New Tacoma vs Colorado vs Ranger

[rruff]

I would want to do the math though - cost is important but it’s secondary to weight.

Aftermarket may have a little strength/weight benefit, but it won't be much. And with the Tacoma you'd surely have to wait, with it being an all-new model.

 

[emulous74]

As a current diesel Bison owner and a Badlands Bronco I am impressed with the Trailhunter but the following gives me patience to buy one:

No front locker
Complexity and extra weight of the hybrid system
No steel front bumper that you can easily mount a winch to.
Nothing beats the Bison’s boron hot stamped skid plates for weight and robustness. I did hear the Traihunters are hot stamped but nothing about Boron or weight.
Can’t get the manual in the trailhunter.

 

[jaywo]

Thanks Jaywo for that info on payload! I didn’t realize the Ranger was sporting that much as base, that’s pretty incredible.

My main reason for wagon vs truck is water and dustproofness of my kit. I have my Canyon well sorted to the point where this isn’t a problem; my problem now is actually occasional mold because of the non-moving damp air on the coast where I lived under the cap during the winter, but I fixed that too I think (seems to be solved anyway but next winter will be the test)

However, to get mine sorted meant a truck cap, which I built myself to be as strong and light as I could, but it still chewed into my payload a bit. I have 1550lbs, and I reckon my cap is about 150 lbs, which immediately drops me down into the high end of common decent wagon territory. Specifically I’m keen on the Grenadier, with the Defender a close second because of payload. But, my current Canyon is basically perfect and easily has a few hundred thousand kms left in it (more if I’m willing to spend on the bigger items when they come due), and I can do a lot with my truck for the kind of money that a Gren or Defender will cost, and I can deal with the “mostly sorted” dust/water/mold issue which is truly a minor problem — hardly any gets in.

The wagon however has a waterproof, dustproof box as it comes from the factory. I really enjoy building these as much as using them and so that’s a factor too - it would be fun to build out a wagon. Plus I like the look/shape of wagons marginally better, but that’s largely irrelevant really.

I also have (postponed!) plans for global travel, and for whatever reason I feel like a wagon would be a bit more discreet/“grey man” than an American mid size truck kitted out the way mine is. A wagon with a tent seems to blend in better than a truck with a cap and tent, for whatever reason.

None of these are super good reasons because both trucks and wagons have pros and cons, but I guess nobody said they had to be good anyway, that is why I’m leaning “wagon” for my next rig, but I honestly could go either way. I really like both and third on my list would actually be a Gladiator, but it’s a distant third behind the Gren and ND.

I should add - my reason for leaning to a new vehicle is because of how much safer they are in a crash. That’s the most likely risk for any Overland traveller, and while I’m not sure about the Gren yet, the New Defender can crash horrifically violently and the occupants walk away. It’s a very well designed vehicle from that perspective. You are right about safety in the Gladiator - that is one of my main reasons to put it at a very distant third. I used to have a JK though, and I really do have the Jeep in my heart, so the Gladiator does get a few extra “smiles per mile” points for me.

Thanks for the details. Of course I would never buy a pickup without a cap or camper.
I will put a lone peak on it which is dust and water proof, and includes a positive pressure vent that prevents dust ingress and ventilates the interior, as well as I will seal the gate.
If you don’t need the room though, then yeah, get a Wagon. You will loose payload for sure, most SUVs don’t have 1400 lbs payload unless you get a very expensive (and expensive to maintain) defender. I am very happy with my Bronco though.

I just read a bit more on the new Taco on the Expo website.

@jaywo - your point about the trail hunter still being an unknown payload is still the reality, I didn’t see any numbers in the article. But it comes with an impressive bit of kit — if I can get my steel bumpers, skids, and even an air compressor from the factory, I’m OK with a dip in payload as I’d suffer that anyway when I add those things myself.

My question is still what that final number is. Like, if it goes from 1700 to 1400, that’s pretty reasonable for the bumpers, skids, etc. that I appear to be getting and may even be less of a drop as compared to what I would lose by adding those things afterwards myself. But if it goes from 1700 down to sub-1000, it’s playing in the space of Rubicon numbers for payload and loses one of the main advantages of a truck-style overlanding platform - payload. I feel the ZR2/Bison did this a bit which is too bad.

2024 Toyota Tacoma at Overland Expo West - Expedition Portal

The 2024 Tacoma was revealed today at the Toyota booth at the Overland Expo West event, being held in Flagstaff, Arizona

expeditionportal.com

No way we can know until Toyota say. See below.

If the base 2wd is 1700, then 4wd, tires, wheels, suspension, luxury and other options... along with bumpers, skids, etc... will put you ~1,000 lbs... probably. Just a guess.

This is incorrect. Payload essentially is GVWR - vehicle weight. GVWR is very different depending on the trim, so it’s not because a trim has heavier equipment that payload will be less. For example the Bronco Raptor is several hundred pounds heavier than my Bronco Badlands, but it has a better payload than my Badlands (I have 980 lbs payload per the sticker) because its GVWR is much higher.

The 2020 F-150 used to be available with HD Payload package giving it 2200lbs payload even equipped with Lariat package and 4x4, that’s MUCH more than a base F-150. The reason is: increased GVWR.

The bottom line is that the Trailhunter could have 1500lbs payload despite all its equipment, if Toyota puts a sufficient GVWR number. Or it could be 1000 lbs if the GVWR is close to a base model. There are ways for the manufacturer to increase the GVWR safely: better brakes, and suspension tuned for the weight. But the manufacturer chooses the GVWR and therefore the payload number.
Usually, the reason you have poor payload is because to higher it they would need to put stiff springs and different shock valving, and your truck would ride horribly without weight (and 90% of tacoma buyer will not ride with a thousand lbs in the back), That‘s why HD trucks exist: they ride horribly without load but people buy them to load them.

A ZR2 is made to go fast off-road so you can’t have both: a suspension tune for that won’t work with a lot of weight. The Ranger Raptor only achieve a better payload (its weight is the exact same as ZR2 about 5300lbs) because the damper are electronically controlled and can be stiffened to accomodate a bit more load.

My hope is that because the trailhunter is made for overlanding, if they are not so dumb they tuned the suspensions taking into account a lot of weight, therefore it might ride not so great empty but we COULD have a great payload like 1500lbs which would be fantastic considering it already has all the armor. It’s
If the Trailhunter has a 1100-1200 payload then it’s an absolute fail from Toyota.

Don’t forget: payload is a number a manufacturer put on a piece of paper. Toyota could do a 2000lbs payload tacoma easily, it would just ride too stiff.
You are going to ask then why don’t they sell a HD payload package like on the F-150? Then everybody would be happy, You want payload? buy the package, you know it rides stiff but you put your gear in and it’s good.
It’s extremely simple: they want to force you to buy a full size. And they want full size people to buy a HD. This is EXACTLY why the HD Payload Package on F-150 used to be available accross all trim. Then they limited it to XLT, and this year it’s limited to the absolute base model. They just want you to go with the F-250 and pay $10K more for upgraded leafs. It’s a huge shame but that’s what it is.

As a current diesel Bison owner and a Badlands Bronco I am impressed with the Trailhunter but the following gives me patience to buy one:

No front locker
Complexity and extra weight of the hybrid system
No steel front bumper that you can easily mount a winch to.
Nothing beats the Bison’s boron hot stamped skid plates for weight and robustness. I did hear the Traihunters are hot stamped but nothing about Boron or weight.
Can’t get the manual in the trailhunter.

You don’t like your Bison? Why not get the new ZR2 or better the Bison with 35’s from the factory? Also come with a steel AEV bumper winch ready and boron plates. It solves all your issues above except manual, but the tacoma also not have a manual on the trailhunter.

For the front locker, I think it’s way overrated. I have a Badlands Sasquatch and it takes me everywhere. Many situations I had wheel spin and the rear locker got me out instantly. I used the front locker maybe twice in 16K miles and that’s because I was lazy with wheel placement.
A mid size truck is not a rock crawling machine, you will be MUCH more limited by breakover and departure angles than a front locker. I can’t think of a situation where a front locker would be useful on a midsize and where the angles don’t limit you first.

 

[rruff]

This is incorrect. Payload essentially is GVWR - vehicle weight. GVWR is very different depending on the trim, so it’s not because a trim has heavier equipment that payload will be less. For example the Bronco Raptor is several hundred pounds heavier than my Bronco Badlands, but it has a better payload than my Badlands (I have 980 lbs payload per the sticker) because its GVWR is much higher.

The 2020 F-150 used to be available with HD Payload package giving it 2200lbs payload even equipped with Lariat package and 4x4, that’s MUCH more than a base F-150. The reason is: increased GVWR.

That hasn't been the case with Tundras and Tacomas in the past; GVWR is the same for all. Of course they could vary it this time, but I doubt it. The F150 is a special case because they increase the frame-wall thickness and upgrade the axle on HDPP.

Very true that payload and GVWR are just manufacturer numbers that limit their liability and warranty, and pertains to the stock vehicle only. My mini Toyota had the same payload as my Tundra, which is pretty silly.

 

[ChasingOurTrunks]

Really interesting info, @jaywo. What you are saying about payload makes some sense; I’ve always looked at is as an emissions thing. CAFE regs seems to change at that 6,000 lbs mark, so tons of mid size trucks get GVWR limited to that even if substantively similar trucks overseas have payloads of a ton or more. Either way, it’s all part of the games manufacturers play with the spec sheets. It’s like paper towel math; it doesn’t need to make sense, everyone just wants to outdo everyone else in the marketing!

I agree that if they spec an overland midsize truck that is low payload they will have missed the mark. I hope that is not the case.

To @emulous74 point, is the Hybrid power train the only option? I hear of a 6 speed manual — not as good as a decent 8 or 10 speed auto, but desirable from some driver experience perspective, and simple. I’m not aware of any other stick shift hybrids out there but I could be mistaken. It would be too bad if the only option were hybrids from the perspective of complexity.

@rruff I hear you when you say the weight savings are marginal, but lots of margins can make a difference on the bottom line. We managed to shed about 400 lbs from our setup on our Rubicon by making small changes — even down to the level of “being the Estwing instead of the Fiskars” type choices with our kit. But it was a lot of long hours with a scale and a spreadsheet to do so, and ultimately it wasn’t enough.

I don’t think most people’s wives idea of a great weekend is weighing axes, winches, bumpers, and other assorted stuff in the living room.

And at the end of the day I agree - it’ll be a few years before options really come out. The JK was out for a dogs age before aluminum bumpers started hitting the scene. I’m not purchasing for a few years yet — today, my family and I went out and ripped a running board off my Canyon on an 8-hour off road adventure (a sure sign of a great day and an excuse to upgrade to sliders, finally), and it does everything I need and more and I absolutely love it, so my horizon on a replacement is a long way out so I’ve got time to see how things settle out.

 

[calicamper]

Thanks for the details. Of course I would never buy a pickup without a cap or camper.
I will put a lone peak on it which is dust and water proof, and includes a positive pressure vent that prevents dust ingress and ventilates the interior, as well as I will seal the gate.
If you don’t need the room though, then yeah, get a Wagon. You will loose payload for sure, most SUVs don’t have 1400 lbs payload unless you get a very expensive (and expensive to maintain) defender. I am very happy with my Bronco though.



No way we can know until Toyota say. See below.



This is incorrect. Payload essentially is GVWR - vehicle weight. GVWR is very different depending on the trim, so it’s not because a trim has heavier equipment that payload will be less. For example the Bronco Raptor is several hundred pounds heavier than my Bronco Badlands, but it has a better payload than my Badlands (I have 980 lbs payload per the sticker) because its GVWR is much higher.

The 2020 F-150 used to be available with HD Payload package giving it 2200lbs payload even equipped with Lariat package and 4x4, that’s MUCH more than a base F-150. The reason is: increased GVWR.

The bottom line is that the Trailhunter could have 1500lbs payload despite all its equipment, if Toyota puts a sufficient GVWR number. Or it could be 1000 lbs if the GVWR is close to a base model. There are ways for the manufacturer to increase the GVWR safely: better brakes, and suspension tuned for the weight. But the manufacturer chooses the GVWR and therefore the payload number.
Usually, the reason you have poor payload is because to higher it they would need to put stiff springs and different shock valving, and your truck would ride horribly without weight (and 90% of tacoma buyer will not ride with a thousand lbs in the back), That‘s why HD trucks exist: they ride horribly without load but people buy them to load them.

A ZR2 is made to go fast off-road so you can’t have both: a suspension tune for that won’t work with a lot of weight. The Ranger Raptor only achieve a better payload (its weight is the exact same as ZR2 about 5300lbs) because the damper are electronically controlled and can be stiffened to accomodate a bit more load.

My hope is that because the trailhunter is made for overlanding, if they are not so dumb they tuned the suspensions taking into account a lot of weight, therefore it might ride not so great empty but we COULD have a great payload like 1500lbs which would be fantastic considering it already has all the armor. It’s
If the Trailhunter has a 1100-1200 payload then it’s an absolute fail from Toyota.

Don’t forget: payload is a number a manufacturer put on a piece of paper. Toyota could do a 2000lbs payload tacoma easily, it would just ride too stiff.
You are going to ask then why don’t they sell a HD payload package like on the F-150? Then everybody would be happy, You want payload? buy the package, you know it rides stiff but you put your gear in and it’s good.
It’s extremely simple: they want to force you to buy a full size. And they want full size people to buy a HD. This is EXACTLY why the HD Payload Package on F-150 used to be available accross all trim. Then they limited it to XLT, and this year it’s limited to the absolute base model. They just want you to go with the F-250 and pay $10K more for upgraded leafs. It’s a huge shame but that’s what it is.



You don’t like your Bison? Why not get the new ZR2 or better the Bison with 35’s from the factory? Also come with a steel AEV bumper winch ready and boron plates. It solves all your issues above except manual, but the tacoma also not have a manual on the trailhunter.

For the front locker, I think it’s way overrated. I have a Badlands Sasquatch and it takes me everywhere. Many situations I had wheel spin and the rear locker got me out instantly. I used the front locker maybe twice in 16K miles and that’s because I was lazy with wheel placement.
A mid size truck is not a rock crawling machine, you will be MUCH more limited by breakover and departure angles than a front locker. I can’t think of a situation where a front locker would be useful on a midsize and where the angles don’t limit you first.

The wagon thing is particularly weird at Toyota today. The very badly needed new Sequoia which I owned a gen 1 and gave to my dad. The new one was a huge miss for me. It’s basically a 4runner with a much needed modern power plant and transmission. Side by side they are shockingly close to the same size. I bought a late 2019 Expedition heavy tow Platinum in 2019 instead. I got 1700lb payload, 9200lb tow rating 3.37 HD rear end and stupid power for $72,000. It has been

Thanks for the details. Of course I would never buy a pickup without a cap or camper.
I will put a lone peak on it which is dust and water proof, and includes a positive pressure vent that prevents dust ingress and ventilates the interior, as well as I will seal the gate.
If you don’t need the room though, then yeah, get a Wagon. You will loose payload for sure, most SUVs don’t have 1400 lbs payload unless you get a very expensive (and expensive to maintain) defender. I am very happy with my Bronco though.



No way we can know until Toyota say. See below.



This is incorrect. Payload essentially is GVWR - vehicle weight. GVWR is very different depending on the trim, so it’s not because a trim has heavier equipment that payload will be less. For example the Bronco Raptor is several hundred pounds heavier than my Bronco Badlands, but it has a better payload than my Badlands (I have 980 lbs payload per the sticker) because its GVWR is much higher.

The 2020 F-150 used to be available with HD Payload package giving it 2200lbs payload even equipped with Lariat package and 4x4, that’s MUCH more than a base F-150. The reason is: increased GVWR.

The bottom line is that the Trailhunter could have 1500lbs payload despite all its equipment, if Toyota puts a sufficient GVWR number. Or it could be 1000 lbs if the GVWR is close to a base model. There are ways for the manufacturer to increase the GVWR safely: better brakes, and suspension tuned for the weight. But the manufacturer chooses the GVWR and therefore the payload number.
Usually, the reason you have poor payload is because to higher it they would need to put stiff springs and different shock valving, and your truck would ride horribly without weight (and 90% of tacoma buyer will not ride with a thousand lbs in the back), That‘s why HD trucks exist: they ride horribly without load but people buy them to load them.

A ZR2 is made to go fast off-road so you can’t have both: a suspension tune for that won’t work with a lot of weight. The Ranger Raptor only achieve a better payload (its weight is the exact same as ZR2 about 5300lbs) because the damper are electronically controlled and can be stiffened to accomodate a bit more load.

My hope is that because the trailhunter is made for overlanding, if they are not so dumb they tuned the suspensions taking into account a lot of weight, therefore it might ride not so great empty but we COULD have a great payload like 1500lbs which would be fantastic considering it already has all the armor. It’s
If the Trailhunter has a 1100-1200 payload then it’s an absolute fail from Toyota.

Don’t forget: payload is a number a manufacturer put on a piece of paper. Toyota could do a 2000lbs payload tacoma easily, it would just ride too stiff.
You are going to ask then why don’t they sell a HD payload package like on the F-150? Then everybody would be happy, You want payload? buy the package, you know it rides stiff but you put your gear in and it’s good.
It’s extremely simple: they want to force you to buy a full size. And they want full size people to buy a HD. This is EXACTLY why the HD Payload Package on F-150 used to be available accross all trim. Then they limited it to XLT, and this year it’s limited to the absolute base model. They just want you to go with the F-250 and pay $10K more for upgraded leafs. It’s a huge shame but that’s what it is.



You don’t like your Bison? Why not get the new ZR2 or better the Bison with 35’s from the factory? Also come with a steel AEV bumper winch ready and boron plates. It solves all your issues above except manual, but the tacoma also not have a manual on the trailhunter.

For the front locker, I think it’s way overrated. I have a Badlands Sasquatch and it takes me everywhere. Many situations I had wheel spin and the rear locker got me out instantly. I used the front locker maybe twice in 16K miles and that’s because I was lazy with wheel placement.
A mid size truck is not a rock crawling machine, you will be MUCH more limited by breakover and departure angles than a front locker. I can’t think of a situation where a front locker would be useful on a midsize and where the angles don’t limit you first.

The wagon thing in the Toyota line up went to trash with the new Sequoia. I was looking for a modern replacement for my first gen Sequoia which replaced a 94 LC which replaced a 91 4runner.

The new Sequoia was needed Badly!!!!
But after looking at it I told the sales kid my Gen 1 one was far superior and walked away. Seeing the Sequoia next to a current 4runner they are almost the same size!!! ******! Just call it the powerful properly powered 4runner?.
I bought a 2019 Heavy tow Platinum Expedition in late 2019. Soo glad I did. 1700lb payload. Its been awesome. Definitely not going back to Toyota. At least with the current Yota stuff.

 

[Dougnuts]

It may be picking nits to compare these trucks, at this point (not denying that bench racing is fun!).
First, we don’t have all the specs.
Second, the aftermarket will often favor some trucks over others.
Lastly, unless things change drastically on the supply chain front, we may have to buy the one that’s actually obtainable.

 

[jaywo]

That hasn't been the case with Tundras and Tacomas in the past; GVWR is the same for all. Of course they could vary it this time, but I doubt it. The F150 is a special case because they increase the frame-wall thickness and upgrade the axle on HDPP.

Very true that payload and GVWR are just manufacturer numbers that limit their liability and warranty, and pertains to the stock vehicle only. My mini Toyota had the same payload as my Tundra, which is pretty silly.

That’s not the case. The tundra GVWR fully varies by trim. For example an SR 4x2 is 7035 GVWR and the capstone 4x4 is 7670. That’s a 600lbs difference. Payload on capstone is still affected, but it would be abysmal if had the same GVWR.

So I truly hope Toyota gave a high GVWR to the Trailhunter so it can’t fulfill its purpose. If not, then it’s a mallhunter not a trailhunter.

You can compare trims and see for yourself here: https://www.toyota.com/tundra/features/weights_capacities/8242/8425/8424

 

[jaywo]

It may be picking nits to compare these trucks, at this point (not denying that bench racing is fun!).
First, we don’t have all the specs.
Second, the aftermarket will often favor some trucks over others.
Lastly, unless things change drastically on the supply chain front, we may have to buy the one that’s actually obtainable.

The ZR2 is available to order today. The Ranger Raptor, if you want it, order opens in a few days.
Yeah, I do wish I had all the specs and test drove all three but if you don’t compare today and eventually buy a raptor in 3 months, that’s when you will have to wait 1 year. I ordered my bronco 6 minutes after the reveal in 2020, and I hear people who complain today they don’t have theirs but they ordered months later.

 

[jaxyaks]

The 1700 lb payload rating for the 2024 Tacoma is not based on the base trim, the only trim they noted with 1700lbs attached to it is with the I force max, not the bottom spec.....

" From Edmunds Article"

"
But as Toyota taketh, it also giveth. The 2024 Tacoma's max payload increases from 1,685 pounds to a current maximum of 1,709 pounds. That might not seem like much on paper, but the former figure is based on the current four-cylinder extended cab, while the latter is based on the new hybrid powertrain (the only payload figure that Toyota has disclosed so far). Put another way, the old Tacoma's best payload figure is based on the most utilitarian configuration possible, while the new Tacoma's higher figure is based on a heavier and more loaded configuration. We expect that more attainable versions of the new Tacoma could have even higher payload ratings.

 

[rruff]

That’s not the case. The tundra GVWR fully varies by trim. For example an SR 4x2 is 7035 GVWR and the capstone 4x4 is 7670.

You're right, it looks like they are varying them now. The prior gen Tundra and Tacoma did not vary GVWR with trim. It was 5,600 for the Tacoma and 7,200 for the Tundra.

Kinda illustrates the arbitrary nature of that number...

 

[jaywo]

The 1700 lb payload rating for the 2024 Tacoma is not based on the base trim, the only trim they noted with 1700lbs attached to it is with the I force max, not the bottom spec.....

" From Edmunds Article"

"
But as Toyota taketh, it also giveth. The 2024 Tacoma's max payload increases from 1,685 pounds to a current maximum of 1,709 pounds. That might not seem like much on paper, but the former figure is based on the current four-cylinder extended cab, while the latter is based on the new hybrid powertrain (the only payload figure that Toyota has disclosed so far). Put another way, the old Tacoma's best payload figure is based on the most utilitarian configuration possible, while the new Tacoma's higher figure is based on a heavier and more loaded configuration. We expect that more attainable versions of the new Tacoma could have even higher payload ratings.

It does not really matter. It all depends on the GVWR for each trim so we can’t really know for now. One would think that since they only advertised ONE payload, it must definitely be the highest available regardless of trim level.
The base 4x2 SR non i-force will probably be a lesser payload.

At this point the Trailhunter can be 1050 lbs payload or 1650, who knows. Hell, it might be 1709 if that’s the one with the highest GVWR.

I look forward to having the exact numbers.

 

[montechie]

Unpopular opinion: I really don't understand the desire for a mid size truck.

They're limited on just about everything a truck is meant to do. With the exception of price, if you step up to a half ton you get better numbers in almost every category. MPG for a half ton is only slightly lower, too.

With that being said, I do like the tech and the offroad awesomeness of what has been coming out I just struggle to understand the hype.

As a current mid-size owner but past full-size owner, I think this is a really good question. With the new trucks it'd be interesting to see all the updated dimensions (width, length, wheelbase, approach, departure, etc) ,real world MPG, weight, and maneuverability for their application. Previously I would've put maneuverability off-road (and at the grocery store) as a big advantage for the mid-size over full-size. However, some of these latest-gen mid-sizes have increased width and wheelbase. I wouldn't be surprised if a F150 Tremor is the same width as a Ranger Raptor. The Taco Trailhunter being shown is a DCLB, which is cool that they still offer a 4-door+6' bed, but from owning a 3rd gen Taco DCLB, it's only slightly more maneuverable than an F150.

If you push it off-road, in loose and/or steep stuff, weight and size becomes a big issue. I went from an F150->3rd gen Taco-> Gladiator and couldn't be happier for where I drive. The 4" narrower track in the Rockies of my Taco was an advantage over my F150, but the Gladiator (stock Rubicon) has gone places my modified Taco would've suffered body damage or gotten stuck, much less my F150, and that's with a pop-up topper on the Jeep (OVRLND). Although some of the full-size light-duties aren't bad for weight, being the heaviest out in the snow, mud, etc. is a huge disadvantage for rescues and staying unstuck unless you're the one doing the rescue. I'm saying this having rescued friends' Power Wagons with my JTR... Yes, I also have a Wrangler (LJR) which is better than my JTR off-road, but I still need a truck bed for truck things and appreciate the larger camping/storage space of a truck camper/topper while still getting at it during snowzilla in Montana.

Obviously there's advantages in other areas going with a full-size. Better cab-size, bigger beds, some with comparable or better MPG/range. Way better towing and handling while towing. It's really up to what folks prioritize and want to do. If I opt to trailering my Wrangler a lot I'm definitely going back to a full-size for towing.

It's nice there's a full range of offerings for about every need under the sun, except maybe on price.

 

[jaxyaks]

It does not really matter. It all depends on the GVWR for each trim so we can’t really know for now. One would think that since they only advertised ONE payload, it must definitely be the highest available regardless of trim level.
The base 4x2 SR non i-force will probably be a lesser payload.

At this point the Trailhunter can be 1050 lbs payload or 1650, who knows. Hell, it might be 1709 if that’s the one with the highest GVWR.

I look forward to having the exact numbers.

I shared that because it is normally the assumption (most of the time correct) that the highest payload will be available on the lowest trim on trucks. This was the case with Tacoma up till now.

 

[rruff]

At this point the Trailhunter can be 1050 lbs payload or 1650, who knows. Hell, it might be 1709 if that’s the one with the highest GVWR.

From the way the Trailhunter is marketed it wouldn't be that weird to give it stiffer springs and shocks. Plus it comes with upgraded brakes... that indicates perhaps greater weight.