Toyota Can Fix Its Costly Mistake By Offering Its Tundras a Non-Turbo Towing Engine Option

And just how would that solve the actual cause of engine problems,(manufacturing pieces left inside the motor)

Repeat of the 70's. I had a useless V8 Pontiac Ventura that went from 0 to 60 in 35 seconds due to the emission choking it to death! Embarassing first vehicle. Lets go Brandon! Invest in muscle while we can.

I do agree that these problems stem from government regulations on fuel efficiency. I believe that the regulations are intended to make automobile companies strive to put out better more efficient vehicles and while the regulations are needed the technology is just not there to require such high requirements. Manufacturers have no choice around them unless they find loopholes which include making bigger vehicles and other sometimes silly design choices just to get around these rules and regulations. When it comes to the engines themselves a lot of manufacturers have decided to use smaller engines and then force pressurized air and fuel into them to get the power needed and desired. Anytime you take an engine and do this it increases the wear and tear, heat, complexity, and maintenance requirements on an engine shortening its life span and increasing the maintenance costs to the consumer. Auto companies might have found a way to meet the government's fuel regulation requirements but how happy are you going to be as a consumer of a vehicle when your vehicle breaks at 100,000 miles? How are the auto companies going to handle replacing or repairing (sometimes free of charge) engines and engine problems when they break under warranty? How is this going to affect the faith a buyer will have on an auto brand? I drive a 2002 Toyota Tundra 4x4 with the SR-5 package and a 4.7 liter V8 and it even has a 3” lift which adds to more wear and tear on the engine. Yet it has a naturally aspirated engine (no turbo or supercharger forcing air) so although it has over 300,000 miles on it my baby is still running strong with no problems. The engine because of being a V-8 produces enough horsepower and torque naturally without all of the heat and wear that you would have to put on a smaller engine like a V-6. I wonder if we were to relax the fuel requirements put on the automobile manufacturers would we get more size choices in the vehicles produced? My full-sized 2002 Tundra is about the size of the Toyota Tacomas I see now. My Tundra is much smaller than the Tundras and other full-sized trucks of today. Are the government's fuel economy requirements causing us to burn more fuel than if we were to relax and let supply and demand dictate which sized vehicles we the consumers want? If the automakers are making bigger and bigger trucks and cars to skirt fuel economy regulations aren’t those bigger and bigger vehicles burning more fuel? If we let the consumers decide what they want would some not want smaller choices in the market? Smaller choices mean less fuel, doesn’t it? Fuel prices are not cheap so I would think the consumer's pocketbook would entice auto makers to look for solutions to lower how much fuel their vehicles burn. I would think that without having to worry about so much government oversight the automakers would have more money for research and development in all aspects of car building even researching more ways to get away from fossil fuels altogether. Also, I wonder how much cheaper our vehicles could be produced without all of the government red tape and regulations. I know some requirements are needed but I think the government is pushing way too hard and fast when it comes to forcing automakers to meet its fuel economy standards.

I drive the same truck, but I’ve had like five recalls already!

Toyota For Life
5 Tundras
2 -2013
1-2012
2-2017
1-2022
So far over a million miles love them to much to give up or switch manufacturers.
Toyota for life