1. Welcome to Tacoma World!

    You are currently viewing as a guest! To get full-access, you need to register for a FREE account.

    As a registered member, you’ll be able to:
    • Participate in all Tacoma discussion topics
    • Communicate privately with other Tacoma owners from around the world
    • Post your own photos in our Members Gallery
    • Access all special features of the site

Tacoma vs pre 1995 R22 Toyota PUs

Discussion in '1st Gen. Tacomas (1995-2004)' started by Hansel, Apr 30, 2013.

  1. Apr 30, 2013 at 9:14 AM
    #1
    Hansel

    Hansel [OP] Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2013
    Member:
    #100925
    Messages:
    217
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Glenn
    Arizona
    Vehicle:
    base
    I used to have an 1989 base truck with the R22. Great truck. Some people say the older trucks were built better than the Tacomas.

    I recently bought a base 2003 that I'm getting ready for the road (only downside is that it's an automatic, I'd rather have the manual for the fuel efficiency).

    Anyway I'd like people's opinions on the pros and cons of the Tacomas vs the older trucks.

    I'm guessing their both great trucks in their own way.
     
  2. Apr 30, 2013 at 12:43 PM
    #2
    joeer77

    joeer77 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2010
    Member:
    #45546
    Messages:
    41
    Gender:
    Male
    North Plains OR
    Bilstein 5100s
    I had a 1986 extra cab pickup with the 22-RE motor for 12 years. It was a good truck for the most part. Traded it in for a brand new 2004 TRD Tacoma.

    Tacoma pros: Better ride, more power in the V6, locking differential (TRD models), more cab space?, electronic ignition

    Tacoma cons: chain drive transfer case, smaller rear window, worse fuel mileage(getting 16mpg on 32's), timing belt

    Pickup/22-RE pros: gear to gear transfer case, timing chain, better fuel mielage, straight front axle if you can find one 1985 and earlier, some years have a turbo

    Pickup/22-RE cons: clutch master cylinder prone to leaks, front crank seal leak, distributor cap/rotor ignition, stiffer ride, carbureted engine on some models

    Both are great trucks. If you can afford a Tacoma I would go that route. If you want to build a bad ass off roader I would by a 1985 pickup with fuel injection and lift it.
     
  3. Apr 30, 2013 at 1:06 PM
    #3
    2004TacomaSR5

    2004TacomaSR5 Nemesis Prime

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Member:
    #55722
    Messages:
    5,081
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Jon
    Montana
    Vehicle:
    2004 Tacoma DCSB & 1980 Toyota Pickup 4WD
    Tacoma is stock and staying that way, Pickup is TBA as of now.
    I always figured older to be better in most cases, and the old yota pickups are legendary. In my experience with old trucks vs new, I found out with old ford trucks vs new ford trucks. I've got a 67 F250 high boy, and a 78 bronco, and you can tell by the frame construction, engine and transmission construction, drivetrain construction, that these old rigs were built to last, and last a very long time. You see, there was a time not so long ago before the automotive giants became greedy and wanted more money, that they spent hours building and perfecting quality cars that would last their owners many years when properly maintained. The shift for ford trucks really took place in the 80s and 90s as tighter fuel consumption laws came into effect, so ford had to take away from the build quality of the trucks to make them lighter and more efficient. In the 80s, they drilled big holes in the frames, and did away with the solid front axle in half tons and replaced it with a quirky i-beam suspension that was much more suited for paved roads then heavy off road work use. In a few years, these clunky frames would rust, and due to them being already weakened with the holes drilled in them, they would literally pull in half. I've heard stories of the rear frames in 80s fords pulling out completely when they are hitched to a heavy load.
    Things got a little better in the 90s for the ford trucks, they got beautiful styling (my second favorite ford bodystyle at that) but still had many engine and transmission problems to deal with that plagued this era. It was also then in the late 80s in 90s, the big three came under the assumption that the general consumer would just buy whatever they made and wouldn't bat an eyelash, so customer loyalty and quality went out the window pretty much. Now you had cars that would run fine for about 5 years tops, then would be so beaten down and worn out, the owner had no choice to but get a new one. And this was the reason Toyota, Honda, and Nissan mainly got so popular on domestic shores was because they did the opposite of what the big three was doing at the time, they built something the consumer wanted, and something that would last many years with little maintenance. Foreign import popularity exploded here in the US in the 80s and 90s, face it, Japan was building affordable, reliable, and super fuel efficient vehicles that would last 30 years easily while the domestic fleet was churning out cars that would need to be scrapped within 5 to 10 years. Like it or not, and none of the domestic purists will ever agree with this, but it was the big three's fault that Toyota, Honda, and Nissan became so popular in the US, they brought it on themselves with quality control issues and corporate greed. They believed that the consumers were stupid and would still continue to buy junk vehicles, and they were wrong and it cost them greatly. Had they not made such obscure decisions, it is very possible that the Japanese auto invasion never would have happened, and cars like Toyota, Honda, and Nissan would just be a side thought in our minds today. I just hope the same fate does not happen with Toyota, Honda, or Nissan anytime soon, but it certainly could. All 3 are multi billion dollar corporations now, and could surely be befuddled by greed in the future, let's just hope it never happens.
     
  4. Apr 30, 2013 at 9:21 PM
    #4
    peow130

    peow130 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Member:
    #102922
    Messages:
    26
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Bryan
    Spokane, WA
    Vehicle:
    1998 Taco TRD w/ 2.5" Skyjacker lift and 33's
    2.5" Skyjacker Platinum
    I had an 81, 86, and an 87' before i got my 98. As much as i loved the first 3, the tacoma is the more comfortable rig. As far as i'm concerned, the tacoma is like a bigger version of the pickup, with a better engine and larger interior
     
  5. May 1, 2013 at 5:53 AM
    #5
    Hansel

    Hansel [OP] Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2013
    Member:
    #100925
    Messages:
    217
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Glenn
    Arizona
    Vehicle:
    base
    I'm glad the Tacoma has a larger interior because its only the base truck and for my 6'4" son it's a pretty tight fit. With the seat all the way back his head "hits" the back corner of the roof.

    Anyone else have this problem? I'm guessing the extended cab would be much better regarding this.
     
  6. May 1, 2013 at 7:23 AM
    #6
    ALawrence

    ALawrence Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2011
    Member:
    #63252
    Messages:
    1,409
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Andrew
    Oklahoma City
    Vehicle:
    03 Tacoma Sr5 Double cab 4x4
    I had a 91 pickup 4x4 5 speed with the 22re. Love it. Would still have it if I hadn't rolled it over. I had switched out the bench seat with two buckets out of a 4runner.

    Inside styling hasn't changed much at all and I felt right at home in my 03. Only thing different was the addition of a CD player..

    As for head space... I'm 5'4" I don't hit the ceiling at all.
     
  7. May 1, 2013 at 8:44 AM
    #7
    gainman

    gainman Semper Fi

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2008
    Member:
    #10185
    Messages:
    3,541
    Gender:
    Male
    SW Florida
    Vehicle:
    2012 TRD Sport Supercharged Manual
    Stuff
    I am 6'4" and drive a 2000 tacoma though it extended cab. I wouldn't mind it being a little bigger but I am comfortable. My 2nd gen extended cab was a better fit though this is not far off
     
  8. May 1, 2013 at 2:56 PM
    #8
    jkirkpatrick

    jkirkpatrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Member:
    #73869
    Messages:
    677
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Jason
    Edmonton
    Vehicle:
    2018 4Runner TRD Offroad edition (2000 Tacoma sold in 2018)
    Lift, tires, wheels, bumper, winch, sliders, skids, regeared
    6'5" and drive an access cab. No issues for me
     
  9. May 1, 2013 at 7:01 PM
    #9
    Taylor

    Taylor Check out NASA Spec3!

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2012
    Member:
    #74417
    Messages:
    1,334
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Taylor
    Vienna, Virginia
    Vehicle:
    NASA Spec3 RaceCar
    Yeah' I'm like 6'2" and I've driven an 86, 96, and an 03. The 86's seat didn't go all the way back, but it was definitely a tighter fit than the Tacomas.

    Funny thing is, there was WAY more foot room. Like the room around the pedals was much bigger. I could actually push in the clutch on the 86, and I have a hard time getting my foot past the brake pedal on Tacomas.
     
  10. May 9, 2013 at 9:25 AM
    #10
    Bubbarr

    Bubbarr Monkey Sweat

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Member:
    #14193
    Messages:
    231
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Duane
    SD
    Vehicle:
    TRD Off-Road 4X4
    DynoLock Auto tailgate lock, 16" Konig Counter steer Off roads, 265/75/16 Goodyear Wrangler Duratracs, 2.5 King front and rear with remote reservoir, Built Right UCA, Deaver 3 pack, SD Truck Shop Custom Sliders.
    I used to own an 86 Toyota pickup. It had a turbo that came stock. I loved that thing.
     

Products Discussed in

To Top