4th Generation 2024 Toyota Tacoma Thread

Carmaker1

Admirer
Messages
817
Reactions
2,485

Should be asleep, but had to touch on this first. Thanks for uploading this. I am all about these!

To my former CALTY contact who worked in clay modelling there, thank you so much! He said to me in late 2019 they were working on a fullsized 1:1 clay of a midsize SUV with aggressive styling and that midsize pickup was nearing the final stages of development. I couldn't make heads or tails of which was coming first back then!

Toyota 920B Program CALTY Sketches by Matthew Sperling, Dated 2019 & 2020
Screenshot (146).pngScreenshot (147).png
Seeing these images now, it makes so much more sense. He said to me that the pickup design had been due for executive review and seeing the date '20 on the sketch finally proves it to me. I would've expected that the design freeze on the 920B truck would've been in the spring of 2021, several weeks before 920B prototype development began in May 2021.

To think they had the design frozen in 2020 for a truck launching in December 2023, is shocking considering how the 989A 2016 Tacoma was launched in September 2015 and although it got final styling approval in mid-late 2013, design freeze was reached not even a full 2 years before it went into production in the summer of 2015. They cut so many corners on that, corrected for 2020MY+.

The 2nd generation truck developed from 2000 to 2004 by Hino in Japan, parallel to the IMV Hilux (by Toyota), was at a final styling stage in late 2001, but didn't reach design freeze (prod. spec) until well into 2002, shortly before '03 4Runner debuted. (Production of '05 Tacoma began September 14, 2004 against 2002 design freeze)

This is why the BEV teaser was able to be shown on 2021/12/14, right after Toyota filed for patent on December 13, 2021 with the Japan Patent Office. They secured the design, in knowing it would be revealed the following day, but had it fully completed for a year at that point. I was right in that respect at least, even if I got misled on powertrains (and last minute on 10AT by Lexus QA guy).

This might be the longest Tacoma development program ever (started in late 2017/early 2018?), seeing as styling was nearly done in 2019. The larger Tundra was developed under 780B from early 2015 to 2021, arriving in showrooms during December 2021 and April 2022 (MAX). The 300-Series LC began development in late 2013 and launched in June 2021. Toyota is really overwhelmed I guess to be taking that long. TNGA was supposed to eliminate this I thought, but IDK about that at all. I remember how Mike Sweers went to Japan for 2 years from June 2017 to June 2019, to help align TMNA goals with Global HQ.

Here is the reveal event in Pauko, Hawaii on May 18, 2023.


(Good night)
 

ssun30

Expert
Messages
3,300
Reactions
7,375
The long LC development period lines up with what we hear about the corporate chaos that went on in the first half of 2010s. The power struggle was at its peak in 2013 when Akio decided to purge 80% of the board and half of the middle-to-high level management. We also know there was a big debate internally on what to do with BOF products in the wake of the financial crisis. Most of the industry was contemplating the idea of completely ditching BOF in favor of unibody for cost and emissions reduction. That's why the Gen3 Tacoma was so half baked and the entire J200/J150 family only received facelift after facelift until they finally decided to proceed with the GA-F platform.
 

Carmaker1

Admirer
Messages
817
Reactions
2,485
The long LC development period lines up with what we hear about the corporate chaos that went on in the first half of 2010s. The power struggle was at its peak in 2013 when Akio decided to purge 80% of the board and half of the middle-to-high level management. We also know there was a big debate internally on what to do with BOF products in the wake of the financial crisis. Most of the industry was contemplating the idea of completely ditching BOF in favor of unibody for cost and emissions reduction. That's why the Gen3 Tacoma was so half baked and the entire J200/J150 family only received facelift after facelift until they finally decided to proceed with the GA-F platform.
Very interesting and exceedingly insightful regarding those boardroom politics. I never had that timeline, but I do remember CIF bringing that up many years ago. Mark Templin touched on concerns he had about GX and LX back in 2016.

The XK70 Tundra and XK80 Sequoia were originally developed without TNGA-F in mind allegedly. What became TNGA-F was allegedly meant to be a Land Cruiser and LX exclusive and Tundra/Sequoia kept separate as a more ambitious American approach. Around late 2016-2017 that apparently changed, it is said and it's why Mike Sweers went to Japan. I cannot verify that independently, but I can only share how one of my sources explained a lot of the changes which occurred with the switch to TNGA-F. Loss of V8, other concessions made, etc. TMNA was not very happy about it and Sweers made sure their needs would be met as he saw fit. It was ultimately a compromise, in respects to some Dynamic Force powertrains tested in these vehicles and omitted from production (doesn't include carryover BS insight).

The final design for the 300-Series was approved much earlier in 2016, after a 2.5 year design effort (beginning in early 2014) and rejected as bland by Akio Toyoda. From what I've seen of that original proposal (front 3/4, side, rear 3/4), I get his point strongly. They sent it back for revisions, which ultimately concluded by 2018 in the final product we saw appear in 2021. What I am worried about, is the same revisions might not have applied for LX 600. Some aspects of the 310-Series LX seem "unrevised" and developed on a much earlier timetable, probably based on the 2018 LS and not any vehicles launched in early 2020s like NX.

I'd reckon the 300/310 interiors were probably designed in parallel to the original 300 exterior proposal, unchanged during LC300 exterior revisions in 2017-18. That is a major reason why it arrived late to market, as well as the XK70 Tundra and the whole TNGA-F lineup. Between design changes and some aspects related to i-Force Max, which was intended to debut in the 300/310, ended up instead being shelved until MMC and first appearing in XK70 Tundra instead.

Like a domino effect, a lot of BOF redesigns were further delayed. This 920B Tacoma was on deck much earlier as a MY 2023, back in 2016. It became MY 2024 (Aug 2023 SOP) sometime in mid-2019, as did Tundra from MY2021 to MY 2022 and all of the vehicles involved. A Toyota spokesperson had mentioned to a journalist that these TNGA-F vehicles were scheduled for 1 year earlier back in March 2019, but by September 2019 they were 1 year behind that schedule he gave. The 2024 Tacoma itself got delayed to December 2023 SOP circa September 2021, then just last November, it moved forward to Nov 2023 SOP for December introduction.

After that mid-2019 delay, the next 4Runner had now been intended for MY 2023 and some of the first prototype units were on US soil in March of 2021. Based on the similarities to the new Tacoma, they did not change the 4Runner design from final approval back in early 2020. Unfortunately, 4Runner was delayed to halfway through MY 2024 2 years ago and then last year, delayed until MY 2025 with July 2024 SOP last time I was told. As of now, it will launch in the second half of 2024. The sources refuse to be specific anymore, likely in the event of any further delays. Toyota is not immune to these internal delays from what I've seen, which skip quarters nowadays.

Back to my other point, yes the 920B Tacoma and 930B 4Runner are similar vehicles indeed, but that CarBuzz rendering comes the closest of all of them. If artists start basing their renderings on the 2024 Tacoma, with added signature C-Plllar and an upright D-Pillar (unlike Sequoia), they'll have a very good idea of the 2025 4Runner.
 

qtb007

Follower
Messages
371
Reactions
552
Very interesting and exceedingly insightful regarding those boardroom politics. I never had that timeline, but I do remember CIF bringing that up many years ago. Mark Templin touched on concerns he had about GX and LX back in 2016.

The XK70 Tundra and XK80 Sequoia were originally developed without TNGA-F in mind allegedly. What became TNGA-F was allegedly meant to be a Land Cruiser and LX exclusive and Tundra/Sequoia kept separate as a more ambitious American approach. Around late 2016-2017 that apparently changed, it is said and it's why Mike Sweers went to Japan. I cannot verify that independently, but I can only share how one of my sources explained a lot of the changes which occurred with the switch to TNGA-F. Loss of V8, other concessions made, etc. TMNA was not very happy about it and Sweers made sure their needs would be met as he saw fit. It was ultimately a compromise, in respects to some Dynamic Force powertrains tested in these vehicles and omitted from production (doesn't include carryover BS insight).

The final design for the 300-Series was approved much earlier in 2016, after a 2.5 year design effort (beginning in early 2014) and rejected as bland by Akio Toyoda. From what I've seen of that original proposal (front 3/4, side, rear 3/4), I get his point strongly. They sent it back for revisions, which ultimately concluded by 2018 in the final product we saw appear in 2021. What I am worried about, is the same revisions might not have applied for LX 600. Some aspects of the 310-Series LX seem "unrevised" and developed on a much earlier timetable, probably based on the 2018 LS and not any vehicles launched in early 2020s like NX.

I'd reckon the 300/310 interiors were probably designed in parallel to the original 300 exterior proposal, unchanged during LC300 exterior revisions in 2017-18. That is a major reason why it arrived late to market, as well as the XK70 Tundra and the whole TNGA-F lineup. Between design changes and some aspects related to i-Force Max, which was intended to debut in the 300/310, ended up instead being shelved until MMC and first appearing in XK70 Tundra instead.

Like a domino effect, a lot of BOF redesigns were further delayed. This 920B Tacoma was on deck much earlier as a MY 2023, back in 2016. It became MY 2024 (Aug 2023 SOP) sometime in mid-2019, as did Tundra from MY2021 to MY 2022 and all of the vehicles involved. A Toyota spokesperson had mentioned to a journalist that these TNGA-F vehicles were scheduled for 1 year earlier back in March 2019, but by September 2019 they were 1 year behind that schedule he gave. The 2024 Tacoma itself got delayed to December 2023 SOP circa September 2021, then just last November, it moved forward to Nov 2023 SOP for December introduction.

After that mid-2019 delay, the next 4Runner had now been intended for MY 2023 and some of the first prototype units were on US soil in March of 2021. Based on the similarities to the new Tacoma, they did not change the 4Runner design from final approval back in early 2020. Unfortunately, 4Runner was delayed to halfway through MY 2024 2 years ago and then last year, delayed until MY 2025 with July 2024 SOP last time I was told. As of now, it will launch in the second half of 2024. The sources refuse to be specific anymore, likely in the event of any further delays. Toyota is not immune to these internal delays from what I've seen, which skip quarters nowadays.

Back to my other point, yes the 920B Tacoma and 930B 4Runner are similar vehicles indeed, but that CarBuzz rendering comes the closest of all of them. If artists start basing their renderings on the 2024 Tacoma, with added signature C-Plllar and an upright D-Pillar (unlike Sequoia), they'll have a very good idea of the 2025 4Runner.
Hopefully Toyota remembered the signature C pillar and the vertical D pillar (to facilitate the roll down rear glass). The C pillar was one of the things I knew I had to get right when designing my Lego 4Runner.


That reminds me, I need to buy some bricks to rebuild my Lego 4Runner to match my '23 Pro in Solar Octane. Right now, it is built to match the red '16 Trail.
 

ssun30

Expert
Messages
3,300
Reactions
7,375
I just realized how genius that wireless charging pad design is.

In my BMW, there is a sophisticated adjustable frame held by springs to hold the phone in place on the charging pad. It's very carefully engineered so that it holds the phone well. It has a dampened rebound so when you take the phone out, the edges won't slam into your finger. Problem is, whenever a phone is upgraded, it gets bigger, and it won't fit in.

Toyota: a rubber band.
 

NomadDan

Follower
Messages
268
Reactions
328
It looks almost like a rust color, which I’m not a fan of. Maybe it’ll look better with better lighting or in person.