Toyota Tacoma Diesel Not Worth it Says Chief Engineer

As a previous poster stated about the Tacoma double cab. Toyota didn't think it was a "good" idea and said nobody wanted it then Nissan started to do it. Toyota came around and now most Tacos are DC's.

It could very well be the same thing with diesel I-4 in the mid size. Cummins and the GM engineers aren't idiots and you better believe they will want to squeeze out as much MPG as possible from their engines. If they get high enough mpg it will tilt the mid-size truck market. Most car buyers are....lets face it, dumb. They want to know what can your truck do for me NOW. If they offer great MPGs then they'll sell like crazy.

It could very well force Toyota into the game. Only 20 mil to do some testing? They would do that in a heartbeat and make half of it back in adding def fluid for people getting it serviced.

I'm excited to see what happens, personally.


Also, can we stop mixing in the Cummins, Duramax, and powerstroke 800 ft. lb torque monster driving rednecks with the potential I-4 diesel Mid size crowd?

 

I still bow to those who run the corporation. They are the ones who have all of the facts. None of us can say for TRUE assurance about the market. And Toyota didn't get to the top by being stupid.

 

If you want to use hard facts, cite sources. I live in Maine, I'm well aware it's part of New England, and my skewed information comes from the 5 gas stations I've been driving by almost every day for 15 years.

http://www.fuelgaugereport.com/states/maine/maine-metro/

Now it's about a dollar. Statistically it has been closer to $.80 difference per gallon for regular gas, which is what most people use, so that should be the comparison. Even at its highest in 2008 it was still more than a $.40 difference. Around here anyways. My point was that it's different depending on where you go, and I stand by that.

 

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_gnd_a_epm0_pte_dpgal_w.htm


And I edited my first post. Its only a 20 cent difference per gallon between regular and diesel in California from 2010-2014. Lets figure somebody does something crazy and owns their truck for 5 years and does something even crazier like drive it 50+ miles away from their house frequently. Over 5 years, average it out, they will have spent 20 cents more per gallon on diesel, not $1.00.

I drive by hundreds of gas stations every day. Right now the HIGHEST station for diesel is about 3.49 and the LOWEST regular gas is about 2.39. Only a fool would take these two gas stations and compare just two to try to prove their point.

I already proved the Toyota Engineer is a liar, cant you just admit that?

 

Have you asked Tundra owners what the one thing they "hate/dislike" about their trucks.... I would assume most would say the shitty MPG they get. A diesel option would be beneficial to help improve MPGs.

I guess as a Toyota owner, I would like for them to step up their game some more. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

 

Diesel has always been $1.00 more than gas in my area. That's about 30% more when it's $3.00 vs $4.00 which is how much more efficient diesel is supposed to be.

The lower the gas prices, the larger that percentage is.

 

EPA is controlled by oil companies...

 

Just saying diesels aren't as appealing as you think, especially with the new emissions. The emissions completely chokes them out. At least that's how it was in my cummins

Also this is how good toyotas service is. I have a 1989 toyota truck, toyota is replacing my steering based on a recall, the truck had 280k miles and isn't in pristine condition by any means. Dodge hassles me everytime something comes out for my 2012 ram, I still don't have the tie rod recall or fuel heater recall done because of lack of compliance on dodges end. On the toyota they ordered the part and told me to bring in the truck some time to get it done, they are even doing a free alignment for me

 

Actually you proved that the cost differential in California is lower than what the engineer stated, so I will give you that. Assuming this hypothetical truck will be sold in states other than California, perhaps a national average would be more useful than a comparison based on 1/50th of the states where this truck will be sold. I'm not sure who would draw the comparison you mentioned, as I never alluded to such, and the url I provided shows an average for the area, not a difference between gas stations across the street from one another. Although my point still stands, regions prices vary. Only a fool would ignore this to prove a point.

 

^ right, California may have lower diesel prices due to lower usage (if it doesn't sell, lower the price). In my area it's never been lower than $.70 difference, right now it's still $3.29 for diesel and just got upped to $2.49 for reg gas.

I thought this was a Tacoma discussion, stay on topic?

As for the Tundra it would be a larger tow vehicle for larger trailers and yes at that point the diesel would be worth it.


As Bama stated, it's all up to Toyota, nothing anyone bitches about will make them actually do it. If you want to pony up $20mil for them to do R&D then more power to ya.

 

Rollin coal in a Taco? I'm in! I keep mine for 10 plus years and would pay for it over that time in fuel economy. Takes that long to get them " right" anyway.
Just want to tow a reasonable weight and still be maneuverable enough to go down through the woods. I HAVE wood thinking about a nice diesel in my truck.


Early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse (Toyota) gets the cheese.

 

the take away i see from Toyota's response is this… "We rather not spend millions of dollars on R&D and newer technology if our sales are still through the roof. If we are making this much money and sell this many trucks, we must be doing something right. No need for any dramatic changes"

 

There's still people bitching for a Diesel in these trucks.... seriously, after the upsale cost of upgrading to a Diesel which cuts heavily into the fuel economy advantage, what is a Diesel really going to do for these little trucks that would be worth the development for Toyota or the cost to there buyers?

 

Toyota has a diesel. It goes in the hilux. If you want one, they are readily available in Australia and other such countries that aren't the USA.

http://www.toyota.com.au/hilux/range

 

Food for thought . . .

How many people here have driven a high efficiency, clean, turbo diesel?

Have now owned a Touareg, Cayenne [I would still own if I hadn't gotten sick], and now [my wife's] Audi TDI are all freakin' amazing.

It is the perfect power plant for larger/heavier vehicles period.

And, unlike gas EPA ratings you are lucky to even hit in these larger/heavier vehicles, every diesel I've owned has out performed EPA ratings by 15-20%. I didn't have a light foot with my Cayenne and still averaged 27 and change. The Q5 that's only rated 31mpg H/W is "averaging" more than 31mpg with a 50/50 mix though the wife does drive more gently than I do.

Sadly, it looks like Jeep is going to blow it AGAIN with their feeble attempts at clean diesel because they don't understand the concept of MARKETING! Seriously, anyone even seen a Jeep GC Diesel commercial?

If it was truly just a 2mpg delta with the generally $2-3K upfront and 25-75 cent diesel price premium required it would not be worth it.

Just sayin' . . .

 

Hard to compare a Toureg TDI to a Tacoma D4D. Just sayin. I have a lot of 1st generation Dutch Canadian customers with various Diesel cars, trucks, and SUV's. When asked they aren't enthused with the value of the Diesel. They buy those German Diesel cars for there reliability and familarity, not because they are cheaper to own or run. Their kids usually end up in gas jobs

 

I didn't take it that way.

First BMW, Mercedes, VW and Audi are all based in Europe and have to do the Diesel thing anyway due to the diesel environment in Europe.

GM ... who the heck knows why they do anything. Looking back at the Gasoline engine they attempted to make into a diesel years ago, and how horribly it failed.

They also discussed after combustion treatments are expensive and a giant pain to the customers ( Urea Injection ). Trust me it is a pain in the rear, and expensive.

With the new emissions standards rising up soon and another large tightening a couple of years later added to the cost of after treatments and diesel fuel prices ... all of these add into the total development cost and to the cost of the vehicle outright and maintenance after the sale. The Average Consumer is not going to pay out that much more money just for the diesel. Some may, but the largest portion would not. I know I wouldn't.

We will see how those diesels are rolling in a few years when the emissions noose tightens up.

You shouldn't inject your Bias into the article.

 

Exactly. Everyone keeps saying, "it's not worth it for a couple mpg". These new diesels typically exceed EPA ratings whereas most gasoline engines struggle to meet them. Motor Trend recently tested the new American half tons and the Ram Ecodiesel got 23mpg overall. That's 3 better than my 2.7 regular cab 4wd Taco and the Ram weighs 2200lbs MORE! An even smaller (2.0-2.4 L4) in a lighter Tacoma would probably get 28-30mpg mixed.

Also, it's not all about efficiency either. A 160hp diesel would move my truck with much more authority than my 160hp gas burner. It would just make these trucks nicer to drive. Especially when lifts and larger tires went on.

 

No diesel coming boys. Let's move on.

 

IBTL!