I should give Toyota credit for one thing — the 2022 Tundra does stand out in a crowd. Even in a parking lot filled with other large trucks and sport-utility vehicles, the newly redesigned Toyota pickup catches the eye with its sheer excessiveness.
The Tundra’s designers also deserve credit for following with religious devotion the wisdom of Clotaire Rapaille. He is the father of what we might call the Toxic Masculinity Design Movement.
Back in the 1990s Rapaille first argued that sport-utility vehicles and trucks should be given styling that looks “as menacing as possible” to allay the “fears of crime and other violence” of U.S drivers. Indeed, automobiles shouldn’t just look menacing. “‘I usually say, if you put a machine gun on the top of them, you will sell them better,’ he said. ‘Even going to the supermarket, you have to be ready to fight’” (Bradsher, 2002; p. 96).
Behold, the ‘Killdozer’ of manly men trucks
Toyota designers gave its full-sized truck pretty much every menacing feature in the known universe except a machine gun. For example, the front end is so aggressive that the Tundra might as well be renamed the Killdozer. Who wouldn’t get out of the way of such an ominous-looking wall of plastic?
This is truly a manly man’s truck. The grille is so huge that, if you put it on hinges, you could barbecue a whole cow. Or an entire congressional delegation.
Those with less treasonous sensibilities may find that the Tundra’s industrial-strength styling makes them feel like a dump truck driver. Isn’t that what every boy wants to grow up to be these days?
Also see ‘2019 auto design: One step closer to machine guns?’
Of course, the Tundra’s brick-on-wheels shape is pretty much designed to destroy aerodynamics. After all, climate change is a Chinese hoax and low gas prices are here to stay.
The rear end is a bit more subdued, but it’s fashionably tall — just like manly men. And look at the way they chiseled that sheetmetal. It looks remarkably similar to an armored tank.
The only problem with the pictured truck is that it has side steps. Real men get hernias instead.
The Tundra epitomizes what’s wrong with auto design
All sarcasm aside, the 2022 Tundra illustrates Paolo Tumminelli’s view that contemporary automobile design “has become a caricature of itself. Its scope is to captivate and amaze a small population of car freaks. In projecting a superfluous and ostentatious image, the industry exposes the automobile to social critique” (Radek; 2021).
It’s time that the auto buff media got honest with its readers — vehicle design has all too often jumped the shark in much the same way that it did in the late-50s and early-60s.
Exhibit No. 34: The Tundra looks as ridiculous as a 1958 Buick. And now that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has led to a spike in oil prices, the car-buying public may start to avoid design excesses that undercut fuel efficiency.
The previous-generation Tundra stayed in production an unusually long eight years, and by 2021 its sales had fallen to under 82,000 units (Wikipedia, 2022). The recently unveiled redesign was supposed to reignite sales, so wouldn’t it be ironic if they instead tanked — much like the infamous 1958 Buick?
If that does indeed happen, we will have yet another example of how those who fail to learn from auto history are doomed to repeat it.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Bradsher, Keith; 2002. High and Mighty: SUVs — The World’s Most Dangerous Vehicles and How They Got that Way. Public Affairs, New York, NY.
- Laube, Radek; 2021. “Paolo Tumminelli on How to Keep the Automobile Relevant and Renew Its Emotional Connection With Customers.” Form Trends. Posted June 1.
- Wikipedia; 2022. “Toyota Tundra.” Page last modified March 22.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- wildaboutcarsonline.com: (Automotive History Preservation Society): Buick (1958)
Yuck. Manly-man my butt. I’d take that on head on with that “61 Imperial!
Over the past few years, Toyota has been introducing extreme style elements on various Toyota and Lexus models. The front ensemble of several Lexus models evokes the wild 1961 Plymouth. Even some design elements of the Corolla and Camry are over-the-top.
Like Chrysler Corporation in the early 1950s, Toyota had a reputation for dull, but safe, styling. Unlike Chrysler Corporation, Toyota hasn’t introduced these design twists in reaction to falling sales and market share.
I would disagree that the Tundra is designed to “amaze car freaks.” I doubt that anyone really interested in cars such as the BMW 3-Series, Honda Civic Si or even the Mustang will find this Tundra attractive.
Having said that, Toyota trucks have an enviable reputation for superior build quality and reliability. (Buyers eagerly seek out used, low-mileage Tacomas, which are hard to find, because satisfied owners hang on to them.) So I can see people buying this – but they will buy it in spite of the styling, not because of it.
Comment lost in the ’80’s. I’ve never heard anyone talk about the quality of full size (but not full suspension) Toyota trucks. Ever seen one on a job site or as a fleet vehicle?
The Toyota Tundra and Tacoma have the best resale value of any pickups in their respective classes. What people are willing to pay for used examples of each truck speaks louder than anything else.
https://pickuptrucktalk.com/2021/10/pickup-trucks-with-the-best-resale-value-in-2021/
Really? The intelligence and thoughtfulness of the American consumer? That’s how you judge build quality?
I trust the values set by the used vehicle market, which consists of millions of buyers all over the country, more than I trust anecdotal evidence on the internet. Are we really supposed to believe that buyers seeking out used Toyota trucks don’t know what they are doing?
Well, yes. I absolutely believe that American consumers can be led astray by wishful thinking and repetition. Could it be that the resale market (which is, of course, a self-selecting market) is not really looking for good trucks? I don’t remember ever quoting “anecdotal evidence on the internet”, I asked you to consider those that actually use trucks for a living, not to just fashion an image for themselves. I’ve been a commercial carpenter for 30 years, and spent 10 years on the railroad. I ask again, have you ever seen Toyotas used on job sites or as fleet vehicles? Think how much goes into “resale value.”
I don’t want to get in the way of a robust debate, but I wonder if a contextual point may be helpful. We know from the Tundra’s fairly mediocre sales that Toyota has thus far failed to make much headway against the Big Three’s full-sized trucks. However, resale values suggest that the Tundra has carved out a small niche of loyal owners. Both of those things can be simultaneously true.
To me that raises an interesting question of corporate strategy: What direction do you go when the Tundra gets its first major redesign in eight years? Do you try to more clearly differentiate yourself from the Big Three, such as by offering a somewhat smaller, more fuel-efficient and less-aggressive-looking alternative? Or do you try to outdo the competition with a bigger, glitzier and more powerful line of trucks?
Toyota appears to have taken a page from the 1961 Imperial. Back then Chrysler apparently decided that if Cadillac was doubling down on sci-fi exoticness in 1959, that the Imperial’s styling should be even more exotic.
It didn’t work for Chrysler and I suspect that it won’t work for Toyota either. However, the Tundra’s redesign hasn’t been on the market very long (and chip shortages have clouded the picture), so it may take a while before clear trends are apparent.
I can see Tundra loyalists buying this truck in spite of its styling. I doubt that it will do very much to improve Toyota’s competitive position against the full-size pickups from GM, Ford and Stellantis.
It is worth noting, however, that a fair percentage of full-size pickups sold are the heavy-duty versions, and Toyota still does not offer a heavy-duty version of the Tundra. That will probably continue to influence sales as much as the styling.
Wow, that looks like a cross between a Transformer and a military vehicle! I suppose that Toyota wanted to make an effort to “out aggression” the competition. I can’t see how that will appeal to anyone outside the “Bro Dozer” crowd. Besides reducing the aerodynamics of the front end, the blunt hood which will sit higher on 4×4 models,must make it harder to see what’s in front of the truck in crowded situations like a supermarket parking lots. These situations are always dangerous because small kids often run unexpectedly in front of vehicles. What’s next, front bumper cameras?
Yes, this is another period of automotive design excesses. I’m glad that I got my 2007 F 150 before this trend took over.
I’m glad we don’t get many full-size US trucks in Australia. I saw a Ram today. They’re gone from clean-and-distinctive to wow-that’s-chromey. Far too often what passes for design these days, whether it’s trucks, cars or in-betweeny-things, seems to rely on contrived shapes and fussy detailing for impact. Like this Toyota – is this a North America only model? I hope so. Those light shapes, with the mascara runs – yuck! The contorted tailgate surface that looks pre-dented. Those wheel arch flares arising out of divots carved into the sheetmetal. The grille’s Toyota logo looks big enough for branding steers. Is there any design cliché Toyota hasn’t used on this thing?
I think car design needs to return to 1995-2000’s clean shapes, and start again. And maybe, just maybe, if we were allowed to buy things in COLOR once again, we wouldn’t have so many ugly designs assaulting our eyeballs, striving to stand out in a sea of greyness.
On the bright side! With all the sheet metal “contrived shapes and fussy detailing” (l agree) – if it ever got into a minor fender-bender, no one would notice the “damage”!!
I’ve been saying this same thing since the ’11 Hyundai Sonata of which I claimed would look as dated in 10 years as a ’58 Buick in 1968.
The truck comparison is quite apt. I thought the Ford and Chevy trucks were parodies. Toyota wins this dubious contest.
Trim and clean one year, a mishmash [and mis-match] of curves and lines and overwrought themes the next.
Only the last generation Civic tops that ugly Sonata crest. And they continue to get worse. Hello Prius.
But perhaps remember how ugly and brutish-looking trucks were in the ’50s and then compare the Tundra. It may not look so outrageous after that.
BIn the ’50s trucks were crude and purposeful looking back, not sold on looks but utility.
Right! Because of the utility, I think they’re great looking. No better truck than a ’73 International 1210
The zenith in pick-up truck styling was the 1988 Chevrolet Silverado. Afterwards, it all became, in my opinion, baroque, with almost every make, perhaps except the Honda Ridgeline, trying to out “Star Wars” stormtrooper the other make. Ford tried to be aero in the late 1990s with varying success but squared up the front-ends as the Aughts progress. Still, I would take any 1958 Buick before I would be caught dead in the latest Tundra !
That was a good truck! Lots of room! As far as new trucks go, the last I really liked was the Ford Super Duty redesigns of late 90’s early ’00. Honda Ridgeline just looks like a cheap Chevy Avalanche to me, but I’m with you on the Buick!
I hope so–I really do.
For the record, Toyota sold about 95,000 Tundras in the states in 2022. And in less than half a year in 2023, they have sold 50,000.
Sales numbers courtesy of GCBC.