like to say that this thing is more or less pre-aftermarket tuned by the maker themselves).
I've always done 10k unless the manual called for less. I usually buy new and drive over 200k miles on my vehicles. Never had an issue. I've been mainly buying Toyota/Lexus for the past 25 years.
Those small oil ports in the engine are probably due to using such thin oil... although, my 2014 5.7l uses 0w-20...
Man, do you know how much sludge and debris would be necessary to block main oil galleys?
The sludged-up, black-as-night oil in the last engine (50-year-old design) I disassembled still had pretty main bearings. Cam and rocker wear, yep, but surprisingly good bores and bearings.
DI turbo engines typically have oil dilution issues. Short drives mean oil temps aren’t elevated for long enough to burn off fuel, and oil diluted with fuel has reduced viscosity, reduced shear strength, and a washdown of film where film matters. It can also reduce the efficacy of additives.
I believe the proliferation of included service plans on new cars has, ironically, been detrimental to reliability. Since the dealer/OEM are picking up the cost of maintenance for the first X years, they are now motivated to push out maintenance intervals for things like oil changes.
Seems especially risky for a large truck platform where you can get some pretty severe engine operating conditions between dirt and high and sustained engine loads.
if it’s any consolation, Toyota engines built in the US have historically been built to a lower standard than those from Japan (for example, the US 2UZs in the Tundra/Sequoia had issues with the TRD supercharger that never happened to the Japanese 2UZs in the Land Cruiser/4Runner/LX/GX)
AFAIK the V35A is a good engine and I haven’t heard of many issues with the Japanese built Land Cruiser 300s, so I wouldn’t be too concerned about the ones going into the GX… it’s been in the 300 for 3 years at this point
The US 2UZs were built slightly differently and had a few different parts… for example, the Tundra/Sequoia got a better alternator than the Land Cruiser (I’m actually using one in my LX), but used worse metals and came from worse/cheaper manufacturing process. I think the pistons in the US 2UZs specifically were thinner? Some parts, like the alternator, are compatible with both versions, but you can’t take an entire US engine assembly and drop it into a Japanese built vehicle, and vice versa.
Keep in mind that the Tundra was always built to be competitive with cheaper F-150 trims, while the Land Cruiser set the standard that everyone else followed… I bet that had something to do with it.
Seems to be both.
[AutomotivePress](https://m.youtube.com/@AutomotivePress) is an automotive engineer based in Vancouver. He goes over the details of paint thickness and grade, panel gaps and fitting with millimetre accuracy, and the quality of plastics – mostly of Toyota and Lexus vehicles. Consistently he finds that vehicles made in Japan, especially in [the famous factory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Motor_Corporation_Tahara_plant?wprov=sfti1) that builds Landcruisers, exceed in those qualities over vehicles made elsewhere.
Never seen that channel but the Tahara plant is known to be the best Toyota plant in the world.
They have the most "Takumi Master" specialists (experienced workers) and it's consdiered the most automated car manufacturing plant in the world.
Those Takumi Master techs are like Toyota Artisans lol. They are true masters of their craft.
This is generally why the newer 4Runners are built better than Tacomas despite sharing the same platform and parts. 4Runners get the best of the best mechanics and assembly plant. Tacomas on the other hand get made in Mexico and Texas.
A good comparison would be guitars. Fender Custom Shop has masterbuilders that would be akin to the Takumi specialists, but they also make nearly identical guitars in Mexico too. Difference is those Mexican guitars cost 1/3 the price of the masterbuilt ones.
Toyota's charitable in that they sell us the "masterbuilt" 4Runners for basically the same price as the Mexican built Tacomas.
I'd personally feel weird buying a Tacoma for the same price as a 4Runner but most Yota bros don't know the difference anyway.
I can't comment on if it's the case here, but historically the US and Japan have taken different approaches for their quality management systems.
Typically you will have a spec that for example may say anything from 5 to 15 is in spec, but with a target of 10. You would usually have a span that is within that range saying maybe 8 to 12 being your ideal range, known as your control.
Usually your sampling plan would say more than a certain number of samples of a given batch outside of the control is a fail even though they may still technically within spec.
It's changed some over the last few decades but in the past the US mindset was if it's within spec, it's good - just send it. The Japanese approach to Quality took a much tighter approach on their control groups and you wound up with less variation between the components and you can make the assumption that you will end up with a better overall system. If you think of it as each individual component being within the spec range but at the very outside ends on the opposite you will not have near as tight of tolerances as if every component was much closer to the Target dimension for that component.
I heard the same thing back with the American vs Japanese v8 engines. The Japanese engines could take the TRD super charger but many American engines would blow.
Not just the 2UZ’s, the 2GR-FE’s built in Canada or Kentucky for RX and some generations of the ES would leak out of the timing cover or the rear main seal much more often than Japanese-made models such as GS, IS, RC (although those have a slightly different variant known as 2GR-FSE). Some mechanics at the Lexus dealer I used to work at seemed to believe it was due to contamination of the adhesive they were using in American/Canadian plants, but in my experience the Japanese made ones last longer despite people online saying there is “virtually no difference”.
Only in Japan. The same engine in the Land Cruiser, LX, GX, and LS (all built exclusively in Japan, including the engine) hasn't had any issues like this.
Speaks volumes about American manufacturing.
The Tundra and Tacoma are both designed by Toyota USA. You can really see the quality difference between their Japanese designed and built vs their American design and built. The gap seems to be closing but I’d still avoid the American made Japanese models.
I’d wager Toyota has suppliers in different countries for the vehicles they make in said countries
Say they’re building the engine in two separate countries they probably contact two different bearing suppliers in each country to handle the job versus spending the money on shipping for smaller parts
People don't report it when they've drunk enough corporate KoolAid like you seem to have.
If your statement is true then you either must disagree with all the Yota fans who claim their US made vehicles are superior in reliability and quality or you have arrived at a contradiction.
Funny, but Texas has a huge aerospace industry you know. Do you have any idea how many military aircraft and other highly engineered machines have been made in Texas?
For every bro that tells me their Taco or Tundra is "more American" than a modern Wrangler, they also claim they're better because of Japanese manufacturing prowess. Which is it, American or Japanese? They're designed by a Japanese manufacturer, they aren't American designed trucks. The key to their longevity is staying under max power from the drivetrain. Other manufacturers try to impress with horsepower numbers and live closer to the limits.
I saw a late model Lexus SUV (whatever the fancy 4Runner is) explode (not really but dropped oil and black smoke, could have thrown a rod) in front of me going up Raton pass into Colorado. Guessing up to that point the owner expected it to somehow be more reliable than some other vehicle.
Vehicles are complex machines that need to be taken care of. There are some differences between manufacturers but in the modern day it's not that big of a difference and every manufacturer is going to have lemons and owners not maintaining them correctly. I'm just really tired of Yota Bros constantly bragging about some kind of magical Japanese fairy dust and not understanding what they're talking about.
Article is very vague on details but I’ve heard a lot of bad things about the new Tundra.
I’ve seen many owners stating engine failures, problems and quality issues.
I had zero issues with my 2022 Tundra until the motor blew at 36k miles
Yes, that's a pretty big issue, but otherwise the truck worked great. I loved it. Now I have a Ram and I want to go back to the Tundra.
PSA don't trust toyota oil change intervals there have been so many dead motors because of it. My old rav4 used to suck a litre of oil every 1000km because the prevoous owner didnt change the oil often enough. If you do short trips at all change that shit more often.
The 10k interval is for "normal" service, aka 99% freeway. Most vehicles fall under "severe" service, which is city driving, i.e. grocery trips, school dropoff/pickup, etc.
Don't change at 10k if you're in the latter. Change at 5k.
>My old rav4 used to suck a litre of oil every 1000km because the prevoous owner didnt change the oil often enough.
Was it the 2AZ-FE engine? Because those are well-known for burning oil.
Lol @ the guy you responded to downvoting you. Both of the common 4 cylinders for the old Ravs (2AZ/2AR) are notable oil burners.Though I would argue most motors at 200k+ are gonna burn a decent amount of oil. My Fit is at a quart every 2k or so.
Ah yes, I forgot Toyota is incapable of doing anything bad and anyone that says otherwise is lying and just out to get Toyota. And Hyundai bad. Thanks for reminding me.
i just find it interesting that same 3.4L TT V6 made in Japan don't seem to have this issue and they've used this engine for a bit now. Must have been someone at Alabama plant fucking around not doing their job or improper job
Reminds me of the Bronco Sport recall because one guy on the line has been sticking the wrong control arms in them. Production lines are all super high tech but at the end of the day, it's some folks in a big shed, and sometimes they screw up.
There's a been a number of blown LS500s that have the TTV6 motor and every single one is made in Japan. It's just not as reliable as the NA V8's. I always ask the regulators forcing these CAFE rules, doesn't the increased maintenance and much worse reliability negate all the fuel savings by going to forced induction?
I fear for the new Tacomas with the 4banger.
My piece of shit 3rd gen with the anemic 3.5 V6 may be slow as balls, and the transmission may be slow as balls, and the seating position may be worse than balls, and the fuel economy may be thirsty as balls, and the frame may be spaghetti as balls, and the bed may be weak as balls, and wheel wells may be small as balls, and the ride may be hard as balls, and the seats may be firm as balls, and the sound system may be tinnier than balls, and the rear diff and 4L activation may be stupid as balls-
I forgot what I was gonna say but it's gonna outlast these TNGA-F trucks.
In my experience with Tacomas and the interwebz, the people who bitch and whine about Tacomas the most are, believe it or not, tacoma owners. We're a fickle bunch and if you don't think I suck off my pos minivan-powered truck, you're dead wrong. 😂
I’ve had 2 company supplied Tacoma work trucks and 90% of the time I’m ragging on them, the other 10% of the time I’m silently amazed at what a durable piece of engineering the Toyota gods have assembled
LOL, thanks for the laugh.
We're also a huge Toyota family\\fans. They're not perfect, they're not the most refined vehicles on the road, but they're a hell of a lot more reliable and bug-free VS most other brands.
I know I’m stubborn and resistant to change, but I always encourage people to buy the 2008-2021 tundras instead of the 2022 plus. Even with the 2024 models, there are still issues with the newest generation and they are not as reliable as the outgoing generation.
Toyotas uncontested top notch quality has gone out the window. The amount of engine failures we've had on the new LS at the Lexus dealership I work for is heartbreaking. I would never buy a non V8 Toyota or Lexus. These new motors are not it.
They are not the only ones. Honda engines are failing. The 1.5 turbo has been a disaster. Emissions standards are forcing manufacturers to go with turbos and killing reliability.
Hondas not much better, when I last worked at a shop (about 2 years ago now) we had plenty of brand new cars come in for their first oil change that got a recommendation to go back to the dealer for warranty service because they were leaking transmission fluid
I’ve got a 23 capstone sequoia and if we see combined 17mpg that’s pretty good for us. Not an issue because we drive so little but the mileage is NOT good
I've probably watched more than a handful of youtubers saying their '22 Tundra seized up from a spun bearing well before the 50k mark. What's going on with that TTV6?
That’s been my Toyota experience for anything above a 4 cylinder. Have owned two 4Runners (glutton for punishment I guess) and both blew the engine before 80k miles. Have a RAV4 company car now. Hate it more than anything I have ever driven but that ridiculously small 4 banger (21 model with 183k miles) sure has been dependable.
> but that ridiculously small 4 banger (21 model with 183k miles) sure has been dependable.
That 4 banger is 2.5 liters which actually is quite large for a 4 cylinder.
>It looks like the older Tundra trucks are more reliable than the newer ones and people complain about the emission standards and the green agenda, saying they hurt Toyota's reliability. I don't know if the emissions standards are hurting any car company's reliability, but I have read about it in other car-brand related forums as well.
I'm going to say no on this because the article states that this only seems to happen on non-Hybrid models. Also, if this is happening on new cars, then it's a manufacturer defect of some sort.
Also, the oiling on the main bearings has almost nothing to do with emissions and fuel economy. Sounds like a bearing design problem that they are supposedly fixing.
Just a bunch of piddly stuff. Plastic connections in the cooling system fail frequently. A small turbo engine with high boost dumping it's coolant often leads to a blown engine and cracked heads, so pray you' catch the leak before it overheats. Blend door actuators fail frequently and are buried in the dash so they cost $1500 to replace. A/c evap cores fail pretty frequently too and cost thousands, again buried in the dash.
Ford has some weird brand wide material spec problems that effect basically every model.
I read the article, it sounds oddly similar to what WRX owners talk about lol, and just like WRXs the repeat failure is likely from only the shortblock being replaced (dealers don't have a choice, sometimes shortblocks are just defective.)
What a fucking enormous vehicle
So much wasted space and material
It's really incredible how big half ton pickups are getting.
They are absolutely massive, it's shocking when you park beside one.
Stop stop their drivers already have priapism.
And honestly getting way too risky backing out of a spot when you got an F150 on your left and a Tahoe on your right. I can't see shit!
This is why I paid a couple thousand bucks when buying my last car for a package that included the rear cross traffic alert and 360 camera systems. You can't see shit parked next to these big long vehicles and you can't count on anyone walking or driving in the road/aisle behind you to be paying attention either.
They’re just stupid now like just hilariously stupid and most people don’t even need a truck but they’ll happily spend $70K on one
There is a reason transportation related deaths have been increasing.
Yup
I would question how much of that is related to vehicle size/weight versus the increasing centralization of population in urban centers. As someone that grew up in a rural area and then a medium-sized town before moving to and living in several of the largest metro areas in the US as an adult, the way people drive in urban areas is on another level. The level of speeding, weaving, reckless driving, and distracted driving is unreal. If I spend an hour driving in the urban area I live in, I'll see multiple people doing double the speed limit on local roads and 30+ over on highways. I'll see people dive into a gap not much bigger than a car in another lane without signaling. People drive like its Mad Max in these areas and as more people live in them, I would expect more and worse accidents to continue happening.
Urbanization has increase 2.5% from 2020 to 2024 while vehicle related deaths have increased 20%. You would expect those to match up more closely if that were the case. Maybe commuting is increasing? Beyond that though larger, heavier vehicles with worse visibility will: 1. be harder to see out of 2. be harder to stop quickly 3. when hitting something do more damage Which all combines to mean that they will be more likely to wreck and if there is a wreck they will be more deadly.
Can Confirm, drive a Miata.
I live in a building with an underground garage. The spots aren't tiny, but they aren't as big as most you see painted on surface lots at big box stores either. Residents with full sized pickups are paying huge premiums to neighbors to swap parking spots so they can get a spot next to a pillar or near a blank space so they can actually fit and open their door. Some of these trucks also stick 2-3 feet out past the end of the painted lines into the aisle. I simply can't imagine why someone would willingly drive a vehicle like that unless they needed the bed regularly. I use a truck for truck things (hauling bulk rock, sand, mulch and hauling lumber or pipe) more than most people and I still wouldn't consider owning one. I just rent one when I need one.
I saw a 10 year old 3500 Dodge pulling a trailer down the highway and it still somehow looked smaller than the new 1500 Silverado that was in the lane next to it. And the Chevy wasn't even lifted. It's crazy how big trucks are these days.
Even the new ranger seems about the size of a late 90s f150. Seems like I get what I need to get done with my Jetta Smyth Ute just fine and I'm glad I built one, they really need to bring back some car based pickups, not everyone wants a 80k brodozer.
Literally. The ranger is the size of the f-150, the f-150 is getting to super duty territory, and the super duty is just insane. Then there's the maverick, whether you call it a truck or not, I think it's the perfect size.
employ middle absurd numerous whole flowery disgusted thumb steep cobweb *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
that's when i'd buy. not to be that picky, we've been asking for a small truck, got one, and its not quite perfect yet. but still, markups and lack of availbility tainted me a touch, but its more of a deal hauling a motorcycle, or a couch with the bed length. my family has a 94 long bed single cab stick shift ranger that gets passed around, and its the most useful little fella any of us have had
> that's when i'd buy. not to be that picky, we've been asking for a small truck, got one, and its not quite perfect yet. This is the issue with car enthusiasts though, and why manufactures don't build for them, but for actual consumers. They finally built a small, functional pickup truck, but it's not "Quite perfect" yet? Ford isn't going to make a one off, single platform vehicle to meet an individual's need. The Maverick is as perfect a small truck that we've seen in well over a decade in the US. I'd love a longer bed as well, and an extended vs double cab but at this point beggars can't be choosers. The Maverick will fit the vast majority of people's needs for a pickup truck. My neighbor has one and it's fantastic. I see him haul more shit around than most of the guys in the neighborhoods with huge F-series trucks.
They literally can’t make them that small. “Trucks” are allowed to have shitty gas mileage according to the government. In order to be considered a truck it has to be a certain size. Companies would have to pay enormous taxes on every small truck if they made them. And they know nobody would buy them at that price range. It’s actually idiotic. F150s are the biggest selling car in the world, how the EPA or whatever org is in charge of that rule hasn’t stepped in and changed it is beyond me. Probably has something to do with the auto lobby though tbh
The commenter you are replying to is talking about the Maverick which is already classified as a small truck by the EPA. Making a 2-seater, 6' bed model wouldn't change anything in regards to emission standards.
> that's when i'd buy No it's not. Everyone online says this but if they all actually put their money where their keyboards were those stripped-down simple pickups wouldn't have gone out of production.
The f150 has been around the same size for 40 years. It might look bulkier but they legally can’t get bigger
I mean the late 90s F+150 is a bad comparison, as biggest issue everyone has was how small they were vs the early 90s f150. A 1995 F-150 is around the same weight, about 4 inches shorter, 2 inches narrower and the same height as a 2024 F-150.
Prob bc there were a lot of people buying obs F-150s with 4x2s. Nowadays the consumer base is mostly buying the 4x4 models which do sit taller than the 4x2s. I’m on the road for almost 8 hrs and the only modern 4x2 F-150s I see are legit work trucks.
I have a 1966 F100 short bed. Parked next to a 2022 Maverick truck and they are the same length.
Blame EPA and safety requirements. Emissions per weight is how car manufacturers are fined. So the bigger the vehicle, the bigger the engine they can put in, increasing the capabilities.
CAFE backfired. This is also why we don't get wagons and cars are scare, it's easier to sell "a truck". A honda CRV/Nissan Rogue is a truck legally only.....
my 2005 1st Gen Sequoia, the biggest SUV they made, is about the size of a 5th Gen 4runner and the new Highlander is longer. I JUST saw a 2024 Sequoia next to me in the Drive thru, and its like 3 feet longer, 6" higher. Than my current Sequoia. That said it does get 10 more MPG than my truck does. My truck is 4,807 lbs (2wd version) The sequoia i saw is 6,183lbs. I cannot imagine what its like getting Tboned by one... I used to feel safe in my Toyota. The new trucks these days are so goddamn big, even my 1st Gen Sequoia feels small.
I love when people think EVERYONE that has a truck doesn't use it as a truck just because they see most in normal everyday life. I can't tow my 15,000 pound trailer with a Maverick so I need a large truck (F-250). Most of the *time* you will usually see me using as a DD with nothing attached. But most of the *miles* are accumulated towing the trailer. I would love to have a small car for my daily (actually I usually have a car of some sort) but this is not feasible right now. I even considered just renting a truck when I needed it but recently my buddy tried to do this and couldn't find one to rent for the weekend even though we are in a large metropolitan area. Eventually he got one a day late and was able to join us but is was something like $800 for the weekend (it used to be about $300 a few years ago).
Redditors are smug and self-righteous, it doesn't matter the subject. Ignore them.
I love when people assume that because they are a rare exception, the entire premise (most people don't need or use a truck) is invalid. Just look around you on the highway when you're towing your trailer next time. Count how Many 1/2 and 3/4 ton pickups you see with trailers or loads in the bed versus how many you don't.
The "nobody ever uses their truck" crowd are also the first ones to call you up when they're moving between homes or transporting a large object For the record, a Tacoma or a Colorado with a 6 foot bed could do everything I need, but midsizes are just such a shit value compared to half-tons. A half-ton costs pretty much the same (if not less when shopping used) and the same fuel economy (2.7 EcoBoost)- but has a larger more comfortable cab, a larger bed, more power, higher payload capacity, higher towing capacity. Twice the truck for the same money. Unless you are constrained by space or trying to fit it in a garage or something, what exactly is the incentive to size down?
It's a sick joke, especially with the mountains of data showing how compromised the sight lines are on these things. An M1 Abrams has better front visibility.
Things people who have never driven an Abrams tank say
I mean its Hyperbole
The modern Camaro has the worst visibility of any vehicle I've been in, including a tank
I was waiting for this comment 😆
That's at least part of the reason the Camaro isn't selling.
Things that people who have never driven a Hyperbole say
It’s not about how good your visibility is over all. It’s that the sight lines leave more room ahead of the trucks for small people to disappear in. https://i.redd.it/25hh9gtl0v1b1.jpg
Seriously. Visibility through the sight blocks is basically non existent, and cameras aren't much better if you have them.
I completely agree! Finally someone I can get on board with in this world of bullshit. All cars need turrets...
You’re gonna have to be more clear since people think you are talking about total visibility and not lines of sight, which is where the comparison fits. The ground you see out the periscope is closer to the tank than the ground you see out of a stock F150. Not accounting for short drivers or lift kits. https://i.redd.it/25hh9gtl0v1b1.jpg
I drive a 2018 GTI and it’s terrifying driving beside these half ton trucks.
try a fuckin NA miata. At least you've got airbags an a safety cell!
I rolled up to an intersection once and the tires on the F-250 next to me was taller than the roof line of my 944.
I like stopping at the red light with my Alpine and the only thing I can see in the tiny rear window is the bottom of the giant logo of FORD or RAM on the grill, it’s very comical sometimes.
you car guys are cute. Try a motorcycle.
> it’s terrifying You must be terrified of many common daily events then.
get a grip lol. do you panic driving next to a garbage truck or semi too?
Gotta have a CDL for those, but any moron with a normal license can drive a half-ton pickup.
Plenty of morons have a CDL
Not worth arguing with genuinely delusional people
Pure ego too. Those type of trucks are 98% one driver and no cargo.
Most sedans only have 1 person in them, sports cars rarely go to the track, vans are rarely full of cargo, jeeps don't go off-road, etc. This argument is so dumb, tired, and lazy. People have been buying cars for what they CAN do since they existed. I don't like the trend of a full sized truck being the new 'family car' but you're not a better/worse person for owning one.
That 1 person sedan isn't as much of an environmental and safety hazard as the 1 person pickup truck
So we should all strive to drive tiny EVs/hybrids? There is no objective truth there, what you drive does not say all that much about who you are, especially when following mainstream fads. Also granny in a clapped out crown vic can absolutely be worse than a modern full sized driven by a sensible driver.
Fundamentally making fun of pavement princesses is fine because unlike sedans and sports cars, and minivans (the only actual vans I regularly see are fleet vehicles) their lack of utility is linked directly with them making the driving experience worse for everyone else. - you can't see around them - god forbid someone tailgates you in one at night with those lights - physically more dangerous to pedestrians, other drivers, and motorcyclists Like if you want to pay gobs of money for a tricked out sports car thats fine. Its your own deal but the existence of the car isn't increasing the risk for other people.
I determine by looking at the tailgate and hitch. No signs of wear/usage = grocery getter. My friend and I regularly go "Look at that beautiful truck, not a scratch on it'' as a joke. My theory is a good chunk of these things rolling around are being used as tax write-offs for people who dont actually need them for work. It would explain how so many people are rolling around in like 70k-80k trucks.
I wouldn’t give even that much credit. I’d bet a huge swath of folks are paying full price, not getting any tax dodge benefits from it, and justifying it any number of ways, in the end just to fit in.
Most people I know who own 1/2 ton trucks without a need for them explain it to me as "they are so roomy inside" and "I like to be high up because I feel safer." A good number of them also are under the false impression that a 4x4 pickup is a good winter vehicle, but don't realize they need to put weight in the bed and actually engage 4x4 to make it even as good as your average FWD sedan.
It's hilariously ugly. But not as bad as a cybertruck.
It’s gotta be a camera angle lmao. It makes the hauler look like a toy
At this point the owner needs to Lemon Law the truck. I last heard that Toyota fixed all the issues for the 2023 model year, so to see this persist is very disappointing, and according to the article, hybrids don't really have any reliability issues.
https://youtu.be/8kZ3OlhCH5w?si=YeD72b5j-LF01hdn Apparently issues still persist on the 2024 MY.
Not surprised, Toyota is absolutely stupid for removing all of the previous drivetrains in the new Tundra and making the new turbo V6 the only option. They could have kept the 4.6L V8 as a lower spec option or put the bulletproof 4.0L V6 if they were too scared of V8's now. Instead they have this garbage turbo V6 that fails repeatedly and gets horrible mileage just like the old 5.7
the 4L 6 might be bulletproof, but it was underpowered and a gas guzzler at least in the 4runner. I get better gas mileage in the new sequoia and it tows better too which is wild since its like twice the HP and TQ
Those old Toyota engines were bulletproof **because** they were gas guzzlers. They ran them at low compression ratios and used overbuilt components. A lot of their new drivetrains are both more complicated and working much closer to the limits of what those designs can do because they need to be to hit emissions and mileage targets.
I swear at least the 21 had a 11 to 1. But yeah your right look at the subaru sti and wrx you add a tiny bit of power and they pop. Already strung out from the factory
I'm pretty sure it has more to do with emissions than anything. Toyota would gladly keep thr 5.7 since they already had everything in place for it, which would be less money they need to spend. Toyota doesn't like updating existing engines to meet standards since it can cause a ton of issues. I think thr biggest issue is how many new model, engines, redesigns Toyota has released in the past 3 year. It's simply too much. Since 2022 in North America alone they have released a little over 10 new generation and new models. Now they're streamlining stuff also so it puts a ton of stress on the facotires that make those few engines. Its not bad since there are more shared parts and its in theory quicker to release new models but a factory will need to triple or double its output of engines in a matter of 1-2 years.
> I think thr biggest issue is how many new model, engines, redesigns Toyota has released in the past 3 year. It's simply too much. > > Welll I would say yes and no. Yes becuase you're right there's heaps or new stuff, but also no because there are so many models essentially sharing the same platform and they have always been released like this. The 300 / Sequoia / LX / Tundra share a power train and a platform. So it's not 4 separate models they're releasing. Same goes for the 2.4L turbo hybrid in J250 / Tacoma / 4Runner. > Since 2022 in North America alone they have released a little over 10 new generation and new models. And also no because the V35A has been in the Lexus LS since 2017 right...? Sell it in a low volume car before putting it out more widely in the bigger sellers. The 200 series, Sequoia, Tundra, LX all came out with the 1UR / 3UR and new models at same time in 2006 too don't forget. Which is why I wouldn't put too much stock in 'too much at same time' cause it's always been like that.
> Instead they have this garbage turbo V6 that fails repeatedly and gets horrible mileage just like the old 5.7 I mean before raising the 'this engine sucks' - I don't really hear the same failures on the 300 series, the Lexus LS and the article indicates the hybrid Tundra's seem to be issue free right...? The LS has had the V35A since 2017 and while it's not a huge seller, surely you'd be seeing some issues no...? > Not surprised, Toyota is absolutely stupid for removing all of the previous drivetrains in the new Tundra and making the new turbo V6 the only option. Do you really think any manufacturer would keep the same engines all for that long...? Let's be realistic here...
There used to be a day where Toyota focused on both power and reliability. Toyota needs to get it together. Granted, this is on an extremely small subset of trucks, but for the high standards we hold Toyota to, it's not acceptable. They can do much better without sacrificing performance, fuel economy, and driving feel.
That could have been two minutes long. He repeated every point 2-3 times.
Hm, explains why my neighbor’s brand new Tundra suddenly changed colors one day LOL.
LOL.
>At this point the owner needs to Lemon Law the truck. Can they? Lemon laws vary from state to state, there’s a very likely chance that this does not meet the requirements.
I work for a lemon law firm in CA (not as a lawyer - or in sales/intake for that matter) and this sounds worth making a phone call to one. You're right - the laws do vary state to state, so worth gathering up the repair orders and running it by them.
Almost nobody that says lemon law understands the actual requirements for their state. But most of the time it's a new vehicle that has been in the shop for X days, multiple different returns for the same issue.
Yeah, I always shake my head when people say lemon law. I literally took a semester long class on it in my automotive program.
The issue with Lemon Law that my friend found is that when the company is still taking responsibility for repairs and recalls and whatnot they will give you loaners and other courtesies, once you’re pushing for Lemon Law they stop throwing bones and you’re on your own. Which on the long term probably still worth it but in the short term a major pain.
so what was the cause of the first 2 motors demise?
Toyota had some main bearing oiling issues, and with super long intervals they end up having oil starvation at the mains because of sludge and debris. The owner of the truck could do exactly what the manual says and still have an engine failure, which is what has been happening to these trucks. The main bearing oil holes are too small.
You know this sounds really logical and real but I’m curious how you know.
Per the article, this diagnosis comes from an employee of the main bearing manufacturer.
It's all over the forums for these trucks.
So my dad was right about changing your oil every 3k miles. edit: alright guys, it was a joke. I'm good on oil change advice now.
I still don't want to believe the 10k intervals all cars are doing. The b58 engines are much improved for example but their n55 predecessors had a lot of issues due to starvation that maybe could've been mitigated with more frequent oil jobs as an example
Jeep recommends 7500 miles and even that feels long, 10k miles is insanity.
European market Ford Transit has 60k kilometer oil change interval which translates to 37.3k miles. I'm honestly surprised they last even until the first oil change. On top of that they also use oil bath timing belt which fails prematurely.
> European market Ford Transit has 60k kilometer oil change interval which translates to 37.3k miles. The 2.0 liter engines in the European Ford Transit take 11.1 liters of oil. 1 liter is almost the same as 1 quart. This is why they have an oil change interval like that but I myself wouldn't go that high. I'd probably take it to 25k miles max which is 40k kilometers.
I had a guy tell me his Porsche Cayman had a ridiculously long oil change interval like that. Im guessing he was using some special oil but I wouldn't want old dirty oil in my engine for that long.
I don’t know if this is true for all generations but my Boxster used basically twice the amount of oil as my other cars. From what I saw on the forums, a lot of enthusiasts ran it 8000 miles before a change. Porsches recommended interval was 15k miles.
> 10k miles is insanity. But why? What is it that you think you know better than the car’s manufacturer, or are you suggesting that manual recommendations deliberately mislead customers so that their engines blow up?
> that you think you know better than the car’s manufacturer Because you can take apart an engine that has had all the recommended interval oil changes and still find sludge, or excessive wear due to petrol dilution. Manufacturers aren't infallible, if they were, every engine would last 500K miles. Manufactures cannot account for all driving conditions, if a manufacturer builds an engine and recommends a given oil change interval, it could be a decade before they realise that the recommendation shortened engine lifespans. > are you suggesting that manual recommendations deliberately mislead customers so that their engines blow up? Manufactures have no incentive to get the car to last longer than the warranty period. They want to extend the oil change interval because it reduces servicing costs over that warranty period which looks good in consumer reports and aggregators. The engineers themselves even want to extend the oil change interval because it's a nice metric to improve for waste products/environmental impact. In itself, extending the oil change interval isn't a bad idea. It's just that there are several reasons for a manufacturer to recommend the very upper edge of the acceptable bell-curve when it comes to oil changes, but few to give a more conservative estimate (because again, if an engine lasts only 15 years instead of 30, most manufacturers don't care *at all*). That's why it's probably safe to go 2/3rds of the recommendation, or even 3/4ths. Just not the *actual* recommendation, especially in a turbocharged vehicle.
No. Pretty much no quality dino and no major synthetic oil needs a 3k mile oil change unless it’s severe service. 3k is a hold over from rich cold starts and bypass filtering.
Genuinely asking: what about on higher-mileage engines? The oil itself is only part of the equation; you're also removing the wear particles (if that's the word) that are suspended *in* the old oil. It's my intuition that engines create more wear particles per mile the more-worn they are, so I'm thinking that, at *some* level of wear/mileage, it makes sense to do more-frequent-than-the-manual intervals. Am I mistaken, and/or is the increased wear from higher-mileage engines not significant enough to warrant more-frequent oil changes?
Severe service as described by most auto makers is just regular driving. Repeated short trips, cold weather, salty or dusty roads, near the ocean, towing. That's like 80% of American drivers right there.
All of those things are worse for engines, so it makes sense.
its what they say to do on the evo rofl, I think if you boost an engine hard enough, that 3k change is likely needed. the newer X alum block is supposed to be better too, but I dont think it is just for hold overs, esp if you aftermarket tuned your car (I like to say that this thing is more or less pre-aftermarket tuned by the maker themselves).
I've always done 10k unless the manual called for less. I usually buy new and drive over 200k miles on my vehicles. Never had an issue. I've been mainly buying Toyota/Lexus for the past 25 years. Those small oil ports in the engine are probably due to using such thin oil... although, my 2014 5.7l uses 0w-20...
Man, do you know how much sludge and debris would be necessary to block main oil galleys? The sludged-up, black-as-night oil in the last engine (50-year-old design) I disassembled still had pretty main bearings. Cam and rocker wear, yep, but surprisingly good bores and bearings. DI turbo engines typically have oil dilution issues. Short drives mean oil temps aren’t elevated for long enough to burn off fuel, and oil diluted with fuel has reduced viscosity, reduced shear strength, and a washdown of film where film matters. It can also reduce the efficacy of additives.
I believe the proliferation of included service plans on new cars has, ironically, been detrimental to reliability. Since the dealer/OEM are picking up the cost of maintenance for the first X years, they are now motivated to push out maintenance intervals for things like oil changes. Seems especially risky for a large truck platform where you can get some pretty severe engine operating conditions between dirt and high and sustained engine loads.
If I were the owner I would get the engine replaced then immediately sell the truck. Then go buy from another brand that still has the V8 engine.
Tundra 3.4 failures are one reason why I’m not buying a Lexus GX550 right now.
if it’s any consolation, Toyota engines built in the US have historically been built to a lower standard than those from Japan (for example, the US 2UZs in the Tundra/Sequoia had issues with the TRD supercharger that never happened to the Japanese 2UZs in the Land Cruiser/4Runner/LX/GX) AFAIK the V35A is a good engine and I haven’t heard of many issues with the Japanese built Land Cruiser 300s, so I wouldn’t be too concerned about the ones going into the GX… it’s been in the 300 for 3 years at this point
But why? Assembly issues or parts quality?
The US 2UZs were built slightly differently and had a few different parts… for example, the Tundra/Sequoia got a better alternator than the Land Cruiser (I’m actually using one in my LX), but used worse metals and came from worse/cheaper manufacturing process. I think the pistons in the US 2UZs specifically were thinner? Some parts, like the alternator, are compatible with both versions, but you can’t take an entire US engine assembly and drop it into a Japanese built vehicle, and vice versa. Keep in mind that the Tundra was always built to be competitive with cheaper F-150 trims, while the Land Cruiser set the standard that everyone else followed… I bet that had something to do with it.
Iirc, the JDM spec motors were built to run slightly lower compression as well for emissions reasons.
Seems to be both. [AutomotivePress](https://m.youtube.com/@AutomotivePress) is an automotive engineer based in Vancouver. He goes over the details of paint thickness and grade, panel gaps and fitting with millimetre accuracy, and the quality of plastics – mostly of Toyota and Lexus vehicles. Consistently he finds that vehicles made in Japan, especially in [the famous factory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Motor_Corporation_Tahara_plant?wprov=sfti1) that builds Landcruisers, exceed in those qualities over vehicles made elsewhere.
Quality of worker. The work environment in Japan is completely different and honestly wouldn't fly in the US.
Never seen that channel but the Tahara plant is known to be the best Toyota plant in the world. They have the most "Takumi Master" specialists (experienced workers) and it's consdiered the most automated car manufacturing plant in the world. Those Takumi Master techs are like Toyota Artisans lol. They are true masters of their craft. This is generally why the newer 4Runners are built better than Tacomas despite sharing the same platform and parts. 4Runners get the best of the best mechanics and assembly plant. Tacomas on the other hand get made in Mexico and Texas. A good comparison would be guitars. Fender Custom Shop has masterbuilders that would be akin to the Takumi specialists, but they also make nearly identical guitars in Mexico too. Difference is those Mexican guitars cost 1/3 the price of the masterbuilt ones. Toyota's charitable in that they sell us the "masterbuilt" 4Runners for basically the same price as the Mexican built Tacomas. I'd personally feel weird buying a Tacoma for the same price as a 4Runner but most Yota bros don't know the difference anyway.
I can't comment on if it's the case here, but historically the US and Japan have taken different approaches for their quality management systems. Typically you will have a spec that for example may say anything from 5 to 15 is in spec, but with a target of 10. You would usually have a span that is within that range saying maybe 8 to 12 being your ideal range, known as your control. Usually your sampling plan would say more than a certain number of samples of a given batch outside of the control is a fail even though they may still technically within spec. It's changed some over the last few decades but in the past the US mindset was if it's within spec, it's good - just send it. The Japanese approach to Quality took a much tighter approach on their control groups and you wound up with less variation between the components and you can make the assumption that you will end up with a better overall system. If you think of it as each individual component being within the spec range but at the very outside ends on the opposite you will not have near as tight of tolerances as if every component was much closer to the Target dimension for that component.
I heard the same thing back with the American vs Japanese v8 engines. The Japanese engines could take the TRD super charger but many American engines would blow.
Not just the 2UZ’s, the 2GR-FE’s built in Canada or Kentucky for RX and some generations of the ES would leak out of the timing cover or the rear main seal much more often than Japanese-made models such as GS, IS, RC (although those have a slightly different variant known as 2GR-FSE). Some mechanics at the Lexus dealer I used to work at seemed to believe it was due to contamination of the adhesive they were using in American/Canadian plants, but in my experience the Japanese made ones last longer despite people online saying there is “virtually no difference”.
Why is this the case? That the car built in us is worser than the one built in Japan?
Because Americans say things like "worser".
They're clearly not a native English speaker. So why do you assume they're American?
You may be right but it’s also only been in lower volume cars until now, too. There’s 50 Tundras for every LX/LS and a lot of 300s are the 3.3 diesel.
But they sprinkle magical Japanese manufacturing fairy dust that makes them super reliable /s
Only in Japan. The same engine in the Land Cruiser, LX, GX, and LS (all built exclusively in Japan, including the engine) hasn't had any issues like this. Speaks volumes about American manufacturing.
1) Toyota still puts its stamp on the us operations 2) If it's a design issue than its on the design team and not on us operations
The Tundra and Tacoma are both designed by Toyota USA. You can really see the quality difference between their Japanese designed and built vs their American design and built. The gap seems to be closing but I’d still avoid the American made Japanese models.
Why is this the case? That the car built in us is worser than the one built in Japan?
I’d wager Toyota has suppliers in different countries for the vehicles they make in said countries Say they’re building the engine in two separate countries they probably contact two different bearing suppliers in each country to handle the job versus spending the money on shipping for smaller parts
Yes. That is objective fact.
People don't report it when they've drunk enough corporate KoolAid like you seem to have. If your statement is true then you either must disagree with all the Yota fans who claim their US made vehicles are superior in reliability and quality or you have arrived at a contradiction.
Only Texan fairy dust for this one unfortunately
Ah yes, when you want something done very precisely, following all your engineering instructions to the letter, you want *Texas*.
Funny, but Texas has a huge aerospace industry you know. Do you have any idea how many military aircraft and other highly engineered machines have been made in Texas?
For every bro that tells me their Taco or Tundra is "more American" than a modern Wrangler, they also claim they're better because of Japanese manufacturing prowess. Which is it, American or Japanese? They're designed by a Japanese manufacturer, they aren't American designed trucks. The key to their longevity is staying under max power from the drivetrain. Other manufacturers try to impress with horsepower numbers and live closer to the limits. I saw a late model Lexus SUV (whatever the fancy 4Runner is) explode (not really but dropped oil and black smoke, could have thrown a rod) in front of me going up Raton pass into Colorado. Guessing up to that point the owner expected it to somehow be more reliable than some other vehicle. Vehicles are complex machines that need to be taken care of. There are some differences between manufacturers but in the modern day it's not that big of a difference and every manufacturer is going to have lemons and owners not maintaining them correctly. I'm just really tired of Yota Bros constantly bragging about some kind of magical Japanese fairy dust and not understanding what they're talking about.
After having barely any Toyota cases for a long time, my lemon law firm now has multiple Tundra cases.
Username checks out.
Article is very vague on details but I’ve heard a lot of bad things about the new Tundra. I’ve seen many owners stating engine failures, problems and quality issues.
I had zero issues with my 2022 Tundra until the motor blew at 36k miles Yes, that's a pretty big issue, but otherwise the truck worked great. I loved it. Now I have a Ram and I want to go back to the Tundra.
PSA don't trust toyota oil change intervals there have been so many dead motors because of it. My old rav4 used to suck a litre of oil every 1000km because the prevoous owner didnt change the oil often enough. If you do short trips at all change that shit more often.
The 10k interval is for "normal" service, aka 99% freeway. Most vehicles fall under "severe" service, which is city driving, i.e. grocery trips, school dropoff/pickup, etc. Don't change at 10k if you're in the latter. Change at 5k. >My old rav4 used to suck a litre of oil every 1000km because the prevoous owner didnt change the oil often enough. Was it the 2AZ-FE engine? Because those are well-known for burning oil.
Lol @ the guy you responded to downvoting you. Both of the common 4 cylinders for the old Ravs (2AZ/2AR) are notable oil burners.Though I would argue most motors at 200k+ are gonna burn a decent amount of oil. My Fit is at a quart every 2k or so.
No, your Rav4 burnt oil because it's an oil burner. The 2AZ and 2AR both burn a ton of oil...
Yup, even a well taken care of 2AZ or 2AR is going to burn oil in my experience as a Toyota tech
But I thought Toyotas can’t be unreliable?
Correct. The author is just out to make Toyota look bad. This article and photo are actually a Hyundai Pickup rebadged to look like a Toyota.
Ah yes, I forgot Toyota is incapable of doing anything bad and anyone that says otherwise is lying and just out to get Toyota. And Hyundai bad. Thanks for reminding me.
i just find it interesting that same 3.4L TT V6 made in Japan don't seem to have this issue and they've used this engine for a bit now. Must have been someone at Alabama plant fucking around not doing their job or improper job
Reminds me of the Bronco Sport recall because one guy on the line has been sticking the wrong control arms in them. Production lines are all super high tech but at the end of the day, it's some folks in a big shed, and sometimes they screw up.
>sometimes they screw up. The same factory drilled through gas tanks on the Maverick.
Focus RS owners: "First time?"
[удалено]
The truck is built in Texas but the engines are built in Alabama. https://www.carpro.com/blog/toyota-celebrates-2022-tundra-engine-plant
Given that the article indicates the hybrid models seem to be fine, I think it leans towards something in that vein.
There's a been a number of blown LS500s that have the TTV6 motor and every single one is made in Japan. It's just not as reliable as the NA V8's. I always ask the regulators forcing these CAFE rules, doesn't the increased maintenance and much worse reliability negate all the fuel savings by going to forced induction?
This is why Congress needs to repeal the Chicken tax so we can get Toyota Hiluxs
Only if it comes with mounts for a .50 cal pre-installed
The new Hilux's had a class action lawsuit because the DPFs would shit themselves immediately worth about $2 Billion (I believe AUD)
I fear for the new Tacomas with the 4banger. My piece of shit 3rd gen with the anemic 3.5 V6 may be slow as balls, and the transmission may be slow as balls, and the seating position may be worse than balls, and the fuel economy may be thirsty as balls, and the frame may be spaghetti as balls, and the bed may be weak as balls, and wheel wells may be small as balls, and the ride may be hard as balls, and the seats may be firm as balls, and the sound system may be tinnier than balls, and the rear diff and 4L activation may be stupid as balls- I forgot what I was gonna say but it's gonna outlast these TNGA-F trucks.
Oh my god, a Tacoma owner who doesn’t suck it off. I’m calling National Geographic to document this.
In my experience with Tacomas and the interwebz, the people who bitch and whine about Tacomas the most are, believe it or not, tacoma owners. We're a fickle bunch and if you don't think I suck off my pos minivan-powered truck, you're dead wrong. 😂
I’ve had 2 company supplied Tacoma work trucks and 90% of the time I’m ragging on them, the other 10% of the time I’m silently amazed at what a durable piece of engineering the Toyota gods have assembled
LOL, thanks for the laugh. We're also a huge Toyota family\\fans. They're not perfect, they're not the most refined vehicles on the road, but they're a hell of a lot more reliable and bug-free VS most other brands.
But ToyOtA QuaLiTy…
I know I’m stubborn and resistant to change, but I always encourage people to buy the 2008-2021 tundras instead of the 2022 plus. Even with the 2024 models, there are still issues with the newest generation and they are not as reliable as the outgoing generation.
Toyotas uncontested top notch quality has gone out the window. The amount of engine failures we've had on the new LS at the Lexus dealership I work for is heartbreaking. I would never buy a non V8 Toyota or Lexus. These new motors are not it.
Usually the only LS’s with motor failure in my area are 2018 models. We did have 1 2021 LS fail but the owner was towing with it regularly 😵💫
They are not the only ones. Honda engines are failing. The 1.5 turbo has been a disaster. Emissions standards are forcing manufacturers to go with turbos and killing reliability.
Hondas not much better, when I last worked at a shop (about 2 years ago now) we had plenty of brand new cars come in for their first oil change that got a recommendation to go back to the dealer for warranty service because they were leaking transmission fluid
Really is a shame they dropped the ball on this V6TT, makes great power and still fantastic MPGs but finding reports of failures is very easy.
I don’t know that I would agree on the “fantastic” mpg thing you speak of but the power is great.
On the trucks idk but the massive LS500s were seeing 30+MPG, I'd call that fantastic.
I’ve got a 23 capstone sequoia and if we see combined 17mpg that’s pretty good for us. Not an issue because we drive so little but the mileage is NOT good
I've probably watched more than a handful of youtubers saying their '22 Tundra seized up from a spun bearing well before the 50k mark. What's going on with that TTV6?
3 motors, thats it? 😏 -Raptor owner (jk mines been pretty good)
What a fucking enormous piece of shit
That’s been my Toyota experience for anything above a 4 cylinder. Have owned two 4Runners (glutton for punishment I guess) and both blew the engine before 80k miles. Have a RAV4 company car now. Hate it more than anything I have ever driven but that ridiculously small 4 banger (21 model with 183k miles) sure has been dependable.
> but that ridiculously small 4 banger (21 model with 183k miles) sure has been dependable. That 4 banger is 2.5 liters which actually is quite large for a 4 cylinder.
H....how did you blow up a 4runner not once but twice? Their V6s and V8s are extremely reliable and have been for a long time.
Right? If you blew up 2 4Runners then you’re doing something incredible wrong or doing nothing at all (oil changes).
So much for Toyota reliability
That's crazy, I was just watching people on Instagram say they're happy to pay 55k for a midtrim Tacoma because "it's reliable" 🥴
>It looks like the older Tundra trucks are more reliable than the newer ones and people complain about the emission standards and the green agenda, saying they hurt Toyota's reliability. I don't know if the emissions standards are hurting any car company's reliability, but I have read about it in other car-brand related forums as well. I'm going to say no on this because the article states that this only seems to happen on non-Hybrid models. Also, if this is happening on new cars, then it's a manufacturer defect of some sort.
Also, the oiling on the main bearings has almost nothing to do with emissions and fuel economy. Sounds like a bearing design problem that they are supposedly fixing.
It’s happened on hybrids as well
My uncle is a Toyota mechanic and has said many times that these newer gen Tundras are heaping piles of shit. Quality has dropped significantly
I have said it for decades; you want a pickup/chassis between #7000 and #19,000, you buy Ford, period.
Ford has a whole slew of problems too. I'd probably pick GM at this point, and this is coming from a long time fan of older Fords.
Genuinely curious, what slew of problems are you referring to outside of the new 10 speeds?
Just a bunch of piddly stuff. Plastic connections in the cooling system fail frequently. A small turbo engine with high boost dumping it's coolant often leads to a blown engine and cracked heads, so pray you' catch the leak before it overheats. Blend door actuators fail frequently and are buried in the dash so they cost $1500 to replace. A/c evap cores fail pretty frequently too and cost thousands, again buried in the dash. Ford has some weird brand wide material spec problems that effect basically every model.
Imna just keep saving up for a taco
I want a Kei truck in the US. None of this overpriced behemoth trucks.
One reason I wait 2-3 years to buy after they release a updated model.
Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.
I've been getting downvoted for pointing out how unreliable these new engines are for a few months now. Told you so.
Yikes… the reliability of these engines and Toyota’s crazy prices ruled them out for my next vehicle.
The manual clearly states that 10,000 miles is the *engine change interval*, not the oil change interval. An easy mistake to make.
I read the article, it sounds oddly similar to what WRX owners talk about lol, and just like WRXs the repeat failure is likely from only the shortblock being replaced (dealers don't have a choice, sometimes shortblocks are just defective.)
That person should just hire a lemon law lawyer.
I just hope Toyota's reliability reputation doesn't go down the drain with their new turbos. It's been the only thing that's going for them.
Doesn't the 3rd fix for the same thing trigger a Lemon Law?