Toyota Hits Milestone and Readies to Hit More

2013_TMMTX_Millionth_Truck_002 II

On Sept. 18, 2013, Toyota's San Antonio truck plant produced its 1 millionth truck, a 2014 Toyota 1794 Edition CrewMax Tundra in Sunset Bronze Mica. That means that if you lined up all the Tacomas and Tundras that have rolled off the assembly line outside San Antonio they would make a pickup chain running from the plant doors to Honolulu. Production of the full-size pickup started in October 2006, with midsize Tacoma production coming online in the summer of 2010.

This is quite a milestone for Toyota Truck, and as you might expect, leadership is full of praise for the state and the 2,800 people who build the trucks.

“We are grateful for our loyal customers across North America who tell us they love driving Texas-built Tacomas and Tundras,” said Chris Nielsen, president of Toyota Texas, in a statement. “It makes me incredibly proud of our team members and 21 on-site suppliers every time I see one of our trucks on the road knowing that safety and quality are built into every one of them.”

Toyota Texas will celebrate its 10-year anniversary this fall with a special series of events. The new 1794 Edition Tundra is a tribute to the ranch, founded in 1794, on which the truck plant is located.

The redesigned 2014 Tundra is among Toyota’s most American-made vehicles ever. Styling was completed by Calty Design Research centers in Newport Beach, Calif., and Ann Arbor, Mich., and it was engineered by the Toyota Technical Center, also in Ann Arbor. Additionally, all V-6 and V-8 engines for Tacomas and Tundras are manufactured at Toyota’s Huntsville, Ala., engine plant; all transmissions are manufactured in Durham, N.C. One of the unique features of the plant is the fact that 21 suppliers have plants on-site to take care of any issues on the spot.

On a related subject, we're told Toyota Tundra, under the guidance of Los Angeles-based advertising agency Saatchi & Saatchi, is launching a new advertising campaign that targets the "evolved trucker." We're not exactly sure what that means but the ads seem to imply you can do just about anything with a new Toyota Tundra--Build Anything. It's been our experience that ad campaigns don't mean much if the truck doesn't back up the promotion with strong capabilities, but we like this message and think it's likely to resonate with potential new-truck customers. Whether there is a new "evolved" pickup buyer out there is debatable, and whether this new Tundra with its butched-up exterior and more stylized interior will grab more market share, remains to be seen.

2014_Toyota_Tundra_ad II

2013_TMMTX_Millionth_Truck_001 II


Now that they've built 2 million trucks, they should do something about the awful fuel economy that is putting most of us on the fast track to the poor house?

What a fugly truck.

Well, at least their 7yo drivetrain matches what the Ram can do with all its newness, gears and unproven gidgets and Chevy has only bested it by 1mpg withs its latest of efforts witha smaller motor...

"Real world" numbers are the ones that count - you don't drive the window stickers.

Its hard to improve without competition - you can only edge the best you play against.

This Tundra has come a long way from the 1935 Toyoda G1 1.5ton...

Toyota Tundra:

Designed in the USA
Build in the USA by Americans, just like the Nissan Titan!

That is NOT a USA design.
I don't care what they say.

The front looks like a China men on OPIUM.

Woopud is right. It's more American than the so called America's Truck Silverado. Silverado has the lowest US parts content of all fullsize trucks and they still make the crew cabs in Mexico.

The Tundra is a great American truck, I would like to see them do a redo on the front end for next year as nobody I know likes it except one guy I talked to. Its fuel economy is real world and no worse then any of the others.

Forgot to mention,
Sold at dealers all across America by Americans!
Just as American as Ford, GM, Dodge and Nissan. How many so called "American" trucks are build in Mexico and Canada? For the people who claim they only buy American, how about that cellphone, tablet, computer, big screen TV, stereo etc are made in America? It's a global economy.

Unless they're taking into account the Tacoma builds hell will freeze over before this ugly truck see's 2 million builds, and this statement is from a Toyota fan.

"Evolved" trucker????

If that is their target market, why did they send PUTC an email about this?

That blue Tundra looks real nice. The one thing I really like bout the Tundra is how they stamp the name in to the tailgate. I wished all truck makers still did that I think it looks good.

I think it's good that they've reached the million mark with the Tundra.

I hope they can offer the Landcruiser 4.5 diesel V8 in the Tundra. Toyota has to invest and improve their diesel's to remain competitve globally.

I think the Toyota philosophy is very similar to the GM one. That is to slowly improve a product and not be to radical. This was also aided by the lack of development funding.

It appears that Toyota tried to use available funding and target the best areas for improvement.

I like the front end of the truck, except for the grille, ist to big and doesn't look functional. It appears animated. A front end more akin to the Landcruiser I think is better.

The VW Amarok and Global Ranger have the nicest looking pickup front ends at the moment.

From what I've read it seems vehicle style and design is what you are accustomed to, like the US style vans. I thought they were ugly and the Euro style nicer.

Nice to see The Toyota Thundra doing well. Great to see they are providing jobs to Americans in the Great state of Texas .
I am looking forward to the 2015 model , myabe they might shock us all with a Disesel truck which gets 40 plus per gallon .
We can dream .

Evolved trucker is supposed to be an insult to our intelligence.

@The Real Lou
Maybe they've been reading PUTC lately about the 'evolved trucker' comment :-)

What a fugly truck.
Posted by: FordTrUcks1 | Sep 22, 2013 9:39:49 AM

I agree old buddy, but it is not quite as ugly as a Super Dooty with that ugly grill. The F-150 isn't much better to be honest. I just don't know about Ford Trucks these days. They've seemed to have lost their way.

@Big Al from Oz - Yes.

@Dave - all depends on where one is on the evolutionary scale.

@FordTrUcks77 - No

@DaffyDuck - I don't know maybe up the ass is to much

@Rich - yes

@woopud - maybe

@Jerry - A prism is a specially shaped crystal. When white light shines through a prism, the light is separated into all its colors.

@Big Al from Oz - I'll try anything once but you have to buy me a drink first

@charlie - what a dufus. You need a truck to attract girls?

Cubic inch or perhaps inch is all you got (That was a thinly veiled remark about your man sausage; those who know me over the years know that I tend to revert to phallic references to compensate for my own short comings).
What's with the "hemi is best" because it is what is used in Top Fuel? Chrysler fanboys almost always bring that one up. Rules say that is all you are allowed to use.
You must be a troll because you'd be too retarded to use a computer if you actually believed what you do.

Tires exclusive to a certain brand isn't a new thing. The tires on the Raptor are supposed to be slightly different than the standard BFG's. Here my first and still favorite hog which made its name on the standard tires. He and the boys demanded respect back then! Not like you Chrysler fanboys!

Toyrulz, you're right only real world numbers count. A friend of mine just bought a Tundra, he said he averages 13. My bro-in-law says he averages 16 with his. It's about on par with the 5.4 Triton. Chevy 5.3 and EcoBoost seem to get around 19-21 from my personal observations and reading other people's claims.

The Tundra is a great truck. I love the comfort. I love the smoothness of the 4.6 and the V-8 burble from the exhaust. I love the dampened tailgate-unlatch and forget it. Great when holding something large.

I wish MPG was better. Though once it hit 25k miles the highway MPG increased. Recently drove 240 miles round trip to the Jersey shore-avereaged 20 MPG. I can live with that-it is the 13 around town I hate.

The 2014 Tundra is beautiful. The grille would look nice in black. In chrome it is just too much...

Ford F150, made in America and has the most American parts content.

@Alex - I've managed to get 15 mpg US and 20.5 mpg US highway out of my 5.4 F150. One has to drive pretty carefully.
That was with the stock Wrangler SR-A's.
Those tires were pretty much done at 30,000 miles. I haven't tried to see what my mpg is now with a set of 10 ply General Grabber AT2's on board, but I have already noticed the lie-o-meter indicating that I am using more fuel.

Guys I've talked to with the EB 3.5 have huge differences in mpg. Some guys aren't getting much better than 18-20 and others are telling me 25 mpg. Loaded, they the same as a V8.


why is it that EVERY article you ever write about the Tundra you always paint a questionable picture about the truck and or act as if the truck wont hit sales goals ect. ect. if your truly a 3rd party site why do display what appears to most of us as pure bias against it? you make comments such as "ad campaigns dont mean much without backing it up with strong capabilities" does this mean the tundra doesnt have strong capabilities? Thats interesting as its been MY experience that if a manufacturer wanted to brag about capabilities and were givin a chance to prove it by everyone displaying their capabilities in an apples to apples format then said manufacturer would JUMP at the chance to display its strong capabilities............... So the tundra stands all by itself because apparently ALL the other manufacturers arent brave enough to step up and rate them by the J2807 method. IF they wouldnt lose and would have bragging rights then I believe they would do so.....

@Canadian Dodge RAM Owner !! - Funny, you are arguing with the Fake Lou.

@Canadian Dodge Ram
There is no Hemi that can develop 10 000hp. Show me this Hemi.

The current crop of top fuel engines only have lineage back to the original Hemi. The Hemi idea was stolen from Porche (zveria).

Not one component from any Fiat/Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge/Mopar/Hemi will fit to a Keith Black.

Also, no Chrysler/Dodge/JeepMopar/Fiat/etc input was ever used in its development.

By the way the current top fuel engines were outdone by the Australian McGee top fuel engine with overhead cam, quad valve, etc.

NHRA banned the Aussie engines from competing in NHRA events. They were to good an engine.

You will need to be factual, please, not just spruik 'untruths'.

@Canadian Ram Dodge
Here is a cut and past to show you how good the McGee engine was.

The next obstacles the McGee’s would face were more formidable than any engineering exercise. Engine builders, race teams and even automobile manufacturers were lobbying the major drag racing sanctioning body to outlaw, or handicap, the McGee Quad Cam engine. In 1997, the sentence “no more than 2 valves per cylinder and a maximum of one camshaft” was quietly slipped into the new rules and the engine, like many other famous US racing engines before it, was no longer allowed.

@ Canadian Dodge RAM Owner !! , Well said Sir.









The site I gained the information about the McGee engine is from this link.

It looks like a got site to surf. It even has Briggs and Strattion!!

Peruse at you liesure.

@BAFO, " Keith Black.

Also, no Chrysler/Dodge/JeepMopar/Fiat/etc input was ever used in its development.


Keith Black, His relentless obsession to improve existing designs was evident throughout his career; He wasn't the first to produce aluminum Chrysler Hemi blocks, but his design was the industry standard. Consider this; Between 1975 and 1984, all National Records in the Top Fuel category were held by KB Blocks.

He introduced his aluminum version of Chrysler's 426 Hemi in 1974. This was the fuel category's "bread-and-butter" engine for the better part of the next decade.

BAFO your the ignorant troll who is " spruik 'untruths'."


@the real Lou, I have achieved a real 20mpg twice with my 5.4. One was a trip from Idaho Falls to Yellowstone NP, and one was from Idaho Falls to Jackson, WY. It seems to like sitting at 60mph, even with a few hills. Put it on the interstate at 75mph and its back down to 16-17 mpg!

Here is the link!!

The other link looks interesting anyway.

@Alex and Dinky Di Lou,
At about 75mph I'm returning over 25mpg.

Hopefully Ford will put the 3.2 Duratorque diesel into the F-150. It will tow as well as V8.

I am still really happy with my Tundra. While there are some things I like with the new one, I prefer my old body style better and some of the features that were dropped in the new one.

My brother has a house in San Antonio that he rents out while he is living in Alaska. I hope Toyota helps keep the local economy stong so his house stays rented.

@Alex - all of the speed limits in BC are 100 kph, even the freeways have that limit. My highway mpg comes from travelling around 100 kph with my family on board and a light load in the back. I hit 20.4/20.5 several times travelling from the north to the lower mainland. It is hilly, no real big mountains even though the Fraser canyon has the Rockies on one side and the Cascades on the other. Most of the roads are on intermountain plateau's and along rivers.
In the back country I'm running around 14-16 mpg on average unless I have to use 4x4 a lot. I read somewhere that in BC there are 45,000 km of paved highways but 367,000 km of gravel industrial roads (logging, mining, ranching etc.). Unfortunately, I do not spend as much time out their as I'd like. Work and other responsibilities have a way with interfering with life.

13 mpg in the city, poorest quality vehicle on the market, cam shaft explosions, rotted frames, rotted spare tire brackets, failed tail gates, bed flex, oil sludge issues...just to name a few. How did they sell a million in just 15 years? Must be the same 75K idiots buying them each year. Still the ugliest least capable pick up on the side of the road.

@Al, yeah the 3.2 looks like an awesome engine, wouldnt surprise me if it makes it in the F150. I hope the 4.4 does too.

@Real Lou. Sounds like Canada and Australia have similar highway limits. Wheels Magazine started a debate to up the limit to 130. The nanny state supporters not happy about that one!
Also, i hate work! Always interferes with my schedule!

@ Tj how about all those Silverado’s that sold that had cab rust within 5 years back in the 90's and early 2000's? Or the piston slap that many GM trucks experience? A lot more idiots bought those trucks. Here in the mid-west, all I see is rusted out Chevys, cab corners, bed sides, and rocker panels; yet they still sell well.

toyrules: the "real world numbers" between my 5.3 ext cab Chevy, and my cousins reg cab sb 5.7 Toyota is more than the 1 mpg you claim, as the real world number is 3 hyw and 5 city! that is the difference between the 2 trucks, and while towing? he is lucky to get 8-9mpg and I get over 10, same trailer size and weight, yes his truck is faster, but the mileage is greater than the speed diff. Then you say with the smaller engine, and the numbers for the new 6.2 are not even out yet? I think you might be surprised when they do come out, and the real world on top of that also, as the new 6.2 will have over 30 more hp and over 50 more ftlbs tq, we shall see!

Look yeah the ford F150 is mostly made in america but its the biggest pos truck made i know a couple of guys who had some and one guy had to swap the trans like 3 times and it still vibrates at 45-50mph, another of my buddies truck had his diff replaced 2 times, and the other one he had a ecoboost and it wouldnt drive when on. i strongly believe that GM and Nissan, Toyota and RAM are going to come out on top of ford all ford wants to do is put out trucks with small eco-shi* and other alternatives apart from there never fuel efficient V8 i rather have a V8 with cylinder shut off that can still do a burnout on pavement then have to worry about my drivetrain getting f'ed up. The ecodiesel from RAM might be kinda iffy too since its not a cummins. nissan is going to be ahead of the game

Shawn: the USA Today article you link, which links the article from, clearly states that the number one ranking of the F-150 is based on sales increase, not how American its parts or manufacture might be.

"While the assembly point and domestic parts content of the F-150 didn't change from 2012-13, vehicle sales are responsible for bumping the F-150 to the top spot."

Take that stupid sales qualification out of the picture and let's see the real rankings.

@ sandman4X4 Consider that the 6.2 requires premium octane to make the advertised power numbers (can run lower octanes if the engine is not knocking), and that changes the whole situation. It also depends on what Trans you have behind your 5.3, if it’s the 4 speed it gets crappy mpgs and poor acceleration.

My 5.7 Tundra with the tow package (4.30 gears) lifted on 35s gets 12-14 city and 17 highway, this is with my speedo recalibrated for the bigger tires. I can’t fathom how some people get below that in a stock tundra, must be going ham at every stoplight.
Our 2500HD 6.0 is lucky to pull 15 MPG highway stock.

John: it has not been told yet what fuel will be required in the new 6.2, that is what I am talking about, not the present one, and as far as your 2500? that truck weighs about 1000lbs MORE than my truck does, or your tundra fro that mater. Both my 5.3 and my cousins 5.7 have 6spd trans, so the only variance is his truck has the 4:30 and mine the 3:42, however it is what is in the trans that make the diff. as the final rations are much closer, and with the power the 5.7 has, the tires you have should not make too much of a diff. anyway, if you has the 4.7, then you would see a big diff. the 5.7 is a gas hog, not mater what you do with it! also you did not mention what year your 2500 is, if of the older type, that would have a 4 spd trans with the 4:10 gearing, I have a friend that has a 2011 2500 w/6.0, and on the hyw he gets 18mpg at the speed limit, but 12 city, but his truck scaled out at 6,400lbs, and that is a reg cab!

Well maybe they will finally learn how to build a truck that the frame won't rust out. The latest build of Tacoma's still has the problem. The body metal is also very flexible & easily gets dings & dents!

@ sandman4X4 IT will use premium, I guarantee it. Here is an article on it:

"Vehicles equipped with the 6.2L V8 engine MUST use premium unleaded gasoline with a posted octane rating of 91 or higher"

My 2500HD is a 2007 classic with the 6.0 and 5 speed manual (NV4500), which in theory, should get better MPG's than the 4 speed (4l80e).

Your right, tire size doesn't really affect MPG, but tires that weigh 80 pounds each (Nitto trail grapplers), aftermarket front and rear bumpers (400 pounds), and a front winch (~85 pounds) that is what makes a difference. I would consider my 12-14 MPG city and 17 MPG highway to be very good considering that I haven’t had to regear.

I have yet to have another truck that you can add a lift, 35's, a lot of extra weight (see above), and still pull close to the EPA MPG numbers.

My 2500HD also has the 4.10 gears option, so that is also something to consider.

My 2500HD has 4.10 gears, as that is an important factor when considering MPGs.

I am a tundra owner since 2010. I was excited about the new Tundra until i drove it. The ride is the same or worse. The awesome 5.7L engine has been neutered since vsc is internal now and cannot be turned off. The new ac vents do not broadcast air like the old ones, its like getting a bullet of air in a small area. Dont like the panty hose material seats. I do like the new instrument panel and radio. The rear seats bottoms in the dbl cab have been lowered for more headroom which puts your knees sky high much more uncomfortable than my dbl cab. So its a big NO for me to change into a 2014. Will be keeping my 2010 for awhile. would consider dodge or chevy but their quality still concerns me. Will just keep chugging along with my problem free 2010 dbl cab. Ive made changes to suspension to get rid of the hard bed bounce ride.

@ cmon

The engine is the SAME, the throttle tip in has been changed so that its easier to take off in rain and not spin. the nannies can still be turned off, the ride quality is BETTER not worse, The AC vents work fine to me, The seats are MUCH MUCH better material, the BACK SEATS ARE IN THE EXACT SAME SPOT AS BEFORE!

GO DRIVE IT AGAIN WITH AN OPEN MIND, if your just convincing yourself not to spend money ok but your remarks are pretty far off from the truth bro.

I typically get over 20mpg on highway and about 16 combined (never burned a whole tank in city) - and puilling my 27'/7000lb RV an average of 12mpg with 2011 Tundra CrewMax 4x4 5.7L with family of 4 on board with luggage. I have seen lower when behind schedule but were talking passing most cars and keeping up with RV in tow. Buddy's Dad claims 35mpg with his Chevy (alone with empty box and overinflated plastic tires) staying under 60mph. We all drive different folks and it makes a big difference. You can not compare your numbers to others as they drive different. I don't care if its your twin brother that you learnt to drive with, depending on my mood or schedule, my truck vary by 10mpgs with the same driver on the same road. Consumer reports gives a decent (though not perfect) apples to apples comparison of real world use (that is superior to EPA lab testing). I didn't claim anything - just pointed to others findings.

I bet there are some older guys that really know their trucks, and hypermiling is instinct for them - where others like me are still figuring it out and paying more at the pumps. I also wish they would create a new scale that considers performance (like mpg/100hp) as its not fair comparing differnt size motors and turbos and superchargers against naturally aspirated.

Like I told my neighbour - buy the truck that does it for you and then b!tch about fuel milage like the rest of us. I am not saying Tundra has best mpgs - just that its not as far off as people think and I am impressed that the 5.7L is 7yo and with a 6-speed and 4.3 diff is still relevant.

The comments to this entry are closed.