2023 Tundra TRD - First 3000 Miles

[jamesurq]

So after leaving it in ECO mode for the first 3000 miles (mostly) and treating it very nicely (again, mostly) I'm damn disappointed with the MPG.

Even after a long highway trip to the beach and back, we're still only topping out at 16.9 mpg. The EPA rating is 20 city/24 highway.

Is it the TRD PRO lift/tires/etc that are the issue? Anyone else with a non-TRD PRO actually getting the mileage they're supposed to?

 

[bjohnson425]

I don't have one but the general consensus on the Tundra forums and other FB groups is NO not even close. There are always the handful of people that " get 30MPG towing a 12,000LB 5th wheel up a 45 degree grade mountain" but those are very few and far between. Even the people who have taken them on extensive road trips with mostly highway miles are reporting 19mpg best case.

 

[jamesurq]

So the EPA are a bunch of liars? I'd love to know how they got those figures..

 

[WildernessRimFab]

Is it the TRD PRO lift/tires/etc that are the issue?

What is your exact setup?

I just hit 3K on mine. Its a 2023 Tundra Crewmax TRD 6.5 foot bed. I have an AT Atlas topper on it with Load Range E 275/70R18 Wildpeaks.
I just did a long trip, loaded down 4 people plus gear and 4 mountain bikes on the back. I was getting ~17 mpg.
I assume that lots of the mpg loss is from the topper, I plan to make a fairing for the front later this summer.

I definitely noticed an MPG decrease with the tires and topper, I was getting 22 mpgs right after I picked up the truck before the tires/topper.

 

[jamesurq]

It’s the TRD pro. They only come one way. Factory lift, fox suspension, 18”bbs wheels falken ATs. 5.5 foot bed. Added a tonneau cover and load bars but that’s it.

 

[Jetboy]

So the EPA are a bunch of liars? I'd love to know how they got those figures..

It's not really the EPA. It's Toyota that's lying about it. The manufacturers do the testing and certify the results to the EPA in most cases. The test cycle dictated by the EPA is not very realistic though and heavily favors small turbo engines. The V35A has been a bit of a flop in terms of efficiency claimed vs real world efficiency. It's probably no better than the old v8 if it had been matched up with a 10 speed. Far more powerful though, so if it's reliable it's still a better engine in my view. It's a bit of a trade off. Hard to accept that Toyota took 15 years and this was the best they could do though. It wouldn't surprise me to see the new Tundra get a restated EPA mpg rating down to more like 14/19. I think that would be more realistic based on most reviews I've seen where they do a standardized highway test. I think it was Car and Driver's long term 2023 Tundra was averaging only 13ish mpg, but it included some towing.

The Truck King guys did a super long drive up to the arctic circle with a hybrid and non-hybrid and that road should return very good mpg - it's slow and not all that mountainous through central Canada. And they only got around 17 to 18mpg from the TRD Pro hybrid empty. They towed an enclosed trailer and it got around 11-12mpg. IMO that's not bad pulling a box trailer. It's like towing a parachute. I get right around 10mpg in my Tundra 5.7 pulling a 16 foot box trailer with 6k lbs. Probably very similar. So it's a 10-20% improvement if the two are comparable in towing.

5th gen 4Runner was 17/21 from 2010 through around 2019 when it dropped to 16/19 despite no known changes to the vehicle. I have no idea why. The new GX550 is supposedly 17mpg combined. That's not good for a midsize suv. If that's the EPA rating, real world could be even worse. The Highlander is as high as 35mpg combined and it's bigger (obviously different design, but that doesn't necessarily justify burning twice as much fuel - the Cd isn't double).

My beef with the hybrid is that the battery is too small to do much. It's quicker 0-60, but the battery is too small to do anything else useful and won't help with mpg. if it had a 10kwh or even better a 20kwh batter pack, it would have a significant benefit in mpg and power available. As it is - I'd prefer to not have it even if it was free. Especially in the Sequoia with how it's packaged. Not until it has a battery with enough energy capacity to meaningfully assist on long mountain passes and regenerate energy on the way down. Then it could be a game changer. I do like the turbo 6 though despite the poor efficiency. It should pull much better than my older 5.7 and do so more efficiently. Like you - I would have liked to have seen the hybrid mpg closer to the GM 3.0 duramax. If Toyota can't get there either by PHEV or other mods on the TTv6 - it should build an EPA complaint version of its 3.3 diesel and give us a truck with 25+mpg.

 

[Zjohnsonua]

There's not much lying. The test data is accurate, but the test isn't real-world representative. Been this way for years. The new cycle is better than the old ones, but it's still poor. The EPA test is heavily lobbied by major market players who are interested in boosting their CAFE numbers...so who here is surprised? The sticker is a guideline at best. Non-agency Third party data is where the gold is.

 

[WildernessRimFab]

You are getting 17 mpg, and the EPA rating for the 2023 TRD Pro on the Toyota website is 18 city 20 hwy.
That's not within the exact range but that's still pretty close.

The MPG for the regular Tundras (non TRD Pro) is 18/23, I imagine the difference with the Pros is the lift (less aerodynamic) and tires (heavier).

 

[bkg]

So the EPA are a bunch of liars? I'd love to know how they got those figures..

simulated perfect conditions?

 

[onemanarmy]

Sucks we have to deal with hybrid systems/batteries/turbos/start-stop/cylinder shutdown/AFM costs, complexity, and undoubtedly less reliable nonsense for 1-2mpg in a 6000 lb vehicle that people want to drive 80mph by themselves

 

[jamesurq]

So the plot thickens. Had a 4 hour highway trip planned for yesterday so I figured, let's try premium gas. 18.9 mpg over the trip (90% highway).

There's no requirement to use premium, but it's clearly better mpg. I wonder if there's any other performance increase? I did the math on the cost differential, and I'm doing 9% better mpg for 19% more money, so unless there's another compelling benefit - it's not worth it.

 

[Rigger]

Automobiles were better before the ruiners got involved.

I have a Ford F250 Tremor that I am selling. Looking to buy one of these new Tundras. Most people I talk to that have them like them despite the issues.

 

[Bripars40]

So the plot thickens. Had a 4 hour highway trip planned for yesterday so I figured, let's try premium gas. 18.9 mpg over the trip (90% highway).

There's no requirement to use premium, but it's clearly better mpg. I wonder if there's any other performance increase? I did the math on the cost differential, and I'm doing 9% better mpg for 19% more money, so unless there's another compelling benefit - it's not worth it.

I have the non-hybrid 2023 TRD off road 4wd (not PRO) and I’m averaging 19.5mpg after 13,000 miles. This is my second one (company trucks) and it took until about 10,000 miles before I start to see good mpg. Also, leave it in normal mode and not Eco. Eco for some reason nets worse mpg

 

[bjohnson425]

Automobiles were better before the ruiners got involved.

I have a Ford F250 Tremor that I am selling. Looking to buy one of these new Tundras. Most people I talk to that have them like them despite the issues.

Not sure if we can link other forums here, but I would suggest heading to tundras.com and checking out the "blown motor" thread in the 3rd gen forum... There are ALOT of them with main bearing failures and to date no resolution from Toyota except to replace the short block... which are on back order. I hope toyota can figure it out. But Ford is on a decade of eco boost and still cannot figure out cam phasers, wastegates or turbos. 175k miles is considered high mileage on those..

 

[onemanarmy]

I can't wrap my head around it.

Just take all that brain power and money and focus on lightweight, efficiency, reliability, and dependability. All those high paid designers that were employed to create such an ugly truck should have been replaced with efficiency engineers.

No batteries, no turbos, no 12 speed auto, no AFM, no cylinder deactivation, no start/stop (what a farce that is), no 48V wiring, no heavy water cooled $1000 alternators and starters, no electric motors.....just a proven V6 and V8 and a robust trans. Something that is made to last a long time is good for the environment too.

 

[joseywales]

Something that is made to last a long time is good for the environment too.

Yahtzee! People need to think it through. The manufacturers are just going to put up the window dressing, and hope nobody looks behind the curtains. All the help these EVs give the environment is undone by the mining and processing necessary to extract the metals to make the batteries. It’s ok though, because we don’t SEE the damage China (where the vast majority of the needed minerals are) does to the planet. It’s like the Ballard fuel cell buses Whistler used during the Olympics in 2010. Big praise was given to the “clean” fueled buses. What was NOT part of the narrative is the fact that the hydrogen was trucked 3900 miles in conventional diesel powered tractor trailers to power buses driving a 12 mile circuit. It’s all done so govt can feel like they are doing “good”.

 

[luwig]

Just my 2 cents here, '23 sequoia TRD pro on the highway does about 18-21 mpg on mostly on ECO cruise control. In-city driving is abysmal at around 13 mpg. I run 93 octane fuel.

But this is all with an aftermarket steel bumper and lift on stock tires and wheels.

 

[jamesurq]

how many miles do you have on it now? I'm wondering if it's going to get better as the miles go up. Just hitting 5k now.

 

[Weedhopper]

As a comparison , my 2015 5.7 with 68k got 18.1 on a round trip from Htfd to boston Logan airport, out and back maybe 5 miles town driving to pick the guy up. 500 extra pounds of toolbox, etc. 210 miles.

Did it the old fashioned way, fill it, drive it, fill it and do the math.

I think those little engines work harder.

 

[Cortez the Killer]

I have a non hybrid ‘22 SR5 TRD OR. Right now just over 26k. I am averaging 19.5 all around and it’s actually difficult to not get low 20’s on the highway. My mileage has gotten better and better as it passed 10k. For whatever that’s worth. It has a ton of power and torque and tows really well. I do run Premium fuel even though it doesn’t call for it, as I feel the turbos benefit and it seems to run smoother. I also change the oil at 5k intervals instead of the factory call out of 10k. While it may have some shortcomings, the engine and transmission pairing is really good. The longer I drive it the more I am impressed. Time will tell on long term reliability. I know it’s popular to crap on turbos and all the required safety and economy gizmos the govt requires, but welcome to reality- it is getting harder and harder to not buy a vehicle with a turbo. Turbo technology is much better than it was in 1983. Toyota did a pretty good job with this truck.