4cyl vs 6cyl for 99-03 4x4

I'm looking to get a 4x4 Tacoma in the 99-03 range. I used to have a 99 TRD with the 6 and liked it. That one is gone now but I'm thinking of getting a new one but can't decide between 4 and 6 cyl.

How much do the two vary in terms of power (ie from start, hills, passing, etc) and fuel efficiency?

 

Are you gonna lift it?

 

I wouldn't personally, but some that I have been looking at have a small suspension or body lift on them

 

Go with the 4 cyl. Much better mpgs and plenty of power. If im not mistaken the 4cyl has 410s and v6 have a like 373 or something idk. but there is plenty of power, only way id go with the v6 is if you lift it alot and put like 35" tires + on there. Thats when that extra power will kick in. Hills.. fine. passing might be a little easier. also wanting an automatic or manual?

 

Manual preferably. That's what my old one was and I'd like the increased mpg

 

Yeah, i'd go with the 4cyl for sure. I love it. not as much since ive decieded to put the bigger tires on hahha but i think for what your wanting id go with the 4 cyl

 

what kind of mpg do you get? And have you ever had a 6?

 

Look for a 4 banger, 3rz engine (the 2.7), and go extended cab. Check door jam numbers to look for the 4.3 ratio rear end. I absolutely love mine, and rear axle gear is a nice medium between 3.91/4.10 and 4.56's I think. Plus, consistent 20-24 mpg depending on where I am driving.

 

Get the 4 since you want a manual. Don't get it in auto IMO, or any first gen for that matter

 

Thanks. What kind of drop off in power can I expect compared to my 99 V6?

 

I got 20 to 23 with 32x10.50s and a 3" suspension lift. Never owned a the 6 but i know a few different people that have them and ive drove em. its not that noticible difference in power... I guess you would say the 6 is more capable of having more power. but Id def go with 2.7 4cyl

 

31*^^^ 31x10.50 not 32

 

Well the mpg is debatable and there are far more factors to it than just engine displacement.

I have a stock 3.4, 5-speed, TRD, SR5 and I see that I am often getting significantly better mpgs than some of the 2.7 guys.

I've also driven up some mountain passes in my friend's 2.7 and it's not even close to the same experience than my 3.4.

 

I've seen both sides of the mpg argument. Some will say the 2.7 is far superior and others say there isn't much difference with the 6. So I'm not really sure on that

 

I can only speak to my experience.

You can see in my fuelly tag, in my signature, that I've been averaging 21.1 mpg for the past 20,000 miles. That includes winter gas.

My running average for the past 10 fill ups is 22.8 mpg. With a best 24.4 mpg.

Since the winter gas has left the tanks I've been averaging:

Apr 2012: 22.2 mpg
May 2012: 22.6 mpg
Jun 2012: 23.1 mpg
Jul 2012: 22.7 mpg
Aug 2012: 22.8 mpg
Sep 2012 22.8 mpg

That's with a fair amount of wheeling and trips up into the hills.

 

Have you done anything special to your truck? In my 99 I usually got 17-18 or 20hwy and babying it.

 

Nope. It's fully stock. The only thing I added is the topper.

I keep it well maintained and drive like a grandfather for the most part.

That's about it.

Oh, other pertinent info: I run 31x10.5x15 BFG All Terrain KOs

 

Interesting. Well maybe I'll have to see what others experiences have been. Seems like there's pros and cons to both

 

Either way, you're gonna end up with a bomber truck.

It's just a matter of preference and needs.

 

agreed. I just don't want to do something like get a 4 for better mpg or something if there isn't much of a difference.

And I'm going to try to do this soon, since I'm selling my current truck tomorrow, which is a dodge diesel, so the decrease in power may take some getting used to.