Increasing Tacoma's GVWR

[phsycle]

The Toyota brochures are actually fairly accurate. If you get a basic 4wd CrewMax SR5, you're at ~1.5klbs, and about the same for 1794 or platinum model...if you get everything fully optioned, yes the payload goes down a bit but that applies for every truck and brand.

Extended cabs 4wd start at around 1.6k lbs payload.

Point is, if you want a Toyota truck that can carry 1.6k lbs of payload...you can get one.

No, the POINT is, you’re suggesting a person buy a new truck with a net gain of less than 200lbs of payload. Even based on the brochures, going from an Ext cab Tacoma (1,445lbs) to Tundra (1,600lbs), net gain is 155lbs. Similar with crew cabs. ?
I won’t comment on how you believe a sales brochure is more accurate than a federally mandated vehicle-specific placard.

 

[rruff]

No, the POINT is, you’re suggesting a person buy a new truck with a net gain of less than 200lbs of payload.

The Tundra will carry the load much better, regardless of the sticker...

 

[Dalko43]

No, the POINT is, you’re suggesting a person buy a new truck with a net gain of less than 200lbs of payload. Even based on the brochures, going from an Ext cab Tacoma (1,445lbs) to Tundra (1,600lbs), net gain is 155lbs. Similar with crew cabs. ?
I won’t comment on how you believe a sales brochure is more accurate than a federally mandated vehicle-specific placard.

According to the brochures:
Base crew cab Tacoma 4wd has a payload of just over 1.1k lbs (access cab 4wd just over 1.2k lbs).
Base extended cab Tundra 4wd has a payload just over 1.6k lbs.

The gain in payload is more than a mere 200lbs. And as someone else has noted, the Tundra handles 1k lbs, and much more, far better than the Tacoma. The numbers dont tell the full story.

Stop trying to put such a negative spin on it.

 

[phsycle]

....
Stop trying to put such a negative spin on it.

No, just fact checking.

 

[shade]

@DaveInDenver and I can start beating each other up over the distinction between piggyback & remote reservoirs, if that'll make you feel more comfortable.

 

[luthj]

I find a deep irony in off-road + overland users wanting a smooth ride, good handling, and lots of travel. While simultaneously wanting high payload, lots of power, and excessive durability (toughness), especially with big tires.

These are conflicting goals to the extreme. More horsepower means bigger/heavier drivetrain components. Which means lower payload. Long travel, soft cushy suspension means worse road manners, and much lower safe payload. Big tires mean better off road ride, but lower payload, and bigger drivetrain components, which further lowers the payload if durability is the goal.

If a smooth ride on crap roads is the goal, then lighter and narrower tires and axles with soft springs, and a light vehicle is whats needed. Less weight means cheaper shocks for the same performance, which means lighter drivetrain, and higher durability.

Once you start down the toughness track, adding weight to increase durability in one area starts the vicious circle where other parts need reinforced or upgraded. Eventually you will get a vehicle that weighs 1500lbs more, and is not terribly more capable than a lightly modified stock vehicle.

A holistic approach with an eye for the end goal must be taken. Otherwise individual "upgrades" may end up self defeating.

 

[shade]

Once you start down the toughness track, adding weight to increase durability in one area starts the vicious circle where other parts need reinforced or upgraded.

Yep. It's about balance.

With regard to the Tacoma's capabilities, a little more weight allowed for better rear springs can result in a significant improvement over OEM performance, on & off road. Otoh, burdening the little truck with a full 1/4" steel skid system, steel bumpers, and 35" tyres can lead to all sorts of new ways to wear out and break things.

Better beef up the springs again. And shocks. And add reinforcement to the front suspension components. And carry a spare drive axle. And U-joints. Better make it a full drive shaft. I carry a spare drive axle & drive shaft on the roof rack. The front hubs don't last long. Now I bring a lot of tools for field repairs. I'd never hit the trail without a welder.

The brakes sure are weak on Tacomas, aren't they?

 

[luthj]

The brakes sure are weak on Tacomas, aren't they?

Followed shortly by, Tacomas sure are under powered, aren't they?

 

[rruff]

Followed shortly by, Tacomas sure are under powered, aren't they?

And yet the anemic 2.4l 22re was the ********...

 

[shade]

And yet the anemic 2.4l 22re was the ****...

It was, in its day. Mine had no problem towing a heavy machine with a load in the bed. I'd still rather drive my current truck at highway speeds, though.

 

[shade]

Followed shortly by, Tacomas sure are under powered, aren't they?

I can't believe I left that out. Stupid Toyota and their stupid car engines!

 

[luthj]

My 22re was fine in a tiny pickup which weighed something like 2500lbs empty. Wide powerband, good for towing in its limits. Driving mountain passed at 80mph? Lugging around 1500lbs of extra weight? Not so much. But then again I wasn't inclined to rage out if I needed to slow down, and other drivers passed me.

 

[tacollie]

My overloaded Tundra handles way better than my overloaded Tacoma did!

 

[shade]

My overloaded Tundra handles way better than my overloaded Tacoma did!

That's the spirit!

 

[rruff]

From the "most popular articles of the decade" link above.
"Jon had the truck weighed and realized that his Tacoma was 2000 lbs over the factory rating. This explained the sag he was beginning to feel in the OME Dakars. "