Fuel economy of the 2016 tacoma

Okay, the tq must have been mentioned in that video. Sounds good all around, hopefully it meets epa estimates like the Gen 2.

 

The 6th gear is a taller over drive so the 4.1 rear end is fine.

Will the 4x4 get 18/24 like the 2nd Gen with 1 less mpg city?

 

I was lucky enough to see the video before they took it down, it seems legit (respectable editorial source.. favorable review). With that I'm actually impressed, 19/24 from a 4x4 AT. Also the 278 hp and 265 lbs/ft torque specs are actually slightly higher than what was "leaked" on a dealer order form. Given Toyota's excellent D4D technology the power bands and torque curves should be great. Now if Toyota can just solve the over sized ugly grill issue and still offer a proper manual with a 4x4, I will definitely buy another one in roughly 8 years.

 

Okay I've quoted both of your posts, what configuration was quoted 19/24? Z50 talked about the 4x4 being lower and Noah you said this was from a 4x4. Also, will the manual have better or worse mileage?

 

Just found it. Tpak said those were the 4x4 numbers so it's possible for the 2wd version to get 20/24.

 

The review didn't mention the manual mpg. However since the manuals are geared and targeted for off road users I would expect a 1 or 2 mpg penalty. I get the city mpg penalty, but why can't they have a taller 6th gear on the manuals? Oh well, even then the manual mpg should be a significant improvement.

 

I can't say with 100% confidence that a DC 4x4 AT will be rated 19/24. I saw the video once, but the initial first minute the "host" talked about the history of the Tacoma and the changes with the 3rd Gen, then the next roughly 5 minutes were dedicated to just the TRD OR DC 4x4 AT features and improvements etc.... So towards the end when he states "this truck will return 19/24 mpg, I assume since he's a respectable editorial source, he was talking about the TRD OR DC 4x4 AT, the one he's been riding and talking about for the past 4-5 minutes (I think he was driving the LB, couldn't 100% tell). I hate and have little respect for people who do a dedicated review video to one particular trim/config but then throw out mpg ratings from the SR 2.7 In-4 4x2 (what the faulk is that!).

 

As I recall it was a DCLB TRD OR (OR implies 4x4 and AT b/c of crawl control as far as I can tell) and like you he appeared to be talking about that specific model. In that config those would be excellent numbers. He also said 21 combined. I would love to see 24 hwy in a DCLB TRD OR as I do a lot of highway driving.

 

Isn't the 2nd gen 4.0L 4x4 rated at 16/21? So the 3rd gen 3.5L 4x4 at 19/24 is a good but not great improvement.

If we are comparing apples to apples.

 

It's all relative, to me a nearly 20% improvement is pretty impressive and welcomed, especially considering the Gen 3 Taco doesn't have a 8 or 9 speed transmission, or have a body made out of aluminum attached to a small displacement high strung engine. I never understood why some people where expecting 30 or near 30 mpg from a petrol V6?

 

20%?!?! Pfft... anything less than a 500% increase is just unacceptable.

 

Yup, people also forgetting that any MPG numbers will be with Air dam and tonneu cover.
So 24MPG will be there as long as they maintain both, otherwise back to 21 MPGs because cross section of new truck and old truck is the same.
And if you were not getting 21 MPG on the old truck, you will not be getting 24 MPGs on new one either.
Not that I want to argue this, but you should set your expectations to some realistic level. This is not diesel .
Otherwise this forum will get million threads "Toyota lied I am getting only 17MPG I only removed Tonneau and air dam"

 

lol good ol' BlueT at it again.

 

I hope to see 24 from the 3rd gen 4x4 2.7 at least. Then , sold.

I can't afford a V6 so it's moot

 

The Off Road is being built at 10:1 for 4x2 to 4x4.
OR implies 4x2 from what I've seen in the numbers

 

Do you really think that a air dam and a tonneau cover are really going to give you a 3 mile per gallon difference?

 

If the video is true and the TRD OR version is in fact EPA rated at 19/24 it will already factors in the lack of a front air dam. In the video the Toyota rep said the OR package does not have the front air dam. Pretty impressive to me.

 

The numbers quoted are for the TRD OR which has no air dam. Not sure if it has the tonneau cover.

 

lol. I too laugh at the people expecting and 8 or 9 speed transmission in a compact pickup. All the fresh fuel-saving tech usually goes into more profitable full-size trucks first.
Also, not sure how the Atkinson cycle even helps MPG. The spec's pickuptrucks.com gave us are almost exactly the same as the GM twins and they don't use that tech.

 

As for the GM twins wait for real world fuelly numbers to see how the Tacoma compares. Toyota seems to give more accurate fuel numbers than GM. Not saying it will work out in Toyotas favor for sure, but plenty of reviewers and fuelly people aren't even coming close to GM's posted numbers.

Also the technology that went into getting the Atkinson cycle to work is the same sort of technology required to get a nearly flat torque curve, if the review is correct, compared to the "van" (@BlueT see what I did there ) torque curve of the Chevrolet engine.