autonews.com is reporting that Toyota will create a new joint platform to underpin the next generation of the Tundra and Tacoma. And it will also be used in the global Hilux. In other words, a single building block set for all of Toyotas pickups, and undoubtedly the SUVs that are based on them (4Runner, Sequoia). I used quote marks in the title for “Platform” as that word has come to mean something rather different with time. And it’s not the first time this has been done, as Nissan’s Frontier and Titan do the same thing. And look to oters to go down this same route.
It needs to be said again: Toyota’s strategy with the Tundra was never to take on the Big Three head-on, with a full range of large pickups. It was always to offer an alternative in the 1/2 ton market to the Toyota faithful. And since the Tundra and Tacoma have shared the same factory in San Antonio, production was severely constrained. And Toyota has consistently favored the Tacoma, as it was vital to maintain its dominance in its category. Tacomas are also being made in Mexico now, and its sales continue to grow (up 13% in March) despite the new competition in the mid-size field.
Toyota has had great success with its Toyota New Global Architecture (“TNGA”) that underpins (or will soon) the Corolla, Prius, Camry Rav4, Highlander and various Lexus models. Whereas once upon a time, a “platform” was seen as something like a common floor/cowl unit, today the parameters are much more flexible, thanks to the ease of tooling and stamping greater varieties of body elements. But the suspension design, certain structural elements or their design, and many components and other building block elements can be shared to minimize costs per vehicle. This is what will happen with the BOF trucks. makes gobs of sense, and both of them are in bad need of a new generation.
These new generation of Toyota trucks will also have hybrid versions. Toyota has committed itself to offering hybrids in every size category, and this is the obvious time to introduce that to the trucks. Just what that will entail is unknown, but it would undoubtedly be fairly easy to adapt the RWD system that has been used by the Lexus LS for some years now, and is standard on the current LS 500. Whether there will be plug in variants or not is an unknown, but ti will undoubtedly improve mileage considerably, especially in city driving.
Interesting. Perhaps the shared platform will allow them to carve out interior space more appropriate to the Tacoma’s exterior dimensions. I’m very curious about what this will mean for the 4Runner; the differences in frame design between the Prado/4Runner/Hilux and North American Tacoma has been a point of discussion and perhaps even pride for Toyota Truck-o-philes.
Hybrids? I’d like to get more than 17mpg city out of my 4Runner and Toyota’s systems have been shown to be reliable.
That’s the body, not the platform. There’s no doubt that the next Tacoma will have a roomier body, as the current one sorely deficient in that regard.
Is it notably worse than other midsizers, Paul? Seems no worse (better,actually) than the Colorado and old Frontier in terms of rear legroom. Yes with the Tacoma you have the legs-out driving position, a function of high clearance+ trying to keep the roof line lower. My old 4Runner is the same way, less so on the 5th gens that are approaching more of a “chair” position.
It’s worse, I sat in the Tacoma, Ranger, and Colorado last week at the auto show to specifically compare this. When the front was adjusted for me (6-1 with a 32″inseam), the back of the Ranger and Colorado were snug but fine with an inch or two in front of my knees and sufficient headroom, but in the Tacoma my knees were in the seatback and my head was in the headliner. It is noticeable. I sadly forgot to check the Nissan at the same time, sorry.
The front seat was worse as well, harder to get into and then if the Tacoma has a sunroof (not my preference in general but a deal breaker in the Tacoma), not enough headroom there either. The cabin is just squished vertically between the frame and the roof compared to the others, or at least that’s how it feels.
Yep, Tacoma has high floorboards. After owning a 4Runner there’s no way I’d buy another like that. Just too uncomfortable. Like sitting in an economy car. Terrible for tall folks.
Right you are gym, I haven’t looked at both back to back, just test drove a diesel Colorado a few years ago and more recently had a rental Tacoma TRD Offroad. My one big takeway: that diesel 2.8L is a dream to drive but judging by the number of lemon-law trucks showing up on Carfax, not the safest long (or even short term) bet. Colrado also had some remarkably sloppy workmanship towards the rear of the bed: daylight shining through the bedside/tailgate interface, really ugly sloppy sheetmetal work on the bed floor towards the tailgate. Not sure if that was just a fluke. The Tacoma by comparison was downright infuriating at times with the lack of low end punch and constantly downshifting for the mildest of hills on the interstate. But it felt like a reasonably high quality piece overall when I spent a bit of time poking around. I’d honestly buy neither one.
The only thing comparable to the driving position in a new Tacoma/4runner are 4th Gen F-bodies. If you have ever sat in a 90’s Camaro or Firebird; butt on the floor, legs straight out in front of you like a bobsledder, you’ve experienced what a new Toyota truck is like.
If I was dependent on the thing to get me across the Sahara I could deal with a Tacoma, but as is, I’d rather have a couple unexpected visits to a Ford/GM dealer, but drive a modern, comfortable vehicle the other 364 days a year.
This is not true of the current (2010-now) 4runner, ltd. The driving position is nothing like the Tacoma or prior 4runners. I keep my driver’s seat all the way down as that approximates the sedan driving position I prefer. I have almost 5 inches of headroom that way, leaving plenty of space to raise the seat to a perched chair position if desired.
It would make a lot of sense to have some sort of platform sharing between the three trucks. It was my understanding that the Titan and Frontier share fame and suspension components, but they each have a distinct frame. I think Toyota could follow a model like that and save a lot of development and engineering costs. Even though unique now, there is already some similarity between the Tacoma and Tundra platforms despite no parts sharing.
While Toyota hasn’t seemed interested in taking on the Big 3 in some time, it sure did come across that way when the Tundra was released in 2007. At that time they had two plants making Tundras and the truck was arguably class leading (at the very least, very competitive). The trucks were also marketed aggressively. Regardless, clearly between the two trucks Toyota has been selling all that they can build for some time.
Toyota is obviously satisfied with the high profits it continues to make on these old platforms and saw no need to make any major changes to either. I recall about 2013 or so Mike Sweers, the head truck engineer, used to actually come on Tundra forums when they were revising the Tundra. He asked for input on how to change and improve the trucks. He did a lot of great conversation but then quietly disappeared after a short while.
IMO, both trucks are long overdue for a major overhaul. I have driven both trucks extensively. The body on the Tacoma dates to ’05 and is not very comfortable or roomy. The Tundra cab is roomy (probably has the best back seat of any extended/super cab truck), but Toyota sorely needs to improve the drivetrain efficiency. Even Nissan has done that and improved the EPA ratings. While I do appreciate the simplicity of the current drivetrain, I can’t say that I am all too keen to spend massive amount of money to trade my 11 year old Tundra for one that has no drivetrain improvements. A Toyota hybrid truck would be an interesting idea, something I’d consider. Then again, the prices are just too crazy on trucks now. Good thing I have no plans to sell any time soon.
The intended market for the T-100/Tundra has been clear since introduction. Unfortunately for me I need a higher GVW and GCW than the Tundra offers, otherwise I would definitely consider it next time I buy a full-size truck. Interesting that Nissan at least has it’s toe in the larger pickup market with the Titan XD, which really is a 3/4 ton despite what Nissan’s marketeers want you to believe.
As a reasonably happy owner of a current Generation Taco, I think an updated platform shared with the bigger truck will be good for the Taco, as long as it doesn’t get too bloated. But on the other hand, if I was a Tundra guy, I’d worry about “cheapening” the bigger truck. I know platform doesn’t mean parts commonality, but there’s some perception that the Titan isn’t as rugged as it could be due to the commonality with the Frontier.
As a longtime Toyota fan, I was pleased to read the last paragraph of the article about a possible hybrid version of the Tacoma pickup. I’m nearing retirement, and I’m looking for that “final” vehicle that could economically combine both recreational and daily use needs. I’d like to get a small trailer–maybe 17 to 22 feet, but I’m hesitant to commit to any vehicle that gets poor gas mileage. I’m puzzled why Toyota hasn’t hybridized their pickups sooner? Their hybrid system is mature and well thought of, and Isn’t the space below the bed an ideal place for battery storage? Could some of our engineers elaborate?
Curiously, the current Tundra has 5-lug hubs while the lighter Tacoma has 6-lug hubs.
For a time, that was also true with the Ram 1500 and the Dakota. With the ’19 Ram switching to 6-lug, the Tundra is now the last full-size truck to use 5-lug wheels.
I always found that interesting too, but since there is no relationship between the Tundra and Tacoma platforms right now, if they were the same it would just be coincidence. Tacoma is based on the same landcruiser platform that the FJ, 4Runner are based upon and it inherited the 6 lug wheel pattern from that line. Tundra/Sequoia are on a dedicated platform right now and for some reason they chose a 5 lug pattern when they designed them. Once they are on the same one you can be sure that they will end up with interchangeable wheel bolt patterns, etc.
In the same way, Tundra/Sequoia and LC200 have some shared frame/suspension/axle components, 5-lug hubs included.
I suspect this consolidation around a single frame will yield a slightly beefier Tacoma (one that doesn’t rot through thin frame rails quite so quickly perhaps) and a Tundra that isn’t a “3/4 ton masquerading as a half-ton.” Current Tundra is remarkably beefy in terms of things like the size and weight of control arms, etc. This is also a non-trivial part of why they are so lack luster on MPG. I can appreciate just how overbuilt they are, but most buyers in the market would rather get more palatable fuel economy.