Torque #'s Finally Here

I get a about 18 highway on my gen 2 Tacoma. If I go on a 2,000 mile road trip and average 25 mpg at $3/gal with a new Tacoma that is a $93 savings in fuel. Compound that over a full year. #MPGMATTERZ

 

Ike Gauntlet:

2015 GMC Canyon CrewCab Long 4×4 7:54.70
2014 Nissan Frontier CrewCab PRO-4X 8:37.62
2015 Toyota Tacoma DoubleCab TRD 4×4 8:49.66
2016 Toyota Tacoma ???????

 

3rd

@AR15xAR10

 

FORUM WARZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

 

It is in fact something that our trucks in particular NEED in order to be sold in the US under current and future EPA regulations (i.e. CAFE). Your argument is a complete straw man, you are talking about what people and the market might want or need. That's irrelevant, the government has already specifically stated by regulation what MPG specifications will be required regardless of what that market wants.

Complying with a regulation regime is a NEED that supersedes any buyer's WANT.

So yes, better MPG, potentially at the compromise of other performance specifications is in fact a NEED because congress passed legislation that said so. End of story. You'll be getting smaller displacement engines with more crap bolted on to them to make up the difference on your truck whether you think you want it or not. It isn't up to you it turns out.

 

you carry a 300 LB recovery bag?
Difference between my 07 and 14 SR5 DCLB both with same driver, both with full tanks nothing really in the cab and empty bad with ARE caps on is ....drumroll ...... little under 300 LB.
Thats almost 300LB I dont cary with my truck everytime I go. I get 21+ MPG on my 4x4 DCLB

Not to mention all the gizmos suck energy so there is Alternator drag to burn more fuel.
...

 

All other posts are irrelevant. I now see the conclusion and am studying it for further data analysis. /thread.

 

ok, but now your argument has shifted. You've moved from "look our mpgs are what they are because they are trucks that are less aerodynamic and we need to accept that" to, "ok but your driving style is what makes this worse than other trucks." I can't compare my own MPGs in the Tacoma to my experience in other trucks because I have no other trucks to drive in the same fasion (which is the only way youre suggesting I can compare two trucks; I don't agree). To answer your question though, I keep the truck on cruise at around 70mph. I pretty much drive this thing like an old person everywhere. Ive been trying to hyper-mile it to see if I can squeeze any extra juice out of it, and so far it's not been very fruitful. I'll say this again and leave it at this: Im not asking for car-like performance and I dont think anyone else is either. I will even agree that they dont make great heavy commuting vehicles if MPG is your focus. I accept the MPGs as they are now. I welcome any improvement, and I firmly believe its possible for toyota to deliver a very similar package AND improve the MPGs. If I am correct, the newer Tacoma with the smaller motor will deliver better MPGs, and still have the same towing/hauling capacity, and will still be able to go all the same places my Tacoma can go.

 

Remove things,,, punch them out... by pass that shit..

Much better truck
I fucking hate goberment regulations.

 

You need to rotate yourself 180* and stop talking out of your ass.

 

Between clevises, recovery rope, tree strap, air compressor, hijack, shovel, and other odds and ends 300 lbs isn't too far off for what I carry just for recoveries.

BTW I think the new F150 proved weight saving help payload and towing but don't help mpg all that much. Maybe a 1 mpg gain on the F150 was due to the lighter frame and aluminum. Most of the gain has been from better aerodynamics.

I bet you get 21 mpg average with the Tacoma. Just like you say you get 18 mpg average with the Tundra

 

Yep, but of course the manufacturer doesn't have that option. And removing stuff and bypassing shit won't turn a 3.5L into a 4.0L either. Someone other than the free market is determining what performance trade-offs are going to be made in designing vehicles. Thus what any persons concept of what "truck" performance should be is irrelevant. Uncle Sugar has decided that for us, whether we agree or not.

 

Careful what you wish for, it is quite possible that what comes out of his ass is more intelligible than what comes out the other end...

 

Life would be so much better with more pollution

 

But if only some people cheat and pollute a lot while almost everyone else follows the rules then it will be OK!

 

...

 

By men. Stacks are a great way to say ",common ladies, hop in my douche canoe!"

 

There is no point in arguing about this as people will always want more. I have multiple arguments in this all and yes CAFE is mandating a lot of bullshit that is unrealistic, but one thing remains constant. Lifted midsize and full size trucks have shit aerodynamics hence why all of them will almost always get less than car fuel economy. Your driving style may affect your economy by 1-2 mpgs+- but ultimately, the weight, combined with the aerodynamics and your style and or driving setting will always dictate what kind of economy you will actually get vs. What is on paper.

So moral of my argument is, if you want car like fuel economy get a car. If you want to use a truck as a daily driver expect a lower economy in general. Expect a trucks economy but your expectations on what kind of MPG you get out of it should never be car like. They are two diferent animals.