Tundra owners advice
- Thread starter Jake777
- Start date
- Status
Only my parents experience. There 2000 Tundra 4x4 v8 extracab started with my sister new and finally with them. It has been trouble free except starter and a frame recall. Still a pleasure to drive and everything works when I borrow it.
Ah yes, the frames. A pile of new frames sitting in the winter snow and salt at my area dealer..... LOL. Life is funny.
Dad had a '08 4.7L. Got it in 2010. Someone rear ended him last year, so its gone now. He has a '12 Ram 1500 5.7L Hemi now.
The Hemi will treat him better, since it has MDS and he idles a lot.
I'll list pros and cons.
Pros
Easy to maintain
Cons
It likes fuel
4WD was wonky, never wanted to engage no matter what you tried
Poor Handling
Slow
The Hemi will treat him better, since it has MDS and he idles a lot.
I'll list pros and cons.
Pros
Easy to maintain
Cons
It likes fuel
4WD was wonky, never wanted to engage no matter what you tried
Poor Handling
Slow
I have a 14 Tundra 1794 package. It has 60700 miles now. Mine has been problem free mechanically and very reliable. The radio / satellite/ navigation unit it the dash is junk. Mine was replaced 2 times under warranty but a few bugs still exist in it.
My fuel mileage in West Texas has been 13-14 around town. 16-18 on the highway. Highway speeds in West Texas are mostly 75-85mph.
My fuel mileage in West Texas has been 13-14 around town. 16-18 on the highway. Highway speeds in West Texas are mostly 75-85mph.
We had a few of them as company trucks and the shop foreman made the comment that his Silverado 2500 got better gas mileage. The one he drove had the 4.7
What vintage? There are 2.5 generations--in 2014 there was a mild sheetmetal update, along with an interior update, but which had the same drivetrain, hence the ".5" generation.
First gen was through 2006, and had the 3.4L V6 or 4.7L V8. These did have frame rot, low mpg and other issues. I don't know much about 1st gen.
Second gen was in 2007. The V6 changed to the 4.0, but really, you don't want the V6 in these models. The 4.7L V8 was always a good mill, some think it underpowered in the full sized, and it was always thirsty. In 2010 the 4.7 was replaced by the 4.6, which is in the same engine family as the 5.7. The 3.4/4.7 was a timing belt, while 4.0/4.6/5.7 are timing chains. For the most part, the engines are relatively trouble-free. Toyota seems to have water pump issues across the board, so the 5.7 can need water pumps. Cam tower leaks can occur, and are not trivial from what I understand. The flex fuel 5.7's (which is most of them after a certain date--the 4.6 were not flex) can get stuck thinking they are on E85 which leads to truly abysmal mpg. [The 4.6 ought to have water pump issues, but I don't think I've read of one. Probably because of relatively low take rate on 4.6?]
In general, the 5.7 is the one to go with. It always had the six speed automatic, and the towing package. The 4.7 never got the six speed, while the 4.6 always had the six but could be had in non-tow configuration.
2nd gen weak spots are:
-water pumps
-cam tower oil leaks
-power steering racks after 2010 or so
-an overly complicated traction/VSC setup (three pushes to disable all. Really? it's stupid)
-it's a part time 4x4, no diff in the center
-some do not like the reach for the HVAC in 2nd gen; 2.5gen I think fixed that
-mpg, with many users hovering around 15mpg real world.
-no limited slip nor locker in the rear
-IMO the 18" tires are odd sized. Certainly not cheapie 16"
-many dis the 2nd gen styling; many dislike the overgrown nature
-a horribly expensive air injection system which is well known for failure
-2nd gen seems to have avoided frame rot--but it's a Toyota, so you know rust will be an issue
-front differential. It wasn't all years but for some of them they preset the bearings wrong and it'll eat the diff.
*
Myself, I have a 2010 4.6L with tow. IMO, if it was non-tow I wouldn't like it--sometime I think it could stand a bit deeper gearing in the rear to make up for the low-torque engine. I cheaped out with the 4.6, although it does just fine for my pedestrian usage. Right now it's getting about 16-17mpg in cold weather, snow tire usage and me driving about 70mph everyplace. I have eeked out 21+ in summer by very very careful driving.
When I bought mine I decided I did not want AFM/MDS/unproven transmissions/diesel/direct injection. So it's primitive today. But at the time it also was the way to get a > 6' bed with a proper 4 doors (albeit reduced rear leg room, not a problem with kids).
*
Would I buy mine again? I dunno. At times the automatic transmission drives me nuts--but any auto is going to do that, as I much prefer stick. But the torque convertor lockup programming is... moronic. The part time transfer case bugs me, as my driveway requires lock to lock turning. It's horrible in snow (snow tires went a very long ways--without them IMO it's best to park this thing). I dislike the throttle tip-in. I never planned to daily drive it, but right now I am, and I find the lumbar support a bit lacking. The dashboard lights dim when I turn on the headlights--which means I have to readjust if I turn them on during the day. Disabling traction is annoying--it's overly complicated.
First gen was through 2006, and had the 3.4L V6 or 4.7L V8. These did have frame rot, low mpg and other issues. I don't know much about 1st gen.
Second gen was in 2007. The V6 changed to the 4.0, but really, you don't want the V6 in these models. The 4.7L V8 was always a good mill, some think it underpowered in the full sized, and it was always thirsty. In 2010 the 4.7 was replaced by the 4.6, which is in the same engine family as the 5.7. The 3.4/4.7 was a timing belt, while 4.0/4.6/5.7 are timing chains. For the most part, the engines are relatively trouble-free. Toyota seems to have water pump issues across the board, so the 5.7 can need water pumps. Cam tower leaks can occur, and are not trivial from what I understand. The flex fuel 5.7's (which is most of them after a certain date--the 4.6 were not flex) can get stuck thinking they are on E85 which leads to truly abysmal mpg. [The 4.6 ought to have water pump issues, but I don't think I've read of one. Probably because of relatively low take rate on 4.6?]
In general, the 5.7 is the one to go with. It always had the six speed automatic, and the towing package. The 4.7 never got the six speed, while the 4.6 always had the six but could be had in non-tow configuration.
2nd gen weak spots are:
-water pumps
-cam tower oil leaks
-power steering racks after 2010 or so
-an overly complicated traction/VSC setup (three pushes to disable all. Really? it's stupid)
-it's a part time 4x4, no diff in the center
-some do not like the reach for the HVAC in 2nd gen; 2.5gen I think fixed that
-mpg, with many users hovering around 15mpg real world.
-no limited slip nor locker in the rear
-IMO the 18" tires are odd sized. Certainly not cheapie 16"
-many dis the 2nd gen styling; many dislike the overgrown nature
-a horribly expensive air injection system which is well known for failure
-2nd gen seems to have avoided frame rot--but it's a Toyota, so you know rust will be an issue
-front differential. It wasn't all years but for some of them they preset the bearings wrong and it'll eat the diff.
*
Myself, I have a 2010 4.6L with tow. IMO, if it was non-tow I wouldn't like it--sometime I think it could stand a bit deeper gearing in the rear to make up for the low-torque engine. I cheaped out with the 4.6, although it does just fine for my pedestrian usage. Right now it's getting about 16-17mpg in cold weather, snow tire usage and me driving about 70mph everyplace. I have eeked out 21+ in summer by very very careful driving.
When I bought mine I decided I did not want AFM/MDS/unproven transmissions/diesel/direct injection. So it's primitive today. But at the time it also was the way to get a > 6' bed with a proper 4 doors (albeit reduced rear leg room, not a problem with kids).
*
Would I buy mine again? I dunno. At times the automatic transmission drives me nuts--but any auto is going to do that, as I much prefer stick. But the torque convertor lockup programming is... moronic. The part time transfer case bugs me, as my driveway requires lock to lock turning. It's horrible in snow (snow tires went a very long ways--without them IMO it's best to park this thing). I dislike the throttle tip-in. I never planned to daily drive it, but right now I am, and I find the lumbar support a bit lacking. The dashboard lights dim when I turn on the headlights--which means I have to readjust if I turn them on during the day. Disabling traction is annoying--it's overly complicated.
Originally Posted By: supton
What vintage? There are 2.5 generations--in 2014 there was a mild sheetmetal update, along with an interior update, but which had the same drivetrain, hence the ".5" generation.
First gen was through 2006, and had the 3.4L V6 or 4.7L V8. These did have frame rot, low mpg and other issues. I don't know much about 1st gen.
Second gen was in 2007. The V6 changed to the 4.0, but really, you don't want the V6 in these models. The 4.7L V8 was always a good mill, some think it underpowered in the full sized, and it was always thirsty. In 2010 the 4.7 was replaced by the 4.6, which is in the same engine family as the 5.7. The 3.4/4.7 was a timing belt, while 4.0/4.6/5.7 are timing chains. For the most part, the engines are relatively trouble-free. Toyota seems to have water pump issues across the board, so the 5.7 can need water pumps. Cam tower leaks can occur, and are not trivial from what I understand. The flex fuel 5.7's (which is most of them after a certain date--the 4.6 were not flex) can get stuck thinking they are on E85 which leads to truly abysmal mpg. [The 4.6 ought to have water pump issues, but I don't think I've read of one. Probably because of relatively low take rate on 4.6?]
In general, the 5.7 is the one to go with. It always had the six speed automatic, and the towing package. The 4.7 never got the six speed, while the 4.6 always had the six but could be had in non-tow configuration.
2nd gen weak spots are:
-water pumps
-cam tower oil leaks
-power steering racks after 2010 or so
-an overly complicated traction/VSC setup (three pushes to disable all. Really? it's stupid)
-it's a part time 4x4, no diff in the center
-some do not like the reach for the HVAC in 2nd gen; 2.5gen I think fixed that
-mpg, with many users hovering around 15mpg real world.
-no limited slip nor locker in the rear
-IMO the 18" tires are odd sized. Certainly not cheapie 16"
-many dis the 2nd gen styling; many dislike the overgrown nature
-a horribly expensive air injection system which is well known for failure
-2nd gen seems to have avoided frame rot--but it's a Toyota, so you know rust will be an issue
-front differential. It wasn't all years but for some of them they preset the bearings wrong and it'll eat the diff.
*
Myself, I have a 2010 4.6L with tow. IMO, if it was non-tow I wouldn't like it--sometime I think it could stand a bit deeper gearing in the rear to make up for the low-torque engine. I cheaped out with the 4.6, although it does just fine for my pedestrian usage. Right now it's getting about 16-17mpg in cold weather, snow tire usage and me driving about 70mph everyplace. I have eeked out 21+ in summer by very very careful driving.
When I bought mine I decided I did not want AFM/MDS/unproven transmissions/diesel/direct injection. So it's primitive today. But at the time it also was the way to get a > 6' bed with a proper 4 doors (albeit reduced rear leg room, not a problem with kids).
*
Would I buy mine again? I dunno. At times the automatic transmission drives me nuts--but any auto is going to do that, as I much prefer stick. But the torque convertor lockup programming is... moronic. The part time transfer case bugs me, as my driveway requires lock to lock turning. It's horrible in snow (snow tires went a very long ways--without them IMO it's best to park this thing). I dislike the throttle tip-in. I never planned to daily drive it, but right now I am, and I find the lumbar support a bit lacking. The dashboard lights dim when I turn on the headlights--which means I have to readjust if I turn them on during the day. Disabling traction is annoying--it's overly complicated.
Thanks for reminding me how much more I hated that truck.
What vintage? There are 2.5 generations--in 2014 there was a mild sheetmetal update, along with an interior update, but which had the same drivetrain, hence the ".5" generation.
First gen was through 2006, and had the 3.4L V6 or 4.7L V8. These did have frame rot, low mpg and other issues. I don't know much about 1st gen.
Second gen was in 2007. The V6 changed to the 4.0, but really, you don't want the V6 in these models. The 4.7L V8 was always a good mill, some think it underpowered in the full sized, and it was always thirsty. In 2010 the 4.7 was replaced by the 4.6, which is in the same engine family as the 5.7. The 3.4/4.7 was a timing belt, while 4.0/4.6/5.7 are timing chains. For the most part, the engines are relatively trouble-free. Toyota seems to have water pump issues across the board, so the 5.7 can need water pumps. Cam tower leaks can occur, and are not trivial from what I understand. The flex fuel 5.7's (which is most of them after a certain date--the 4.6 were not flex) can get stuck thinking they are on E85 which leads to truly abysmal mpg. [The 4.6 ought to have water pump issues, but I don't think I've read of one. Probably because of relatively low take rate on 4.6?]
In general, the 5.7 is the one to go with. It always had the six speed automatic, and the towing package. The 4.7 never got the six speed, while the 4.6 always had the six but could be had in non-tow configuration.
2nd gen weak spots are:
-water pumps
-cam tower oil leaks
-power steering racks after 2010 or so
-an overly complicated traction/VSC setup (three pushes to disable all. Really? it's stupid)
-it's a part time 4x4, no diff in the center
-some do not like the reach for the HVAC in 2nd gen; 2.5gen I think fixed that
-mpg, with many users hovering around 15mpg real world.
-no limited slip nor locker in the rear
-IMO the 18" tires are odd sized. Certainly not cheapie 16"
-many dis the 2nd gen styling; many dislike the overgrown nature
-a horribly expensive air injection system which is well known for failure
-2nd gen seems to have avoided frame rot--but it's a Toyota, so you know rust will be an issue
-front differential. It wasn't all years but for some of them they preset the bearings wrong and it'll eat the diff.
*
Myself, I have a 2010 4.6L with tow. IMO, if it was non-tow I wouldn't like it--sometime I think it could stand a bit deeper gearing in the rear to make up for the low-torque engine. I cheaped out with the 4.6, although it does just fine for my pedestrian usage. Right now it's getting about 16-17mpg in cold weather, snow tire usage and me driving about 70mph everyplace. I have eeked out 21+ in summer by very very careful driving.
When I bought mine I decided I did not want AFM/MDS/unproven transmissions/diesel/direct injection. So it's primitive today. But at the time it also was the way to get a > 6' bed with a proper 4 doors (albeit reduced rear leg room, not a problem with kids).
*
Would I buy mine again? I dunno. At times the automatic transmission drives me nuts--but any auto is going to do that, as I much prefer stick. But the torque convertor lockup programming is... moronic. The part time transfer case bugs me, as my driveway requires lock to lock turning. It's horrible in snow (snow tires went a very long ways--without them IMO it's best to park this thing). I dislike the throttle tip-in. I never planned to daily drive it, but right now I am, and I find the lumbar support a bit lacking. The dashboard lights dim when I turn on the headlights--which means I have to readjust if I turn them on during the day. Disabling traction is annoying--it's overly complicated.
Thanks for reminding me how much more I hated that truck.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2015
- Messages
- 1,462
Originally Posted By: supton
[The 4.6 ought to have water pump issues, but I don't think I've read of one. Probably because of relatively low take rate on 4.6?]
They did have the same waterpump issues. But b/c it's timing belt driven it gets replaced preemptively with a new timing belt so you hear less about complete faillures.
[The 4.6 ought to have water pump issues, but I don't think I've read of one. Probably because of relatively low take rate on 4.6?]
They did have the same waterpump issues. But b/c it's timing belt driven it gets replaced preemptively with a new timing belt so you hear less about complete faillures.
2011 5.7 Crew Max LTD 4wd.
47k No issues. Drives nice and tows well.
Like it more @ $1.50/gal.
47k No issues. Drives nice and tows well.
Like it more @ $1.50/gal.
Originally Posted By: KingCake
Originally Posted By: supton
[The 4.6 ought to have water pump issues, but I don't think I've read of one. Probably because of relatively low take rate on 4.6?]
They did have the same waterpump issues. But b/c it's timing belt driven it gets replaced preemptively with a new timing belt so you hear less about complete faillures.
You're thinking of the 4.7. The 4.6 is the same engine as the 5.7, which is timing chain. 1UR-FE is the 4.6, 3UR-FE is 5.7 non-flex fuel, 3UR-FBE is 5.7 flex-fuel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_UR_engine
http://www.toyotatundraforum.com/pdf/1UR-FE.pdf
Originally Posted By: supton
[The 4.6 ought to have water pump issues, but I don't think I've read of one. Probably because of relatively low take rate on 4.6?]
They did have the same waterpump issues. But b/c it's timing belt driven it gets replaced preemptively with a new timing belt so you hear less about complete faillures.
You're thinking of the 4.7. The 4.6 is the same engine as the 5.7, which is timing chain. 1UR-FE is the 4.6, 3UR-FE is 5.7 non-flex fuel, 3UR-FBE is 5.7 flex-fuel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_UR_engine
http://www.toyotatundraforum.com/pdf/1UR-FE.pdf
I bought a 2011 Tundra Double Cab 4x4, with the 5.7(non flex fuel) and tow package in early 2012. To this point it has treated me well. I did not buy it expecting great gas mileage but have been pleasantly surprised on trips. My biggest complaint is the cheap BFG Long Trail tires Toyota put on them. They do not last and seem prone to dry rot. The 275/65/18 is an expensive tire but all new truck tires are expensive.
I drove all the competition in late 2011 and early 2012 and liked the Tundra and F150 the best. I went with the Tundra mainly because I felt it would be more reliable over the long haul and the Tundra was cheaper.
I drove all the competition in late 2011 and early 2012 and liked the Tundra and F150 the best. I went with the Tundra mainly because I felt it would be more reliable over the long haul and the Tundra was cheaper.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2015
- Messages
- 1,462
Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: KingCake
Originally Posted By: supton
[The 4.6 ought to have water pump issues, but I don't think I've read of one. Probably because of relatively low take rate on 4.6?]
They did have the same waterpump issues. But b/c it's timing belt driven it gets replaced preemptively with a new timing belt so you hear less about complete faillures.
You're thinking of the 4.7. The 4.6 is the same engine as the 5.7, which is timing chain. 1UR-FE is the 4.6, 3UR-FE is 5.7 non-flex fuel, 3UR-FBE is 5.7 flex-fuel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_UR_engine
http://www.toyotatundraforum.com/pdf/1UR-FE.pdf
whoops I have a hard time keeping the 4.6 and 4.7 straight.
Originally Posted By: KingCake
Originally Posted By: supton
[The 4.6 ought to have water pump issues, but I don't think I've read of one. Probably because of relatively low take rate on 4.6?]
They did have the same waterpump issues. But b/c it's timing belt driven it gets replaced preemptively with a new timing belt so you hear less about complete faillures.
You're thinking of the 4.7. The 4.6 is the same engine as the 5.7, which is timing chain. 1UR-FE is the 4.6, 3UR-FE is 5.7 non-flex fuel, 3UR-FBE is 5.7 flex-fuel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_UR_engine
http://www.toyotatundraforum.com/pdf/1UR-FE.pdf
whoops I have a hard time keeping the 4.6 and 4.7 straight.
we have an 06 with about 140k on it, which we bought used at 100k. We've towed heavy with it, and now a lighter camper (4,000 wet). The PO towed at least 3500 per the remnants of the previous brake controller.
It has been reliable, reliable, reliable, and worked hard.
I really like the truck but as with anything if you use it hard you'll find the limits.
There's not a lot of electronics, even the 06 uses push/pull cables for HVAC controls. No blend door motor problems, defrost actuator failures, etc..
The roll-down fullsize rear window is wonderful.
Transmission never misses a beat, even with its use.
LSD is a nice feature in the 2wd
easy to work on. neat and tidy engine compartment, simple underneath.
The brakes are a little anemic when you ask it to handle large loads
15-17 mpg typical (I've got a mild level (maybe 1" lift" on the front, and 265/70-17 tires, so that eats 1-2 mpg.)
Engine has just started a tiny, and its first oil weep, looks to be at the valve cover.
Engine has a nice power curve, great low end torque. The stock headers are 4-1 pipe on each side beneath the heat shield. If you get on it (towing on inclines) it makes the power and sounds sweet but is loud and raw. If you do this for 2 hours its miserable. Around town it rarely breaks 2200 rpm and is near silent down there.
With the towing package, power and gearing really isn't a problem. The 4.7 is plenty adequate for weekend warrior-ing. It moves out plenty quick day-to-day.
Engine consumes zero oil (minus the new weep), even towing at this mileage. it's pretty solid.
Towing package includes extras like oil-to-water heat exchanger, aux trans cooling.
It's sort of a big, simple, starts-everyday, vehicle.
It is not plush. It will beat you on rough roads. It also does not wallow through turns like softer-sprung trucks. It rides like a big taco.
It is a large vehicle but doesn't drive like it.
they aren't for everyone -- many want the smoother riding F150 or quieter GM. But it's stout and honest.
It has been reliable, reliable, reliable, and worked hard.
I really like the truck but as with anything if you use it hard you'll find the limits.
There's not a lot of electronics, even the 06 uses push/pull cables for HVAC controls. No blend door motor problems, defrost actuator failures, etc..
The roll-down fullsize rear window is wonderful.
Transmission never misses a beat, even with its use.
LSD is a nice feature in the 2wd
easy to work on. neat and tidy engine compartment, simple underneath.
The brakes are a little anemic when you ask it to handle large loads
15-17 mpg typical (I've got a mild level (maybe 1" lift" on the front, and 265/70-17 tires, so that eats 1-2 mpg.)
Engine has just started a tiny, and its first oil weep, looks to be at the valve cover.
Engine has a nice power curve, great low end torque. The stock headers are 4-1 pipe on each side beneath the heat shield. If you get on it (towing on inclines) it makes the power and sounds sweet but is loud and raw. If you do this for 2 hours its miserable. Around town it rarely breaks 2200 rpm and is near silent down there.
With the towing package, power and gearing really isn't a problem. The 4.7 is plenty adequate for weekend warrior-ing. It moves out plenty quick day-to-day.
Engine consumes zero oil (minus the new weep), even towing at this mileage. it's pretty solid.
Towing package includes extras like oil-to-water heat exchanger, aux trans cooling.
It's sort of a big, simple, starts-everyday, vehicle.
It is not plush. It will beat you on rough roads. It also does not wallow through turns like softer-sprung trucks. It rides like a big taco.
It is a large vehicle but doesn't drive like it.
they aren't for everyone -- many want the smoother riding F150 or quieter GM. But it's stout and honest.
Last edited:
I own a 2013 Tundra double cab that I purchased new. Have 42,000 miles on it. It has the 4.6, which I think is basically the 5.7 with a shorter stroke. About 75 less HP. 4 WD with the tow package. Mileage averages 17 or 18 and once I got close to 20 on a trip. Winter its worse.
I went with the 4.6 as at the time gas was high and I felt I could save a little there.
As I shoped for trucks I found Toyota was the least expensive by far. I thought I would end up with a used F150 or Ram but once I started shopping I found used truck prices were crazy.
I ended up getting the Tundra for 26,995.00. It stickered for 33,205.00. No other brand was close in price.
As for reliability so far all I have done is replace the garbage original Bridge stone tires. They lasted 25,000 miles. I have changed the oil, T case and diff fluids too.
I have owned Fords, Chevy's and Dodge and so far I think the Tundra is better quality.
If there is one thing Toyota needs to work on is ride quality. This truck has a stiff ride. Rides better towing or with a load.
I guess only time will tell as to overall quality. As for the 4.6 it moves when you need it too. The 5.7 must be awesome. I tow a boat that is just under 2000 pounds and with the tow haul feature it tows it fine. I know that's not a lot of weight.
My friend bought a F150 with the ecoboost just before I bought my Tundra. His truck rides much smoother. More car like. I told him it will be a good comparison on quality as we both plan to own them for years. So far he has had one recall I think. Nothing on the Tundra.
I went with the 4.6 as at the time gas was high and I felt I could save a little there.
As I shoped for trucks I found Toyota was the least expensive by far. I thought I would end up with a used F150 or Ram but once I started shopping I found used truck prices were crazy.
I ended up getting the Tundra for 26,995.00. It stickered for 33,205.00. No other brand was close in price.
As for reliability so far all I have done is replace the garbage original Bridge stone tires. They lasted 25,000 miles. I have changed the oil, T case and diff fluids too.
I have owned Fords, Chevy's and Dodge and so far I think the Tundra is better quality.
If there is one thing Toyota needs to work on is ride quality. This truck has a stiff ride. Rides better towing or with a load.
I guess only time will tell as to overall quality. As for the 4.6 it moves when you need it too. The 5.7 must be awesome. I tow a boat that is just under 2000 pounds and with the tow haul feature it tows it fine. I know that's not a lot of weight.
My friend bought a F150 with the ecoboost just before I bought my Tundra. His truck rides much smoother. More car like. I told him it will be a good comparison on quality as we both plan to own them for years. So far he has had one recall I think. Nothing on the Tundra.
hands down the best truck i have owned . not a single problem in 12years . gas mileage is fair at best but reliablity is amazing. bed is too shallow is my only complaint. its a full time work truck and the shallow bed is an oversight on toyotas part.
- Status
