The planet’s largest car manufacturer established its name based on unwavering dependability. Yet, its full-size pickup is beginning to undermine that reputation.
Toyota faces a significant hurdle with its Tundra. Specifically, it deals with complications stemming from its twin-turbo 3.4-liter V6 engine that powers not just the Tundra, but also the Sequoia SUV, Lexus LX, and Lexus GX. What was once a reliable V8 has now been replaced by a turbocharged V6 that has been involved in numerous recalls, leading to over 270,000 trucks being affected.
This is far from a simple precaution—metal fragments left during assembly are causing unexpected and severe failures, past measures to remedy it have been ineffective, and Toyota is currently replacing engines at no charge.
In the latest episode of The Drivecast, we delve into Toyota’s reliability dilemma—how it found itself in this predicament, the deeper issues at play beyond the headlines, and what the future may hold.
New to us? The Drivecast is The Drive‘s weekly podcast that provides behind-the-scenes insights into the major controversies, narratives, and figures shaping the automotive sector, accompanied by how our roads appear today. Powered by The Drive‘s exclusive access, original journalism, and insights, The Drivecast seeks to turn everyone into an insider.
Tune in to The Drivecast on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or Amazon Music. Enjoy it? Appreciate it? Want to support? Leave a five-star rating on your preferred platform to help get The Drivecast in front of a larger audience. Have thoughts, suggestions, or feedback? Shoot us a message at [email protected]. We read every email.
Complete Transcript
Caleb: Okay, so Joel, did I catch that you recently had both a Tundra and a Lexus GX, both of which feature the engine we’re discussing, that troublesome twin-turbo V6?
Joel: Yes, that’s correct. It was purely coincidental, I assure you! I didn’t plan for that; they simply joined the fleet. The Toyota Tundra was that new TRD ProWavemaker Blue, and I intended to document a story about colors and blue, with this as a great backdrop for photographs. It’s ironic that we’re discussing these vehicles after I spent a week with each of them and their engines. So, yes, you could say it’s fresh in my mind.
Kyle: And neither of them failed, right? I feel like I would have heard something if they had.
Joel: You would have indeed heard about it; neither of them failed. I did tow boats with the Tundra, and it didn’t fail, so they were fine. However, the Tundra had the TRD performance package and cat-back exhaust, which prompted some comments from my wife. Mainly, “This is annoying, when does this truck leave?”
Kyle: That’s a pertinent point, as Toyota’s shift to a V6 still allows for truck capabilities. It’s not lacking in functionality. Nevertheless, it is more complex than a V8, and it sounds different, especially with that exhaust. Ironically, Toyota opted for a V6 in the Tundra, while competitors like GM, Ram, and Ford still offer V8s. Ram is shifting away from the V8 with the Hurricane engine introduction. But when Toyota made the decision to say they were finished with V8s, did that choice age well? Some might say no. So, Joel, how did we arrive at this point? How did we end up with a V6 Tundra that is, by comparison, significantly less reliable than its predecessor?
Joel: For those who aren’t avid fans of Toyota, Tundra, or trucks, here’s a brief overview. We’re currently in the third generation of Tundras, which is somewhat astonishing considering we’ve been around for about 30 years. The second generation Tundra housed the dependable 5.7-liter V8 that this turbo-six took over from and had a 14-year run, which is long enough to reach a bar mitzvah—how wild is that! The new Tundra made significant advancements for this generation. It features a fully boxed frame, a more robust transmission, and a turbo-six instead of a V8. But it’s a larger truck, more competitive. It also retains many features that characterized the Tundra, such as a lower bed side height, making it easier to reach into the bed. Now it has a composite bed that won’t rust, although there are downsides. The cab is larger to be on par with other trucks, and the trim options have expanded, including off-road models and more. Overall, it’s more competitive in many ways. Significantly, it still has the sliding rear window feature in the cab—a fantastic feature! Other trucks don’t offer that; I only wish Rivian had it. So that’s how we arrived here—three generations of Tundras, with the first two boasting V8s and exceptional reliability. They’d typically rust out before becoming non-functional, while the current Tundra lacks this dependability.
Kyle: It is accurate that Toyota, relative to many manufacturers, historically maintains long model durations before moving on to a next generation. This is partially why they’ve cultivated a reputation for reliability—they didn’t take many risks. They figured out how to create a vehicle, produced it for 8-14 years, and then meticulously crafted the next Version to enhance that reputation. Part of what we’re observing—because it’s not only the Tundra experiencing issues—is that Toyota has recently faced a convergence of model-year or generational updates in a brief period. They’ve made numerous changes as they enter the hybrid and V6 era, alongside electrification, leading to some growing pains. However, that doesn’t alleviate concerns when discussing potential widespread engine failures.
Caleb: Indeed, and Toyota has just transitioned from a five-speed automatic in the 4Runner to their current system, and they’ve also upgraded drum brakes on the Tacoma to disc brakes—all happening simultaneously. While other automakers made these shifts long ago, it appears Toyota had to figure out how to manage numerous changes across various models and platform-sharing. It’s a significant moment for them, tackling all these adjustments at once, so perhaps some of the blame lies here—though it’s hard to say definitively.
Kyle: Additionally, one of the class-action lawsuits they currently face pertains to one of their new eight-speed transmissions intended to modernize several models. It’s been utilized in numerous popular vehicles, and, uh, it’s not going well.
Joel: Not great, not great. Now that we have the background, what exactly is occurring? What’s the core issue here?
Caleb: We have been discussing this for nearly two years now, which is astonishing. Initially, we saw Tundras parked along highways due to sudden power loss. Others wouldn’t start, and some experienced knocking noises. From the start, there was considerable confusion; people were doubtful because they transitioned from a naturally aspirated V8—long proven to be reliable, even if it was only 14 miles per gallon—to this new setup that was experiencing failures. The search for the cause of these malfunctions led Toyota to identify manufacturing debris within the engine. Consequently, more than 100,000 Tundras and select Lexus SUVs were recalled, initially focusing on the LX model and later including the GX. The intention was to clear up the manufacturing debris and prevent future occurrences, with Toyota maintaining that this was not a design flaw but rather an issue of leftover materials affecting main bearing number one. This has been the prevailing issue. There have been independent teardown reviews confirming this, revealing spun bearings as the culprit. For a while, before the formal recall announcement, dealerships addressed these concerns under warranty, often fully disassembling the engine to replace only the defective components, which is hard to digest. Therefore, Toyota decided to replace entire engines instead. This approach was established during the first recall and also for subsequent recalls. Recently, Toyota has reported adding another 44,000 trucks to this recall, pushing the total to over a quarter of a million affected vehicles. They’ve managed to complete around 77,000 recall repairs, yet there are apprehensions surrounding the replacement engines potentially facing the same issues. It’s chaotic—it truly is.
Kyle: Yes, indeed. We’ve seen images of Toyota dealerships overflowing with Tundras having their bodies separated from the frames for complete engine replacements. This is occurring quite frequently. Caleb, you mentioned earlier that manufacturing debris in engines isn’t unusual. It’s a typical if somewhat problematic outcome of how these engines are assembled, but what makes Toyota’s predicament here stand out from it being a relatively minor issue is?
Caleb: Certainly! The technical term for this leftover manufacturing debris is swarf. Currently, there’s a challenge with swarf accumulating within the engine. Older engines could manage this leftover debris due to looser tolerances and cylinder pressures being lower. This current situation has been articulated by Toyota in an NHTSA recall document. They’ve detailed their attempts to resolve this issue, analyzing internal pressure levels and making adjustments. The main complication arises from debris of a specific size and shape attaching itself to main bearing number one, leading to its failure. It’s not merely the quantity of debris that causes these sporadic failures; rather, when debris of that specific size and shape adheres to the bearing, it ultimately leads to failure under high pressure. That’s the root of the problem Toyota has been working to remedy. They’ve pondered how to mitigate this, and it’s outlined in the NHTSA recall documents, filled with extensive technical jargon. Essentially, these new engines operate under such high pressures with tight tolerances that swarf, which wouldn’t have been an issue in the past, has become critical now. As for the question of whether this is a design flaw or a manufacturing problem, Toyota adamantly states it’s the latter. Opinions may vary on this.
Kyle: The fact that they’ve attempted to fix this and made adjustments in the engine assembly process, yet continue to face these issues is notable. It’s curious to note that when Toyota decided to transition to a turbo V6 instead of a naturally aspirated V8—especially for a pickup truck—there were concerns about performance stress. The perception was that the V6 and turbo would work harder, wear out faster, and require more maintenance for similar performance. Few anticipated issues regarding tolerances and metal debris trapping in ways that wouldn’t have occurred with previous engines. Yet, here we are—over—what is it, 100,000 documented failures at this point, or at least that many engines replaced?
Joel: I think many don’t fully grasp that Toyota aimed to over-engineer this engine, since Toyota has long been synonymous with reliability. Surprisingly, that V6 is quite intricate. The numerous heating, cooling systems, and heat exchangers within that powertrain are perplexing. I recall someone mentioning it had around 10 or 9 radiators; that seems exaggerated, but I believe it does have three primary cooling systems and five heat exchangers/radiators at the front. There’s a main engine radiator, heat exchangers, transmission coolers, and a hybrid inverter radiator. You can visibly see the array of radiators and lines crisscrossing through the grille on the open-grille model. They focused so heavily on preventing overheating and failure that they overlooked minor concerns like engine shavings.
Caleb: So, that point is essential. To counter these issues, Toyota has implemented upgraded manufacturing procedures at their Alabama plant during the engine production. They became conscientious about preventing debris from entering the engine, but that hasn’t resolved the issue. The high pressures and a complex assembly have contributed to the challenge. Historical engines didn’t face such stringent pressures allowing for swarf build-up to be less problematic. As noted at the Tundra Hybrid launch years ago, I penned a story exploring how the Tundra Hybrid differed from the Prius hybrid, which showcased the mechanics involved beneath its frame. There’s now a valid concern regarding whether these complexities could prove to be overly ambitious.
Kyle: Yes, vindication might feel pleasing, though it’s disheartening overall. No one is satisfied with this predicament. We’d all prefer Toyota to produce high-quality vehicles free from reliability concerns. While they likely won’t revert to V8s, there must be solutions available. It surprises me that they haven’t resolved this issue at the factory, and they continue to distribute these trucks. The Tundra remains a popular model; it’s not as if consumers have completely stopped purchasing Toyotas. However, the ripple effects from this situation warrant close attention. What do you believe they should do moving forward, Caleb?
Caleb: That’s an excellent question, and if Toyota had a fixed answer, we would likely see it implemented already. The latest analysis of these engines was performed in May 2026, and while assessing engines that had undergone recall fixes, they observed nearly identical wear patterns to the first batch of engines.
Kyle: Oh dear! Looks like we didn’t quite make it, folks; let’s keep trying.
Caleb: Indeed, that’s the situation: they have actively made adjustments. They’ve altered the cam housing clearance to hopefully lessen these pressures. The terminology in the recall documents refers to it as pressure stack-up—issues compounding over time. While they haven’t successfully pinpointed a definitive solution, the engines currently being produced—the 3.4-liter twin-turbo V6—now have a slightly modified main bearing number one aimed at improving resistance to these complications. This adjustment is separate from the cam housing clearance alteration. They haven’t yet reported any recurrences of prior issues, but as anyone aware of automotive manufacturing knows, these processes are lengthy. It took two years after the trucks launched for the initial recall to occur. Some Toyotas may have failed after less than 10,000 miles, while others have operated for around 200,000 miles—it varies widely. This variability complicates matters, and while I can’t claim to be an expert in manufacturing processes, I wouldn’t want to be in Toyota’s position trying to determine necessary changes. It appears that, since they have amended the main bearing number one and are currently producing engines, maybe that is the ultimate solution. They might have been focusing their attention incorrectly on cleaning processes instead of acknowledging that even minute debris can create significant issues. I find it difficult to predict their next steps, as I believe they are too far into this transition to revert back to a V8 engine, which would almost feel like conceding defeat. Moreover, they are no longer manufacturing it. Tim Kuniskis from Ram highlighted the complexities involved in repurposing the Hemi, noting the importance of coordinating with suppliers across international borders. It’s an intricate process, not simply as straightforward as stating, “Okay, we’re switching back.” They’ll have to definitively identify the solution to prevent these recurring failures. Throughout all of this, it’s worth noting that Tundra Hybrids have not been included in the recalls, as it’s not perceived as a safety issue for those models, since they still have electric power to move them off the road even though they use the same engines. Owners of these vehicles are becoming anxious regarding when the hybrids might be factored into such considerations, as some express concern that what happens once they surpass the 60,000-mile and five-year warranty limits, and a similar failure occurs. This engine is utilized in Tundra and Sequoia, yet the Sequoia hasn’t been addressed in this context because they are hybrids. It’s quite complicated.
Kyle: That’s quite the loophole to find yourself dealing with.
Caleb: Indeed! There have been discussions surrounding the initial recalls, with hybrid owners concerned about their status. As long as they’re within the powertrain warranty, they should be fine. Yet what happens when that warranty period expires but the same failure occurs? This engine is used in both the Tundra and the Sequoia. It raises many questions.
Kyle: Judging by our tips inbox, simply stating that “Tundra hybrid owners will be covered under warranty” isn’t sufficient. Consumers are aware that the dealer serves as the intermediary for warranty services, and we’ve received numerous emails from individuals saying, “My Tundra’s engine failed, went to the dealer, and they indicated it was my fault. Can you assist me in contacting Toyota Corporate to address this situation?” We have tackled several of those stories. However, the notion that hybrid clients will simply “navigate the process, and we’ll eventually find a fix” isn’t particularly comforting.
Joel: I don’t want anyone to believe that we’re—this is a Toyota-focused episode highlighting a significant issue on their hands—but I also don’t want anyone to think we’re ignoring other matters. In addition to all Caleb stated, GM is grappling with its own challenges, and we have extensively reported these issues. The 6.2s are failing as well as grappling with the torque converter lockup problem in their heavy-duty trucks. These powertrains are complicated; in the realm of V8s, various brands face their trouble, however, none currently experience the degree of issue reflected in the Tundra saga. That’s the point we want to make—there are other concerns, but we’re not dismissing those either.
Kyle: Furthermore, one additional context factor worth considering: Toyota’s the largest automaker globally, producing a lot of vehicles. Coupling that volume with their previously established reliability reputation, a series of issues takes on a heightened significance. This visibility can create perceptions that exceed the actual state of their recalls. The Tundra situation is indeed troubling—extensive engine replacements for numerous trucks—this is bad. However, in comparison to the number of vehicles sold, Toyota’s overall recall rate isn’t that alarming; it’s actually lower than Ford’s. Yes, Toyota faces a dire situation, as their reliability signals have declined. Still, it doesn’t mean they’re uniquely in a bad position among competitors. We’re simply not used to observing Toyota under such scrutiny, and that poses concern. However, we will observe the outcome. It’s typical to see Ford recalls on back-to-back days, but when Toyota struggles to understand the reasons behind replacing 100,000 engines, that’s a significant alarm.
Joel: It’s a full-blown crisis.
Caleb: Indeed! Analyzing this from a media perspective, it’s astonishing since we have never encountered such an event from Toyota. It wouldn’t be less impactful if it were another full-size truckmaker experiencing this, but this scenario creates a perfect storm—Toyota’s reliability reputation combined with their history of over-engineered vehicles. There’s a saying that Toyota is its own worst enemy due to their vehicles being so reliable that replacements were seldom necessary. Now, we witness a contrasting narrative. Yet, I believe Ford remains focused on volume against GM, especially as Sierra and Silverado closely pursue Ford’s dominance with the F-Series. In the end, I think they’re all relieved to have maintained their current method, even if Ram had to pivot back to the Hemi. However, Ford’s 5-liter engine persists, and GM’s 5.3-liter and 6.2-liter engines remain active as they enhance their small block next generation. They probably appreciate maintaining business as usual. This situation didn’t unfold as anticipated, considering regulatory factors that seemingly led Toyota to adopt a shift, only to see other manufacturers follow suit such as Ram. Now that prospect isn’t as pressing, and there are complexities nobody could have accurately foreseen. Perhaps some anticipated certain aspects, but it boils down to adhering resolutely to their strategies. I assure you they are grateful not to have to deal with the headaches in handling dealerships, as that is a significant undertaking.