Disappointing test drive

Over the past couple of weeks I have been itching to test drive a new tacoma double cab but because I live in the Northest (where there is very limited inventory) I have had a hard time finding one. So yesterday I sat down and called nearly a dozen dealers in the area and finally found one that had two tacomas in Langhorne, PA (about 20 miles from my house). By the time I got there one of the two had been sold but I did get to test drive a DCSB OR in white. Now I wanted so much to love this truck, I love the specs, I love the way it looks and I want the perceived reliability and durability that comes along with it. Though unfortunately this was definitely a case of "don't meet your heroes" and here are my issues.

1. No height adjustment on the driver seat. For a nearly $40k vehicle this is just totally unacceptable. It caused me to be in a very uncomfortable seating position. Its something I might be able to get used to but I'm not going to spend that much money on a truck hoping it will eventually be comfortable to drive.

2. Low front roof-line and short windshield. This caused me to be in a seating position where even with me feeling like I was sitting on the floor I still had the sun visors right in my line of sight. Now im an average built guy (~5' 10") so I cant be the only one who feels like this. This position also made the interior of the truck feel very cramped, like I felt I had more interior space in my wife's 2013 Mazda3 we took to drive there.

3. VERY tall hood. When I got in the drivers seat it just felt like the hood never ended. I feel like it would make it very difficult to park the truck and position it in any tight spaces.

4. Underwhelming V6 engine. Ok yes the engine did have a decent amount of power but I had to completely floor the throttle and cause the transmission to shift down 2 gears before I felt any of it. This is not really an issue for me but for something with that much torque I just expected more.

So after I was done the test drive and was so disappointed with the results I decided if nothing else I should compare it back to back the Chevy Colorado. So I drove right down the street to a chevy dealership, hopped in a colorado for the first time and it is so much more comfortable. Although I will never buy another American designed vehicle after the issues I have had with my current car I have to give it to chevy that they won the match here on interior comfort.

 

I almost test drove this same truck (also a northeaster). I think I still may, but have my 2015 the way I want.

 

Thanks for the post. Prepare for the fanboy as you offended their truck.

I have prepared what their responses will be (below). They can select a number and use for any response. This will save them time and effort.

1. Then don't buy it - go buy a Colorado / Canyon / Frontier / Fiat instead
   
2. You are just jealous
3. You could not afford it anyways
4. Here is a tampon for your .....

I agree with you. Add to it the hood is so long it makes if difficult to see where the front end it for offroading.

 

Wow...amazing. I am 5'10" and I have none of the issues that you speak of except the part about never buying a domestic brand again. Just goes to show how much personal opinions differ and that expectations are premeditated let downs.

 

and Ill respond with.
1. After that test drive im not going to (although Ive been waiting for this new version for years)
2. I am jealous because I would love to be in the class where this truck was actually comfortable, though unfortunately Toyota designed this truck with a "one size fits some" mentality.
3. Oh trust me I can afford it, I have the money stashed away to buy it in cash.

 

I test drove one here in PA for the first time on Friday. I too was somewhat disappointed, but your #4 was my primary concern. The transmission seemed to hunt around a lot for the right gear and the new V6 engine was pretty lethargic unless I rev'd it out at much higher RPM's than I normally drive.

The hood is also really long and will undoubtedly cause occasional visibility issues off road.

I'm 5'11" and 180 pounds; I personally didn't feel cramped and the seating position wasn't uncomfortable to me. I'm not one who gets hung up on creature comforts. Drive-train, mechanical stuff, quality & dependability, and off road ability are what I primarily concerned about.

 

I will never understand why they didn't just add an elevation adjustment to the driver's seat. The 4runner has similar issues with acceleration, it's the way Toyota maps the throttle and transmission. It's geared toward efficiency. I wonder if the manual drives any better.

 

The SEAT! My wife and I test drove the Tacoma and the Colorado yesterday. The first thing we did, adjust the seat- but not in the tacoma. I was sure that the Tacoma would be the best, hands down. After 3 Tacomas, I think that I have to move on, forced to move on. I want a truck, double cab/long bed. I commute 70 miles a day and the new tacoma, at (maybe 23) mpg is just not practical. I may have just purchased the colorado yesterday if there was not the diesel option coming out.

Has anyone done the math? Diesel price of fuel, +$3,700 price tag.?

I would not mind leather- you cant get this in DBLB.

The interior is not plastic, in fact, my wife mentioned that the tacoma interior seemed plastic (I like the new taco interior).

I love the throttle response of my 2006 taco, the 2016 does not come close. How does my 10 year old truck preform better.

-The Colorado on the other hand, handled it power where i needed it.

Still concerned about reliability of the twins and would be less concerned if i was leaning toward the new taco.

 

Id test drive one, but I'm afraid I'll be disappointed.

 

Assuming the diesel gets 10 MPG better and diesel fuel stays 20 cents higher than regular gasoline, it would take you 167,000 miles to make up the difference. Or between 8 and 9 years if you average 20,000 miles per year.

 

Most guys put 91-93 in at least the 2nd gens which is more expensive than diesel currently

 

True, and I'm one of them. But technically the requirement for either the Gen 2, Gen 3, or gas Colorado is only 87 octane so that's what I based it on.

 

I'd test drive a colorado, but I'm afraid i'll like it...

 

Lol. True but we both know the 4.0 runs better on higher octane and I bet the more advanced 3.5 does too

 

Don't worry, they have plenty of suckers lined up!

 

Yeah, mine is pretty painful on 87.

Just redid the math quick and at the cost difference between 93 octane and diesel under the same conditions, you'd catch up to the extra cost of the diesel in about 70,000 miles.

Looking at what most are quoting as GM's estimates versus '16 Tacoma or Colorado, 10 MPG looks optimistic too.

 

So did mine. Lol. But it's different when a new Tacoma is $32k instead of $38k! Though I'm not sure I'd want to see what a Colorado looks like in 5 years/70k miles. Looks like my next truck will be a fullsize. The cost of the new Tacomas does not justify what you get, especially given you can get fullsizes including a tundra for the same price (after rebates/sales).

 

Seems like lots of people are not reading the forums enough to know to disable eco mode when you get in the truck. In order to get max mpgs Toyota put in some really funny shift points that can be turned off by hitting the ECT button. Then the truck drives much like the current Tacoma from what people have been saying.

Also, the low roof line is common on midsized trucks. I felt the same thing on the Colorado during a test drive and on my Tacoma.

I'm 5'11" and I like the Tacoma seating position... I can't even fit into the new Mazda 3 so I'm finding it interesting that you found that car roomie.

 

So instead of 167,000 miles maybe it goes down to 135,000 miles if you use premium. Seems like a bit of a senseless argument.

It'll still take a butt fuck ton of driving for Diesel to price out like some people try to make you think it does. Just buy whichever engine fits your needs. Forget about the mpgs because it's basically a write off for years and years anyways. Worry more about the livability then the math, because the math sucks either way.