Yep, important pickup news from a couple of days ago.

Considering how popular the Tundra is getting in the American market, this could be good news.

Yes, but if it's F-150 news it'd be hot off the press.
Regardless I'm in if this happens

Could be a game changer for Toyota!

Toyota's OWN V8 diesel- the 1VD will have to meet Euro6 standards THIS SEPTEMBER. That means it will be ready for EPA as well. Since this engine is already in the 200 series Land Cruiser (which shares the front frame with the Tundra), I just see that as more likely, than integrating the red engine for a short period.
As for being a game changer? If you've driven a Tundra with the 5.7, you know that engine power isn't part of the problem for Toyota.

The Cummins name will be a good thing for Toyota, I know plenty of people that only purchase Rams because of the Cummins. The Cummins name is a status symbol, and still has an aura of the "best" diesel. While that is debatable, many people still conceive the Cummins as the superior engine.

The Cummins + Aisin trans (Toyota owns and uses one in the Tundra currently) will be reliable.

Remember that the HO 850tq Cummins in the 3500 Ram requires the Aisin trans.

I like GM s approach, they are cautious to waste money putting a diesel in their half tons cause they can get great performance out of their gassers and cut more weight and probably get close to the efficiency as the diesels for lower maintenance. Only offer a diesel if it makes economic sense

So Gm and Ford are the only ones without a diesel option for their half tons? I'm sure that will change very soon! Going to be an awesome shootout coming in the near future!

re: "likely take some time in the marketplace for consumers to get up to speed on the gas versus diesel performance differences."
Many pickup buyers, are already operating diesel engines in larger trucks or equipment. We have been screaming for diesel options and buying them in droves when available. Shouldn't be too many surprises for the real pickup market.

engine power hasn't been the problem, refinement has.

These trucks are bouncy.

Poor mileage. I am sure hemi lol will say "I get blah blah blah" but in the 30k shootout and the light duty challenge, you are luck to get 18-19.

Motor Trend got 19 empty, and towing 6769 pounds, less then 10 mpg. Hemi lol will say "I get 11 towing more weight at 75" or some line.
The GM 1500s got 20 for the high octane loving 6.2 and the 4.3 got 21 Ecodiesel 3.92 geared got 26, the 3.55 geared Lonestar Ecodiesel 4x2 got 28. All highway numbers. Only the regular cab v-6 4x4 Sierra managed 10 mpg towing. All the v-8s were single digit mileage when towing.

They stop and corner so-so with a load, but tell you how overbuilt they are.

This would be a good engine for a 2500/F-250, as they don't all want to tow 17000 pounds.

TRX 4 Tom blah blah blah

yes i DO get the mileage i posted. doesnt mean you cant dispute it. Consumer Reports ALSO reiterates that the 5.7 Tundra averages 15 overall on their test mule which is the SAME as a 3.55 ecoboost. argue all you want facts are facts! PUTC isnt 3rd party any longer they have shown their bias on so many occassions now. Fact is with a Sequoia in tow approx 8k total Sequoia and trailer i averaged just a little over 11 mpg from Chicago to Cincinnati with that load running 75-80 mph most of the way. i really dont care what you think of the facts that i post here. You claim the tundra is bouncy... funny mine isnt...... the 14's ride better than the new ram with coils if you ask me. OH ive actually driven both with proper air in tires and factory style wheels and tires, have you? i bet no..... especially the 14 models since your hatred toward toyota is so great i cannot imagine you got over it long enough to objectively drive one.

Come on Toyota, just make an HD truck already. I'm not a Toyota fan, but the way they keep inflating the Tundra's capabilities (even if only on paper), it's obvious that they want to play with the big boys now. The old T100 "1/2 ton" was basically a Dakota. The 1st gen Tundra was a real 1/2 ton. Now we have this monstrosity that's trying to be a 3/4 ton. I see an 8-lug Tundra with a Cummins in our future. Not saying that's a bad thing, just a prediction.

Hmmmm, this is good news.

Nothing against the Titan, but I would rather have a Tundra with a 5.0 Cummins than the Titan. It has nothing to do with anything other than the fact that the Tundra is built in my hometown and I have family and friends that work there. I also like the look of the new sporty Tundra without all the chrome.

haha yeah the american trucks will have diesel in the future but ford will have a 4cyl stroker in it since they are down sizing there original gassers. gm will probably put a very amazing Duramax!

but the tundra does look pretty beefy except for when you see it offroading from the side it looks like the truck is too big for those size rims and fenders, other then that new updates are decent and if you offer that cummins count me into looking to buy one!

Hemi you must have the only tundra that doesn't bounce. They had better stiffen the frames if they plan on using the older frame they have no like the ...well warmed over Toyota with the look alike ford dash.

@Luke

I find your "but the way they keep inflating the Tundra's capabilities even if only on paper" statement to be incorrect along with your "The 1st gen Tundra was a real 1/2 ton" statement and possibly your "I see an 8-lug Tundra with a Cummins in our future" statement.

1. Tundra was the first pickup to be SAE rated.
2. The 1st gen Tundra wasn't even a true half ton it was 7/8.
3. Tundra doesn't even use a 6 lug wheel like F150 and GM they use 5 lug wheels so going to 8 would seem unlikely.

Here is a better idea for Toyota, update your engine & transmissions.
8 speed automatic standard.
Engines: Valvematic and/or D4-S port/direct injection system.
That will put Toyota back to the top.

Toyota is working on an eight or nine speed tranny look for it in 2016.

@George C- Product planing wanted to do some of that, but didn't get the necessary funding. Hopefully they'll approve changing the 4.6 liter over to DI soon, along with the 8speed. There's no in-house 8speed to go behind the bigger motor. Time will tell. IN the mean time, the Tacoma will very likely get a KD diesel.

@Mark Williams
You seem to be an advocate of a gasser V8.

Why don't you pass on comments stating that most should buy a gasser V6, due to the usage of most pickups?

Diesel will be similar to a V8, people who only drive short distances will profit from a gas engine.

Lots of people buy a V8 for the V8 experience. Diesel is the same.

I've been thinking about the Titan's and Tundra's and I do think the one truck will come as Class 2 and Class 3 pickups. The Class 3 versions will come with these V8 Cummins.

I think the Big 2 and Fiat will have some competition in the lower end of the HD market. This is a smart move by Nissan and Tundra. There will be plenty of demand for the Cummins Titan and Tundra.

Hino diesel's are too heavy for this application. Toyota as I've stated don't have any decent diesel's in production.

Cummins is making good use of their products.

PUTC - can you do a shootout comparing the Nissan with the Cummins and the Toyota with the Cummins? That would be really interesting because it would test the build quality of the truck and transmission without engine differences....if that makes sense. I really would love to see that.

This is TERRIBLE new for Ford!
Ford bet the farm on the Ecoboost. They
have no diesels that can compete with the Cummins, baby duramax, or Ram Eco-diesel. Ford needs to hurry up and bring ethanol injection to the market with the Bobcat engines. My guess is they still haven't paid off the considerable investment they made in Ecoboost line of engines. Ford is nervous and you can feel it.

@nlp
Ford made the decision back around 2004ish to move to boosted gasoline engines. Ford's logic behind this was it was cheaper to produce gas engines and people would buy a vehicle with a cheaper sticker price.

Ford do have diesels for the F-150 though, but Ford has committed itself to the Eco Boost, even in the Eurozone.

In Australia Ford's Eco Boost engines failed and diesel is reigning and we pay more for diesel like you do in the US.

I think there may be something in this for the manufacturer's to look at. Maybe the biggest and cheapest isn't what people always want.

Why not just use the 4.5l D4D V8 they put in the Landcruisers over seas? Seems like a more logical choice.

@ TRX 4 Tom The 5.3L GM trucks got 12.5 - 12.6MPG pulling 8,500 pounds in the 2015 Light Duty Challenge

http://special-reports.pickuptrucks.com/2013/06/2013-light-duty-challenge-mileage-drive.html

Hey Tom can you show links to you're motor trend test I can't seem to find them with the MPGS you posted

2013* not 2015 lol

Same diesel in more than one brand of truck will be great for competition.

Maybe to get a leg up on the other. One might offer a manual transmission.

I thought the Ford Bobcat engines were a great idea. Sure would like to know what happened to them.

Direct injected, 4 inch stroke, square v8, with a manual tranny would be great also. My guess is that it means bad smog though.

I guess I am stuck though, if the T-18 ever gives out I'll have to replace it with a 6 speed manual.

Good for Toyota and Cummins. Finally a Tundra worth considering. As far as Ford being worried, I highly doubt it.

Ford has a few options for diesels for the F150.

1. 3.2L Power Stroke
2. 3.0L V6 (which is rumored for release anyway).
3. V6 diesel electric hybrid from the Range Rover.
4. 4.4L V8 from the Range Rover (which Ford makes and has already done the R&D for the F150 and Expedition).
5. Buy the Cummins ISV 5.0 V8 (which Cummins said it will sell to any manufacturer). I highly doubt Ford would do this option as it seems to have adopted a product differentiator operational strategy.

Looks like Cummins has the exclusive right to sell diesel engines to all of the non-USA badged car companies.

@Big Al--This is playing out just as you predicted. It looks like diesels could become a player just as you predicted. It looks like Toyota sees this as an opportunity to sell more Tundras. Maybe the Tacomas with a diesel option will be next.

Don't go from diesel to gas like I did. You will hate your self for it.

Ecodiesel & Ecoboost prove that V6’s can now do the job that was exclusive to V8’s and with solid mpg’s. So when are manufacturers going to focus on making ½ tons’ more of a parkable daily driver for the masses? With the front end of these full-size trucks encroaching 2 feet beyond the front wheels, no wonder people want Rangers and S10’s to come back. Manufacturer’s answer to parkability has been to give us shorter beds or smaller crew cabs. Well I’m sick of this tradeoff! Continued improvement of V6 engines has to be the focus, because inline 4’s and V8’s are too long to be able to begin making an impact on reducing the front end size and overall length of trucks. I want both the regular 6.33-6.5 foot long box, and the 40 inch legroom crew cab. A 5-6 inch reduction in front end length by using a V6 really matters because that is what is required to fit a 6.33 foot bed (RAM Midbox) with a 40 inch sized rear legroom crew cab into a VERY standard 235.1 inch garage as per three SF Bay Area homes measured from sheet rock at front wall, to the rollup door’s protruding U-shaped sheet metal horizontal support at the rear! The RAM 1500 in that configuration today is 237.9” long, GM1500 239.6”, and Ford F150 243.9”.

RAM1500 is again in the best position to innovate, on front end reductions, because of their family of Motor Trend Truck of Year V6’s: Pentastar & Ecodiesel. Click this link to see guy in RAM engine compartment.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/why-2013-ram-1500-v6-mechanic-best-friend-154301790.html The big 3 marketers should understand a full size truck can now be the new midsizer, and that people who need more pulling power should be directed to F250 or 2500 models that have V8’s or inline 6 Cummins. And that a $4500 premium from Pentastar V6 to Ecodiesel is too much (no need to fuel cost analyze anymore)!
Reducing the overall length of a truck will help with overall weight too on the mpg front: 10% decrease in weight gives a 4% increase in mpg.

RAM would then be able to capture the most combined mid size and full size ½ ton truck market share with one truck alone. The extra cylinder in a V8 or inline 4 takes up 5-6inches of front end real estate. Only then can Mr Reid Bigland say with confidence that RAM truly has a full-size truck that mid size or small size truck owners will want to buy.

Is RAM up for this kind of game changer or are they going to let the all electric TESLA change the game with perhaps a more cab forward high torque electric truck plant in Texas?

Misleading GM press release on the subject of garaged full size crew cabs with 6.5 foot beds http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/chevrolet/news.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2012/Dec/1213-2014-silverado.html with their claim at the section showing their corner step bumper. Further, their mid size GMC Canyon is just more of the same (essentially sized as a Tacoma): a 6.16 foot box with small truck crew cab, & engine compartment to accommodate their inline 4 diesel for MY2016. If GM doesn’t innovate they will continue to loose market share.

Nissan won't be happy if this rumor is true, so I hope Nissan has some other tricks up its sleeves for 2015. I suspect they will offer the 400HP DI 5.6 gas V8, but they really need to do more. We should also remember this story is talking about a mere possibility, not a certainty.

This might just be a disinformation campaign!

Wait and see.......

Are you related to miath nlp? You should just as smart.

From what I am seeing online, Nissan will have its hands full trying to get cheap stuff out to fleet and getting some QRD in the consumer product. Sadly, there old gasser was a reliable part of the Titan so swapping in heavy Cummins will not help their QRD.

I always thought Titan was a big Frontier the way Gen 1 Tundra gave Toyota fans something bigger so not to leave the brand. Where Toyota stepped up with Gen 2 to real full size, Titan stayed an inflated Frontier. This is Nissan Gen 2 coming, they will be real full size this time and will have the specs. But will they improve Quality. Where I trust their motors, I am more nervous of the other parts more than any other brand.

From the Tundras that I've seen towing, my biggest concern is the amount of chassis flex that there is in between the cab and box. I'd address this asap, especially if they are going diesel.

@johnny doh!: yeah, that was with them towing 8500 pounds of non wind resistance (ie, like a flat trailer damn near) on flat Michigan roads at 60 or so. Wow, most of us can't always tow in flat places that let the GMs tow and deactivate cylinders, most have more wind resistance in what they tow. Tow around here with a 5.3 3.42 gear in 6 th gear, abd you will define hunting for a gear.

You want a link? Go buy the February Motor Trend issue, it has Truck of the Year in it. That's if you aren't to cheap to spend $5.

Did you think I made up numbers? You too can read it.

@hemi lol (hemi smoking Tundras): I drove a 2010 Tundra, then new, about 45-50 miles, with my bro and law and salesman.

I thought the tire pressures were actually low from looking at them, so yup, I checked them, on the lot. It was what it shoulda been, a low pressure, to make it smoother, but the back end was bouncy.

Why would I drive a 2014? They barely changed it. They would need to do a hell of a lot more to get me to drive one.

I didn't care for Toyota's cocky ass attitude.

They finally fixed the gauges, yipee! They are still behind.

I've given them credit for the trans. Still good, but just lacking a few ratios. Too bad the engine hasn't as broad a powerband as a 16 valve engine.

Tell me whatever, you're a salesman.

Now hows the Prius recall comming along?

I have driven every full size 1/2 truck on the market (I go to lots of auto shows) and I can honestly say, in terms of driveablity, the Tundra was last on my list. I just couldn't even force myself to like it. I think the Cummins 5.0l is going to be an awesome powerplant(which btw, I'm sad that Ram isn't going to have it in their trucks). There are really 2 things at play here, first and foremost, truck makers need to DRASTICALLY increase mpgs to meed the fleet average mandated by the government. This can be achieved most easily through diesels, regardless of whether the actually consumer even wants or needs a diesel. The other thing going on is there is a market niche for diesels, especially in the half ton segment where they have been non-existent. What we are seeing is the merging of these two factors and I would feel safe to say every half ton will have a diesel option in the next couple years. Whether or not the Cummins name would influence customers to buy a truck instead of one that has the "Ecodiesel", well that remains to be seen. See, the problem I find is that people who recognize the Cummins name and associate with the Cummins brand, they are people who would likely buy HD trucks, not 1/2 tons. I think a big question here is does the 1/2 ton market care what brand of diesel engine is in their truck? My point is this could go either way, either customers in the 1/2 ton market are drawn to trucks with a Cummins, or they could care less what diesel engine the truck has because they have no diesel experience.

@Jeff.S and @Hemimonster,
The CAFE rules are forcing the change. I expect Diesels to be very common in the US in the next couple of years.
Cummins V8 is beeing earmarked to takeover from the Triton V10 in Class C and Class A Motorhomes, quite a market there.

I would love to see Ram have the 5.0 in both the 1500 and 2500! I also wonder if replacing the inline ISB with a 6.7-7.0 V8 would get better fuel economy.

@Hemi Monster

I am not sure, but are you inferring that the Ecodiesel and the Cummins ISV 5.0L are even comparable? That people would actually cross shop these two and the only deciding difference is brand preference? I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that is not what you are suggesting because that is just to idiotic to compare a 3.0L V6 diesel meant for fuel mileage and a 5.0L V8 diesel meant for power. That sounds just as silly as cross shopping a Pentastar 3.6L V6 and a 5.7L V8 Hemi. Don't get me wrong I think the 3.0L Ecodiesel has good power for a medium sized truck/SUV, but not in a full sized truck unless your primary want out of your vehicle is fuel economy. There is no way the 240hp/420lb-ft Ecodiesel would compare to the estimated 325fp/550lb-ft Cummins ISV, and it is not just a "brand name" that separates them.

This source claims 275 HP / 560 lb-ft out of the 5.0 Cummins.
http://www.autoevolution.com/news/2015-nissan-titan-diesel-hp-torque-numbers-leaked-76416.html (referencing TFL Truck, in which I can't find the original quote.) Not that great, but maybe it's just detuned for a half-ton. I bet it is way more capable than that.

@ alex

If the peak power the 5.0 puts out is only 275 it will probably make that peak power by 3k rpms. It will make a fantastic engine to tow with. That said if you're going to hypothesize that the 5.0L Cummins is capable of much more, then you have to acknowledge that the 3.0L ecodiesel is already capable of much more.

The Cummins may return slightly worse fuel economy numbers than the ecodiesel, but is still an upgrade that a lot of people would consider if it were an option on the same vehicle. I have my doubts however that the smaller diesels GM is putting in the Colorado/Canyon are going to return much if any better fuel numbers than the Ram 1500 and Jeep Grand Cherokee ecodiesels are.

@ALL1
I'm not saying that all potential buyers would be cross shopping, but I don't think it's ridiculous to say that some people will consider both the Cummins and Ecodiesel when truck shopping. First of all, since we're talking about 1/2 tons, there is all kinds of "cross shopping" that happens when someone goes to buy a truck, especially if they aren't particularity brand loyal. Admittedly, people compare similar truck, with similar engine options, etc, but who's to say that the Cummins and Ecodiesel are that much different. Sure the Cummins has already been tested in buses and medium duty trucks, but that doesn't mean it's out of the league of the Ecodiesel. In pickups the Cummins will be limited by the fact that it's in a 1/2 ton.
The bottom line is both diesels are far more capable than any 1/2 truck they are put in will ever be rated to tow. For example, the Ecodiesel makes better HP and Torque numbers than the '90 Ford F350 7.3l diesel I used to own. That same is true for the gasser V8's too, since for example, the 5.7l Hemi is offered in 3500 trucks, showing that it is more capable of an engine than would be needed for a 1500. My point is this, yes there are differences, but the bottom line is they will be used for the same purpose. All 1/2 tons are roughly in the same league as far as towing numbers are concerned.
Since towing number haven't yet been released for the Ecodiesel, lets assume it will have a towing capability of somewhere between the Hemi and the Pentastar(because it has less HP than the Hemi or Pentastar, but more torque than either). When you look at the max towing number for the 1500 w/Hemi, it becomes apparent quickly that people who plan on towing 10k+ buy HD trucks, so the max towing number is somewhat irrelevant. In other words someone who plans to do some towing could get by with either the Ecodiesel or Hemi.
With the Cummins, yes it's a V8 and yes it will have better numbers power number than the Ecodiesel or maybe even the top of the line gasser V8's, but like I mentioned earlier, people aren't going to likely be towing at max capacity. This means that the Cummins will likely be more than what the average customer needs in terms of capability. Therefore, when they go out shopping, it's altogether reasonable to compare the Ecodiesel with the Cummins. The vast majority of tasks can be done by either engine. Like I said earlier the Ecodiesel has better power numbers than the diesel in my old F350. What is different now from back in the day is that people expect more from their trucks.

Ward's suggested 2016 calendar year, not model. 2017 is the next gen Tundra. Still have a ways to go.

@ ALEX

Those are the power numbers for the ISV in a medium duty/bus application that has to pull a lot of weight. The more an engine is rated to tow or carry, the less it's power rating is so it can safely tow that weight reliably. Hence the reason why the power output varies depending on what you are putting it in. This is why the 6.2L in the F150 is rated for more power than the very same 6.2L in the F250, and the power goes down even more on the 6.2L F250s with a 9,000+lbs GVWR. In a half ton application, you do not need to "de-tune" the engine to pull a lot of weight which is why it is more. In Cummins own words......

"With a torque rating in the mid-500s (lb-ft) and more than 300 horsepower, the Cummins 5.0L V8 Turbo Diesel will provide light truck customers the combination of towing capacity and mileage that is expected in the highly-competitive North American truck marketplace."

http://cumminsengines.com/cummins-5L-V8-turbo-diesel

I also spoke to some of my buddies at my old job(Cummins) and while they didn't give me an exact number, they did confirm it was over 300hp and well over 500lb-ft.