Tundra on a Texas Ranch for 100K miles

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

Besides, MB is pulling out of the IL market because the lawmakers have to subsidize farmers to get the downstate votes. They give huge tax breaks to gas stations that use bio, but there are almost no standards in place so the signs on the pumps say the bio content could be between 0 and 20%. MB (and all manufacturers) don't recommend more than 5% and then it needs to meet ANSI standards which isn't guaranteed at IL pumps.

Why would anyone want to jump through all the federal diesel nonsense just to deal with state by state **** like that?

Toyota could spend millions developing a US only diesel only to have protectionist folks in the government hammer them if they actually sell enough to make money or to have the fuel rules change again.

In addition to that, there are more strict rules about fuel economy and emissions coming in the near future. I'm sure the development cost is extremely high. In order to compete with the big three in power and capability, Toyota will have to spend massive amounts of money to sell probably 15-20k trucks a year? Ford sells 300k plus. Toyota isn't going to do something if it isn't going to make them money. It is a business after all.
 
I have a test for that truck.

I work at a surface coal mine. You should see the use and abuse our fleet gets. That truck looked way too clean. Mud and winter will tear a vehicle apart. Sure they had rough roads to drive over, but that truck looked like it never got in any real mud or other adverse weather, those are variables that would have changed the outcome of that vehicle. I also can't believe the tailgate was in such good shape. I've never seen a ranch truck that didn't have a big ding in the top cause they backed into the goose neck, or they had to fix something and used the tailgate as a work table and beat a wheel bearing out of a spindle or something in the field. I also didn't see a mountain pass for hundreds of miles around that place. Take that stock trailer over Eisenhower Pass and see how she feels then. My 40 has towed alot too on flat ground.

To compare, we use Fords here, have for 35 years. We have tried Dodge and Chevy. The Dodges did poorly in all aspects. The Chevys have weak front ends, really bad clearance and if you even once touch dry ground in 4WD, they will grenade the transfer case. We still have two Chevy crew cabs, they have both been through multiple transfer cases in only a 4-5 year period. The Fords seem to be doing the best right now, but by no means are they great, but I still think they have the best chassis of the big three.

I have a 2001 F250 that is mine to use here. I started driving it as a summer employee for two summers when it was brand new. I then returned here and I still drive it. The truck has 43,000 miles on it. It does not get used on a daily basis except in the summer. Winter time I use it about 8 hours a week. This truck sees severs duty conditions. Lots of cross country driving through reclamation, rills gulches, contour ditiches, cab high grass, shrubs, and hidden rocks. In the winter it is not uncommon to push snow with the bumpers and fight mud as deep as the rims. The truck is usually coated in heavy Mag Chloride laden mud.

Early on the front flaps and such under the radiator tore off, skid plate underneath is a pretzel. Within weeks the steering stabilizer that was mounted on the bottom of the axle was toast. We lost all the radiators a few summers ago by hitting a large rock that went under the front bumper and hit the radiators cause they hang below the front frame. Fuel pump has failed, tranny was low on fluid from the factory. Brakes only last about 5000 miles here, all U-joints up front have been replaced several times. Front driveshaft was a failure from the beginning, we use custom shafts in these trucks up front now. Rear drive shaft pucked a U-joint last summer. I also had a broken rear spring, half the helper leaves were gone, only the main and overload were left.

Tranny shifter is loose and junky. It freezes in the winter with mud around it and can't be shifted. Park brakes are a nightmare for the same reason. It is extended cab with the third doors, they rattle to no end, you can see light all around them. Paint is peeling off the rockers, and the top of the hood. Rear door latches don't work very well, door hinges are worn and heater blower has been acting up. Don't get too much water inside, it shorts out the fuse panel, and this just from rinsing the floor off or lots of snow and mud. Too much moisture under the hood also shorts stuff out. Alternator died last year. And the thing is burning a quart or two between services, blues blue smoke on startup. We service every 3-4 months, and you can tell by the miles and age, it does not go 3000 miles between changes.

Yes my work truck is somewhat abused, but at the same time I do try to take care of it. Alot of the failures on it and the overall wear is just crappy parts in an extreme environment. I don't think a Tundra would take any of the abuses of the mine site any better, I think it would fair worse. The mud and cap eats up all the rubber components in the suspension for one, along with u-joints.

I would like to test a Tundra here though, give it to us for 100K and see what it looks like, but we are not average users, so they shy away.
 
I have a test for that truck.

I work at a surface coal mine. You should see the use and abuse our fleet gets. That truck looked way too clean. Mud and winter will tear a vehicle apart. Sure they had rough roads to drive over, but that truck looked like it never got in any real mud or other adverse weather, those are variables that would have changed the outcome of that vehicle. I also can't believe the tailgate was in such good shape. I've never seen a ranch truck that didn't have a big ding in the top cause they backed into the goose neck, or they had to fix something and used the tailgate as a work table and beat a wheel bearing out of a spindle or something in the field. I also didn't see a mountain pass for hundreds of miles around that place. Take that stock trailer over Eisenhower Pass and see how she feels then. My 40 has towed alot too on flat ground.

To compare, we use Fords here, have for 35 years. We have tried Dodge and Chevy. The Dodges did poorly in all aspects. The Chevys have weak front ends, really bad clearance and if you even once touch dry ground in 4WD, they will grenade the transfer case. We still have two Chevy crew cabs, they have both been through multiple transfer cases in only a 4-5 year period. The Fords seem to be doing the best right now, but by no means are they great, but I still think they have the best chassis of the big three.

I have a 2001 F250 that is mine to use here. I started driving it as a summer employee for two summers when it was brand new. I then returned here and I still drive it. The truck has 43,000 miles on it. It does not get used on a daily basis except in the summer. Winter time I use it about 8 hours a week. This truck sees severs duty conditions. Lots of cross country driving through reclamation, rills gulches, contour ditiches, cab high grass, shrubs, and hidden rocks. In the winter it is not uncommon to push snow with the bumpers and fight mud as deep as the rims. The truck is usually coated in heavy Mag Chloride laden mud.

Early on the front flaps and such under the radiator tore off, skid plate underneath is a pretzel. Within weeks the steering stabilizer that was mounted on the bottom of the axle was toast. We lost all the radiators a few summers ago by hitting a large rock that went under the front bumper and hit the radiators cause they hang below the front frame. Fuel pump has failed, tranny was low on fluid from the factory. Brakes only last about 5000 miles here, all U-joints up front have been replaced several times. Front driveshaft was a failure from the beginning, we use custom shafts in these trucks up front now. Rear drive shaft pucked a U-joint last summer. I also had a broken rear spring, half the helper leaves were gone, only the main and overload were left.

Tranny shifter is loose and junky. It freezes in the winter with mud around it and can't be shifted. Park brakes are a nightmare for the same reason. It is extended cab with the third doors, they rattle to no end, you can see light all around them. Paint is peeling off the rockers, and the top of the hood. Rear door latches don't work very well, door hinges are worn and heater blower has been acting up. Don't get too much water inside, it shorts out the fuse panel, and this just from rinsing the floor off or lots of snow and mud. Too much moisture under the hood also shorts stuff out. Alternator died last year. And the thing is burning a quart or two between services, blues blue smoke on startup. We service every 3-4 months, and you can tell by the miles and age, it does not go 3000 miles between changes.

Yes my work truck is somewhat abused, but at the same time I do try to take care of it. Alot of the failures on it and the overall wear is just crappy parts in an extreme environment. I don't think a Tundra would take any of the abuses of the mine site any better, I think it would fair worse. The mud and cap eats up all the rubber components in the suspension for one, along with u-joints.

I would like to test a Tundra here though, give it to us for 100K and see what it looks like, but we are not average users, so they shy away.

So all I got out of that was that the F-150 has all but fallen apart and you say that it gets light duty? I would love to see a Tundra out there in your environment. I think you would be very surprised at how it handles the abuse. As for the video not being heavy workload, the guy was towing a goose neck with 12 cattle that weigh 1200 lbs each! That's 14400lbs WITHOUT the weight of the trailer. If that's not extreme duty I don't know what is. The truck in the video obviously wasn't showroom condition when they brought it back in. I mean every light on the dash was on. It looked like a Christmas tree. However, if you listened to what the guy was saying in the video, he said that they have had all the big 3's trucks and none of them held up as well as the Tundra.
 
After 105,000 miles on my 2007 tundra u bought brand new in October 2007, the seat side bolster is unraveling on the cloth seats, I had to replace the starter because of a no start condition after having it in the shop twice (removing the starter requires removing the exhaust manifold)

Brakes have been good.

The tailgate got bent up after dropping a tree limb on it.

The front skidplate looks like a $2 horror on a Sunday morning.


Three sets of tires, one center cap is broken and needs to be replaced


The f'n fan puts out a high speed squeal


Still better than the ford and Chevy it replaced.
 
I'm not saying the Tundra did not do well, I think it did great, and I think they are great trucks, but I think it could be tested further and that their test bed was selected for certain reasons. Overloading a truck is one thing, the components are overengineered anyways, so yes it handled the extra loads. But I'm saying the environment of the testing could have been harsher, I think you would see different results. Throw in some road salt and see what the chassis looks like then.

I have no doubt they were blowing through domestic trucks on their ranch, they have so many small issues that would crop up in that use. We face that everyday here at the mine, but I know a new Tundras chassis would take a beating here, as would the body and interior. My father inlaw has had alot of front end work done on Dodges through the years from driving in the oil fields, it wears them out pretty quick. Maybe it is the weight of the Cummins. I was impressed they felt the front end had held up so well, that truly is impressive.

We're using F250's here, we only have one F150 left. The half tons really can't take the abuse. I was just remarking about a Ford that I use, and has had consistent use by one person for very few miles comparatively, is falling apart. You should see the trucks used to transport the guys to and from their work areas, driven by three or more drivers per day, every day. They rack up the miles and are sold off or discarded after a few years and a little over 100K miles cause they are shot. Most usually recieve a great deal of chassis work in their lifetime and an engine repalcement is not out of the ordinary. But the solid axles front and rear have been far stronger for us than the previous IFS Ford used, I think that would be one of the weak links for a Tundra in rougher conditions. I'm also less than impressed with ground clearance on all new trucks. Even the new Fords we got, almost identical frame layout to the trucks made a few years ago, but the fuel tank, exhaust, etc... all hang down further. Trucks just seem to be getting more and more urbanized, but that is a debate for another time.
 
Testing

The conditions in Texas are harder then you think, try very hot 110 degree days, trucks idling for hours and thick dust that coats all filters very quickly. The Tundras in oil field work hold up twice as good as any other truck used. These oil field truck are almost all off-road and get 100k in 2.5 years. Oh and by the way Toyota does test on Ranches in Montana too, with just as good of results.
 
The conditions in Texas are harder then you think, try very hot 110 degree days, trucks idling for hours and thick dust that coats all filters very quickly. The Tundras in oil field work hold up twice as good as any other truck used. These oil field truck are almost all off-road and get 100k in 2.5 years. Oh and by the way Toyota does test on Ranches in Montana too, with just as good of results.

Glad someone from Toyota chirped in....

:p

:beer:
 
No, the 200 is made in Japan. The Tundra is mostly based on the 200 Series chassis architecture. It is a 200 Series truck.

How's the IRS swap going?
 
After 105,000 miles on my 2007 tundra u bought brand new in October 2007, the seat side bolster is unraveling on the cloth seats, I had to replace the starter because of a no start condition after having it in the shop twice (removing the starter requires removing the exhaust manifold)

Brakes have been good.

The tailgate got bent up after dropping a tree limb on it.

The front skidplate looks like a $2 horror on a Sunday morning.


Three sets of tires, one center cap is broken and needs to be replaced


The f'n fan puts out a high speed squeal


Still better than the ford and Chevy it replaced.

Have you had the drive belt and/or tensioner replaced on yours?
 
No, the 200 is made in Japan. The Tundra is mostly based on the 200 Series chassis architecture. It is a 200 Series truck.

I find that very hard to believe.

The Tundra is pick up based. It has a three section frame to have bed flex. It has the tow hitch as part the frame. It has over-sized everything for towing. Big brakes, big driveshaft, big axle. It was purpose designed to be a large American style towing machine.

You're trying to tell me the Land Cruiser was designed first to be all those things?

I don't have a problem believing they share some parts, including the basic frame architecture and, of course the 5.7L and drive train.I have a problem thinking all those HD towing parts were designed with the 200 in mind and they just raided the part bin for the Tundra. More likely the Land Cruiser is evolving toward becoming a re-badged Sequoia. Frankly, I'm surprised it hasn't already happened.
 
I find that very hard to believe.

The Tundra is pick up based. It has a three section frame to have bed flex. It has the tow hitch as part the frame. It has over-sized everything for towing. Big brakes, big driveshaft, big axle. It was purpose designed to be a large American style towing machine.

You're trying to tell me the Land Cruiser was designed first to be all those things?

I don't have a problem believing they share some parts, including the basic frame architecture and, of course the 5.7L and drive train.I have a problem thinking all those HD towing parts were designed with the 200 in mind and they just raided the part bin for the Tundra. More likely the Land Cruiser is evolving toward becoming a re-badged Sequoia. Frankly, I'm surprised it hasn't already happened.

The Land Cruiser is still pretty different from the Tundra/Sequoia. The most notable difference is all the luxury stuff that is standard on the LC and you have to pay out the nose for on a Sequoia. I will say this, if you buy a Platinum Sequoia with all the bells and whistles, it nearly equals the LC, including the price...
 
IRS is moving along slowly... maybe I'll start a post about it in the hardcore forum. :D

It was purpose built/designed using the heavy duty 200 Series Chassis as the starting point. That is why the share so many parts.... it certainly doesn't share much, if anything, with the smaller 150 or Taco chassis. Sure, the rear 2/3rds of the frame are different for a few reasons, two come down to money, one for the leaf spring axle design. I'd rather Toyota kept with their rest of world products usage of boxed frames. The only larger hard parts on the Tundra are the front rotors, the rear driveshaft, and the rear axle on the 5.7L trucks. The A-arms and tie rods are longer to get the extra width up front.

The Sequoia is another vehicle based on the 200. The IRS will likely be seen on the next generation Land Cruiser.
 
I have read that all their truck and LC platforms from 2005-ish on share the essentially the same frame, sans a few recombinations.
 
I just drooled on my self.


Like Gumby says, the Feds gotta look out for whomever's suckling at DC's teat and vice-versa..

*Yet they support manufacturers and corporations who try new stuff using Japanese business models?
screen_image_451804.jpg


Oh, wait, that was NUMMI, and of course it was really Toyota's fault it closed? :popcorn:

/END RANT. Let's see what comes into availability this season for Central and South America??

Everyone gripes about Toyota's holding out on a stateside diesel, yet Toyota, IMHO has comparatively been doing what is right/best so far. :D
 
Everyone gripes about Toyota's holding out on a stateside diesel, yet Toyota, IMHO has comparatively been doing what is right/best so far. :D

More true than any of us diesel-seekers care to admit.

Didn't NUMMI close because Give us Money backed out on the partnership for it?
I hate that Toyota lost the Matrix through that, that was a great little car. If I could, I'd DD one.



IRS is moving along slowly... maybe I'll start a post about it in the hardcore forum. :D


Please do!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom