I've seen a few notes here and there about special edition packages this year on the new Tundra - perhaps something like the Baja T|X package that Toyota discontinued on the Tacoma.

Any word on that on your end Mark?

Really, isn't it time to make FFV more widespread? What does it really cost the industry to add a few dollars in cost to a feature that will be very much in demand in just a few more years. They're going to be blending more exotic fuels, count on it!

I find it amazing that Toyota has reduced prices.

They have done the same here in Australia with the Hilux, because competition was increasing.

It shows that Toyota does charge a premium for nothing substantial.

Also, like here that legendary bullet proof view many hold with Toyota might be slipping. People are finding out Toyota's aren't much different than anything else.

Imagine what even more competiton could do with pricing in the US pickup market.

Toyota realizes they can't sell their out-dated gas hogs at the overinflated prices and have to compete on price. But a small decrease isn't going to sway anyone.

It's a old truck with a new uglier grill and a ford interior. They should drop the price and will have too if they plan on moving this outdated thing.

what no jabs at Toyota in this article Mark? No mention of the perfect flawless trucks that the big three make?

You're slipping

It's nice to see a carmaker that doesnt think their trucks are worth $60,000+ sticker prices

@Paul, Tundra price drops, even small ones, puts pressure on GM/Ford/Fiat. Competition is a good thing.

The Tundra is still the most reliable full-size pickup. However, none of the magazines put any value on reliability, because it is not directly visible to the reviewer.

What is the point of "reliability" if you are miserable every time you drive it.

The only thing that keeps this truck from being worst in class is it's transmission.

Hey Paul,

IN CASE you have been passed out for the last 6 years straight in some sort of a coma the Tundra holds its value MUCH better than its competitors so explain to me how they cant sell their "overpriced gas hogs" as you call them? The plant is at FULL capacity.

Might i also add that option for option the price on a Tundra IS LOWER NOW than all its competitors. go compare a Platinum Tundra at $50,000 to a Ram Laramie at $54,000 or a Platinum F-150 at $55,000 or a Denali at $56,000. NONE of them have any frills the tundra doesnt have except an itbc. PLUS the tundra has memory seats, power tilt and telescopic steering, adjustable headlights among a few

I am trying to be fair and I understand why some of you say Toyota can't charge more for this truck but we must also remember that GM got this ball rolling as the 2014 Chevrolet Silverado price stays the same http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/redesigned-2014-chevrolet-silverado-gets-best-fuel-economy-among-v8-pickups-gm-says.html so that could also be a reason why Toyota did not raise the price as well. As both GM and Toyota love the low cost of ownership and reliability thing.

the price should be lower on a tundra its selling really a old truck against newer technology.What the tundra plant is at full capacity really. lol Sense when?

A toyota price drop doesn't put pressure on ford.Fords plant is a max capacity and has added shifts to try and keep up with demand. Toyotas tundra is in no way a threat to ford ram or gm.

the higher value thing is funny.Its a low volume seller at best and I don't see anyone knocking down anyone to make a raid on there toyota dealer for a tundra and this latest one with its new grill thingy and odd looking fake hood scoop is uglier then the one it replaces.

The tundra would have to be 10 grand cheaper to even be revelant let alone be a threat to ford .

The Ford would have to be cheaper for me to buy one, Reliablity is far less then desired with a Ford and from what I've heard from my friends with them, I would never own own.

This is all due to Abenomics. Japan has artificially de-valued its currency and the favorable exchange rate allowed Toyota to make about 3 times the profit per dollar of income compared to GM last year:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=Toyota+GM+profit&source=newssearch&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQqQIoADAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bloomberg.com%2Fnews%2F2013-07-31%2Ftoyota-seen-with-triple-gm-s-profit-as-abe-boosts-exports.html&ei=HywEUondB4jhyQG-y4GABQ&usg=AFQjCNHhPLZLZYS2YpNM_FAezSMjZfDwjg

I'm surprised they didn't lower their prices more. They certainly could have afforded to do so.

Toyota rekiability? really? I've seen many a F-150 which a local large construction company uses with 250-300K hard miles on them & still at work. They use Ford trucks exclusively too! LOL Toyota Reliability what a joke!

jason h.

what does that have to do with the cost of a tundra? NOTHING its designed, engineered and built HERE IN THE US with MORE USA CONTENT than ANY other truck. the same percentage as ford at 75% but they have many more parts that are built in Canada eh. meanwhile the ONLY part manufacturer in Canada for Toyota is the Alloy wheels.

The new Chevy midsize beat all to the punch today ... I will be buying the new mid. GM pickup... with the diesel. I did not like the 40 percent American Canadian part content but watts the dif. between after what I herd about the mix it up made SENCE to me.... GM is just stamping all the parts there then more shipping jogs = more American jobs= 2014 Silverado 1500 94 percent AMERICAN...GO GM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Len, seriously??? You do realize that Ford doing so well with fleet sales has absolutely nothing to do with their "reliability" (BTW, not knocking Ford, their reliability is fine compared to the others). Fleets buy Ford for the same reason they will buy Chevy and Ram-THOSE ARE BASE MODEL TRUCKS THAT ARE VERY INEXPENSIVE TO MAKE AND REPLACE. They are bare bones trucks that are meant to be driven into the ground.

Now is the Tundra the best, absolutely not. But I will say that my Tundra's, and more importantly Toyota customer service, have been great compared to what I dealt with both GM and For when I drove their trucks. Especially GM.

BTW, glad to hear you know companies that are getting 250k-300k out of their Ford trucks. We used F-150's at the USACE site I worked at last year and both trucks had less than 40k on them and were falling apart. We ended up getting rid of them for new RAM 2500's, LOL. The Rams are awesome and I'm not even a Ram guy.

I ment to say if you buy a 3500 ,or 2500. the tabs are cheaper than a 1500 .

Well there you have it folks Len says the the F150 have "rekiability" (whatever that means....lol). All you folks with the stalling EcoBust engines....go ahead drive them in the rain....Len says it's all in your head....heeeeeeheeeee

The Tundra plant has been over capacity not at capacity. That confused me when I heard Toyota predicted sales number for the 2nd gen Tundra was 200,000 units that they are not meeting. Then I figured out how they are over capacity the plant is designed to produce 200,000 units but before 2010 not all models of the Tundra were being built here in S.A. as the most popular crewmax was still being built in Indiana http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.....ring_Texas. Now in 2011 when they shifted all production of the Tacoma and Tundra to S.A. but the Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami happened which kind of crippled production for 2011 but from 2012my on Toyota is selling more than 100,000 Tacoma’s and Tundra’s all assembled in S.A. putting them over the 200,000 units.

Of the 3 foreign manufactures selling large pickups in America. I would pick the Tundra purely for reliability, next the Fiat Hemi because it has been recently redone (excluding the joke V6) and
lastly the Titan because it is just outdated (that will change in 2015).

Ok, lets me see, a reg cab 4x4 V-6 for what? 26K? when I can get a Ram reg cab Express with a Hemi 4X4 8spd for less $$, no brainer Ram all the way! same with Chevy a reg cab 4x4 5.3 with tow package HD service and lmt slp for less $$$, no brainer, and I bought a Loaded Chevy Z-71 with everything but leather, for 27K!!! keep the toy!

Here we go forcing each others opinions with lame, factless claims. Guys, lets grow up and just be factual instead of immature babies. "Facts and figures set you free," sage advise from a well known sales trainer. How about using facts and figures instead of opinion facts. Then we will think you guys are sensible and credible.

Quote: Hemi
IN CASE you have been passed out for the last 6 years straight in some sort of a coma the Tundra holds its value MUCH better than its competitors so explain to me how they cant sell their "overpriced gas hogs" as you call them? The plant is at FULL capacity.
------------------
The plant was built to produce up to 200K fullsize trucks. For most of its 6 year production Toyota has sold less than 100K Tundra's per year. They have so much extra capacity that they folded in their Tacoma production into it.. and it still is not straining the plant.

As to the Tundra's resale I don't see it heads or shoulders above the big 3.

@sandman4x4

Of course the Fiat Express reg. cab would be cheaper--nearly EVERYTHING is NOT made in the USA.

Fiat-Ram Regular Cab = Made in Mexico

If you think this is an ugly truck, just wait until you see the new 4-Runner.

@Hemilol:
It's got everything to do with it. While they may be assembled here in Texas, I'm willing to bet a significant number of the parts in them come from Japan. Also: it's still the same company...since the company is doing so well on exports they can afford to make less on the trucks. I work for a Japanese (Toshiba)-owned company here in America and perhaps I am better-positioned to see the big picture.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for free trade and 4 of the 5 trucks I've owned were built in Japan (3 of them were Toyotas...and my current Chevy was built in Canadia so you could even say I've never owned an American-built truck), but you seem to be operating on blind faith or living in the past. While I agree with you that the new Tundras are nice trucks and probably have a slight quality/reliability edge on the domestic-nameplated trucks, you'd have to have your head pretty deep in the sand to miss some of the Tundra's obvious shortcomings, featurewise as compared to the domestics. The Tundra was quite competitive in 2007 (perhaps even a bit ahead of it's time), but it has more or less stood still since them while the domestics have really gotten their sh!t together. And it's also tough to miss the difference in the quality of the vehicles Toyota is putting out today compared to the vehicles they made in the 80s and 90s. I figure it's just growing pains...any company that's grown as much as Toyota has in the last 30 years is going to run into quality problems now and again.

However, I still wouldn't hesitate to encourage someone to buy one if the price was right. As for myself, I'm not the type of person who needs (or even wants) all of those fancy gimmicks they're putting on trucks nowadays (just more sh!t to go wrong). I buy used, do all my own maintenence and drive a vehicle until it dies (then fix it and drive it some more), but I realize that most people don't operate like I do. That said, my next truck could very possibly be a used Tundra.

Any fleet getting 250K per unit is spending a sh-t load of money keeping the trucks running.
My brother's company trucks REGARDLESS OF BRAND are complete piles of junk after 3 years or 250,000 kilometers (156,250 miles). They used to keep them until 100,000 km (62,500 miles) but when the economy got bad in 2008, they kept them longer. It has turned out to be MORE expensive keeping the trucks longer.
Fleets do not give a damn about badge or alleged reliability. You put them in the hands of multiple drivers and none of them last long.
Fleets sales are NOT a sign of reliability, just a sign of who sells trucks the cheapest.

FORD = Fix Or Repair Daily

According to Consumer Reports the Tundra gets 1 better Mpg in their real world testing than the 2013 Ram 1500 Hemi. Yet it's nearly a second quicker to 60 than the Ram Hemi.

I looked up the 2013 mpgs at CR last month. Both 2013 Fords (5.0 and EB), Ram, Tundra, Honda, Nissan all got the exact same 15 mpg. 15 mpg even. I am convinced that it is not real world and they are not to be trusted.

Yawn! A little less ugly, same fail, 13 mpg in a "truck" that is 25 years behind the Big 3's. They will attract the idiot buyer but will not get an educated driver to waste money on something so weak and worthless.

I wouldn't buy this ugly thing if it was under $10,000.

@Tom Lemon/DenverMike/TRX-4 Tom and all the other detractors,

The more you push the more I will become resolute.

What I find intriguing is that you have labelled me a midsize zealot, when in fact I don't support anything.

I give midsize feedback because you guys don't have what we have.

You seem to talk about midsizers much more than I do, you must very interested in them.

Give it up, between all of you I don't think you are convincing.

It's all well and good to be loyal. But loyalty can only go so far.

When there is a plethora of facts and data supporting an argument it becomes rather boring. Sort of like re-inventing the wheel, if you have heard of that phrase.

Most of the time the impression I'm gaining is that I'm debating the same person, but with different names.

Post what you want, I have proven all of you are just ignorant and fearful of what you deem the unknown.

Our country went more or less what you are going through now. You have nothing to worry about. No matter what happens in your vehicle market there will always be some form of light commercial vehicle.

@tj

clearly you are not educated, that is all.

Agreed hemi lol.

Saying the Tundra is "25 years behind" the big three is just baseless hyperbole. Notice the cheap and immature name calling of those who do opt for a "foreign" truck. Sadly, the "foreign" Tundra is actually more "American" than many of the "American made" trucks. Ignorance must be a wonderful thing for those who cannot be objective in their position.

Look, somebodies reposting BAFO's stuff. Lol!

Consumer reports does their gas mileage tests right there with the accelation tests, on the same tank. The best way to do it is do acceleration tests, top off tanks and then do mileage testing, do it in city and then highway. I have always done better then CR as far as gas mileage. 15 mpg? I got well into the 19s driving a quad cab 4x4 hemi with. 3.92 gears @65 mph, up and down these ozark mountain hills! Yes, on 87 octane!

Why do you think both the last light truck shootout and 30k shootout, the Ram got better mileage? Because, duh, it gets better mileage! And all you folks that bitched about the Tundras tires in the autocross, that same wider/taller/heavier tire didnt help the Ram, but yet it out mileaged the I-force.

Go to Fuelly.com, real world fuel milage by real people. The 2012 Ram has an average of 15.0 MPG, the 2013 is 17.0 MPG with the new V6 and eight speed. The Tundra is averaging right around 15MPG, and the Ford is up around 16MPG. Not much difference between them.

As far as towing, considering they did their towing test on FLAT ground, you don't need to be in tow haul. Obviously, the GMs could tow in top gear with their less torque, the hemi can as well, considering the tire size differances, the 3.42 gm and 3.55 Ram come out about the same rpm in top gear.
If we could only get whoever does those tests to actually learn when to use tow haul, such as hilly areas/city driving, then they would see better results. I got about the the same mileage. (10.5) they did in that last test when I had about 7000 plus pounds between whats in tow or in the bed, going 70 mph, and I will bet the non aero dynamics on my old racecar (figure eight racecars from the 90s aren't known for being very aero, or are present day pure stock dirt track cars) more then made up for the differance of weight. Their trailers had nothing really un aero about them.And they did that test at 55 or so mph? On the flat? I was in hills, but not that steep. I-44 west of Springfield, Mo. Going thru Kansas? On 65 mph roads @65, about 11.3 in light hills.

And if an i-force beats a hemi, it's either racing against a 6 speed, or they got 3.92 gears and 8 speed, which will only spin tires with all that gear ratio, and spinning aint winning! As far as trailer towing, refer to the shootout. Smoked that I force, with 3.55 gears!

Yet we will continue to see these heavy discounts on crewmaxs, even with these prices. Even with their maintenance program. Yup, they are highly discounted....no mater what highdesertcat says. No, they aren't equipped as a hemi larimie. Rams use adjustable pedals, so they don't need telescoping steering, get air suspension you don't need adjustable pedals, you also get alot more actual ground clearance then those lo, Tundras, funny they don't mention the low frames, crossmembers, gas tanks, mufflers and such, on Tundras. They just snow you with " more ground clearance" cause they don't have a low air damn. Simple. Want more clearance on a non air ride ram? Remove the air damn, and you got that Tundra beat! Or get air ride and have more clearance in offroad, and more mileage on highway, by far, over the "25% made elsewhere then north america vs. Ram 88% or so north american. We support Asia enough!

Ok boys, i did some reserch and here is what Kelly Blue Book's figures are. I compared my 2007 Tundra Limited 4x4 with 62,000 miles with the same options, and here are the results for a trade value opposed to a retail value in order from highest to the lowest value. Tundra, trade- 29,922 retail -33,522, Chevrolet, trade-22,038 retail-25,288 Dodge, trade-21,487 retail-24,687 Ford, trade-17764 retail-19714. As Phil would say on Duck Dynasty, if you own a Tundra you might be HAPPY, HAPPY, HAPPY!! I paid 38,500 ,and if you look at the depriciation factor i think Toyota is still the way to go. And oh, i've had zereo problems,and still love to drive it . Ok lets here all the negative BS. L.O.L.

@Big Al from Oz or whoever you want to call yourself.

Quit the crap, really.

It's getting long in the tooth.

You want to debate, but it has to be on your terms.

Learn how to debate, then we might be able to have a decent debate.

Opinions are good, but if they are only your view to support Australia's unions, then how good are they.

Post what you want, we have proven you are is just a ignorant and fearful U.S hateful fool.

I'm pretty loyal to toyota but they've given me no reason to pay those prices.

High on machismo, high on price, but low on utility and low on mpg.

Johnny Doe, i was going to comment, but it's pretty hard to argue with s----d!

@Hemi lol
"Might i also add that option for option the price on a Tundra IS LOWER NOW than all its competitors. go compare a Platinum Tundra at $50,000 to a Ram Laramie at $54,000 or a Platinum F-150 at $55,000 or a Denali at $56,000. NONE of them have any frills the tundra doesnt have except an itbc. PLUS the tundra has memory seats, power tilt and telescopic steering, adjustable headlights among a few"

The tundra Platinum 4x4 MSRP $49,165
The F150 Platinum 4x4 MSRP $50,220
Ram Larime Limited 4x4 $49,770
GMC Denali AWD is $50,325

Oh and the F150 has the memory seats, power tilt stearing power teloscoping steering, and HIDs, most vehicles i see with headlights out of wack that blind you when they pass you are toyotas so maybe thats why they included this feature. and the memory seat thing my 05 chevy z71 had memory seats just like my 2010 ford congradulations on having the same fetures as all the othe rmakes.

@rick irvin
I like how you cherry picked numbers that make the tundra look rediclasly better in resale than it actualy is , you went with 2007 when the current tundra came out to with say 2006 when both trucks where previous gen or 2009 when the current f150 body stly premired or 2011 when the new drivetrains came out. I calculated the following all at 75k miles.

2006 F150 SCrew XLT 6.5 Ft Bed 5.4L 4x4
Trade $14,439
Retail $19,739

2006 Toyota Tundra Double Cab 4x4 SR5 6.5 ft 4.7L
Trade $16,013
Retail $21,598

2009 F150 Crew xlt 5.4L 4x4 5.5 ft bed
Trade $19,609
Retail $25,734

2009 Tundra Crew Max SR5 4x4 5.5 ft bed
Trade $22,389
Retail $28,469

2011 F150 xlt supper crew 3.5l 4x4 5.5ft bed
Trade $23,480
Retail $30,010

2011 Tundra Crew max 5.5ft bed 5.7l v8 4x4 SR5 TRD off road, x-sp , JLB audio and tow pkg
Trade $23,866
Retail $29,021

for an 06 the diffrence in value was aroun $1800, in 09 about$2700, and for an 11 they are esentialy dead even They are both rated highly in terms of reliabilty and saftey
I prefer the Fords becale of fuel economy and a wider arry of options the fact that xlt, lariat and King Ranch have avalible hill decent control that is standard on fx4 and raptor , and all trim levels can get elockers in 2wd and 4wd that sells it for me. if you take these trucks off the betten path these features make life easier.

Carilloskis, i did not cherry pick anything! The only reason i choose those numbers is that is what i drive,and i was comparing what my trucks re-sale value is. These are'nt my figures they came from Kelley Blue book. Look at the facts, The Tundra exceeded all the other brands! Do you have an explanation for this!!

@Rick irvin

Sorry i miss read your post about what you drive, and yes for an 07 your truck has the best resale value, but that has more to do with being a second gen tundra competing against a 3 year old ford design and a brand new GM design (with a carry over drive train from 99) When vehicles get refreshed the previous gen takes a bigger drop in resale as people want to be seen in the lattest and greates the tundra was largly unchanged from 07-13 where as the f150 was completly redesigned in 09 new drive trains in 11 and interior refresh in 13 all those things impact resale. notice that the 09 crew max is worth only 1k less than the 11 where as with the 09 ford is worth almost 5k less than its 2011 counterpart. people arenot going to spend as much on a 5.4l f150 as they are on an ecoboost, thanks to fords advertising the ecoboost is highly sought after and people are willing to pay more for it in a nearly identiacly equiped truck. i guarentee the 2014 F150 will not be worth as much in 2017 as the 2011 is worth now simple because the 2015 f150 will be out with new apperance and probably new drive trians on launch or by 2017 if ford is following the same pattern they did in 09/11 this will kill the resale, so it really depends more on how often a vheicle goews through a refresh than the quality of the vehicle, this is one area where the Tundra's lach of updates helps its owners.

@Big Al from Oz/rick irvin or whoever you want to call yourself.

Quit the crap, really.

It's getting long in the tooth.

You want to debate, but it has to be on your terms.

Learn how to debate, then we might be able to have a decent debate.

Opinions are good, but if they are only your view to support Australia's unions, then how good are they.

Post what you want, we have proven you are ignorant and fearful of the U.S.

the average time a ford truck stays on the lot 2 weeks.The tundra may sit there for months before being sold and usually cheaper then the ford because no one wants the dog ugly things and thats the truth jack