Disappointing test drive

Oh and the HOOD! Dear god it never ended!

 

It all depends where you are coming from. I also drive a 2006 Mustang, and, sitting somewhat on the floor with that thing, not to mention the longer hood, driving the Tacoma didn't appear all that imposing. My guess for the "unnecessary length" is the upcoming regulations for front-end crash ratings and pedestrian survivability.

 

Why? I doubt the GM diesel will get 10 mpg more but maybe. You also need to factor in higher maintenance costs on the the diesel and DEF.

 

My point was the argument that premium currently costs more than diesel which was the argument against diesel was the cost. No one said it was a better option. Nope its supposed to be rated at 34 mpg hwy, that's 11 more than the gas taco.

 

Your name says it all! He's not the only one? Are you reading the other posts?

 

Put a small cushion.

 

And the next accessory...a front view camera.

 

Yeah mid 30s for a truck gonna get a booster seat?
Having owned several Toyota trucks since 1987 can say I have ever had to do that. Now I'm so darn curious about the new model I gotta drive one & seriously not one to be found near me or even seen one on the road. It is like a mystery truck
My previous Toyotas were a mixed bag - 22REs, a factory 4 cyl turbo, a V6 3.slow, couple 4.8L tundras, 2 V6 2gen Tacoma's. I want to know what is up with how everyone is all over the map on the new release. Hopefully get to see & drive for myself by Christmas. Fingers crossed.

 

Except automatics often now, when cruising, lock up. Which makes them just as efficient as a manual. Trust me, a newer automatic on a closed course will record better mpgs than a manual on the same model of car. The difference in mpg has disappeared and that's what you see reflected on the EPA sticker.

 

The difference in MPGs between autos and manuals was never really different when cruising (assuming they had the same number of gears). The difference was mostly due to when shifting occurs, and when coming to a stop (the manual would be in neutral while the auto would stay in first gear and use more fuel). Now many of the autos have the stop/start technology, so that is no longer an issue.

But mainly the difference now is due to the gearing. You can see how everyone is complaining how the new auto shifts to the higher gear too soon. You can bet nobody who has a manual transmission is going to shift that early all the time. So there is your difference. This is also why many of the autos that seem to have good MPGs on the window sticker don't seem to deliver them in real life. The best example I can think of is the F150 with the 2.7 Ecoboost. Yes you can get 23 mpg on the highway if you drive like grandma. But when you actually step on the gas and enjoy the 300+ hp, your MPGs drop way way down.

The truth is that these turbo 4-cylinders that continue to be put in cars to replace V6 engines do not really deliver better gas mileage than the V6 engines they replace. What they do allow for is this.... If you drive with a very light right foot and make sure not to ever push the car, then the turbo will never scroll up and the MPGs will be really really good. However, if you drive the car normally, be prepared to get much worse MPGs than the window sticker indicates. I have a BMW X1 with the 4-cylinder. It is the exact same thing. The window sticker says 33 MPGs on the highway. No way I can ever get higher than about 25-26. Why is that? That turbo is just too fun to not use. When you step on the gas, this car really goes.

Unfortunately the only way to get really good acceleration is to have bad MPGs. The only alternative to that reality is to have a really light and aerodynamic vehicle (not possible with a truck), or to have an electric vehicle (maybe there will be an electric truck in the future).

 

My question is why run premium in a Tacoma for no gain? Analysis should be done with regular.

 

There are countless threads on this in 2nd gen section, but most of us find our trucks to run better on 91 or higher octane, not sure what the 3.5 is tuned for.

 

Big thing with #1 an #2 is that they are both personal preference. You will find people of all shapes and sizes that both like/dislike the seating position and seat height. You will find 6'0" people saying they don't fit and its too cramped, but the next guy who is 6'5" loves it. Same goes for anyone around the 5'-6' range. I'm 5'9" and love the seating position and find visibility to be good. And both #1 and 2 are the same exact complaints people have with the 2nd gen.

The other complaints are about on par with what I expected people to talk about. Look what happened to the 4Runner, that thing has a big fat nose now too.

 

My Malibu has a flat nose.

 

A diesel GM may out-resale a gas GM. But there is zero chance a diesel GM is going to out-resale a Toyota.

 

I have seen this expressed before. A wild uneducated guess from a Taco fan boy would say....when over 40% of the owners say they are taking their vehicals off roading....a vehicle built to a price point as opposed to a 4 Runner say, the thought of fording streams and bringing salt into the lower floor/seat area does not combine well the electrics in power seats. I remember some water intrusion while going through a deep hole and hoping there was nothing electric, especially a convenience feature, that could fail and make it impossible to move a seat. This opposes what we see for power seats in Land Rovers etc....but these people can afford fixes that cheap skate Taco owners can't.

 

I live in So cal and I am very interested in the 16 Tacoma preferably in manual but it is not a option in our region the closest place with a manual I would have to acquire in Flagstaff, AZ (350 miles away). I was hoping I can get some feedback from you in regards to The manual, if it was superior etc or what pros and cons you observed in your test drive.

 

If these mileage figures on the sticker are referenced EPA, they will never be and never meant to be exact mile ages for cars. It just means that two separate cars will have a relative mileage difference for comparison. No one with a turbo expects to get 33 mpg perhaps, but for a Corolla rated at 40, they should expect the difference to be roughly around 7 mpg....IF YOu drove both the same way in the same location ......which seldom happens. As far as manuals and autos are concerned, IMHO, it isn't the transmission you are fighting with for best performance....it's the computer. The more you hand gear decison making over to a computer, the closer you can get to designed goals the engineers had in mind. The driver becomes an after thought and you trying to manage the shift lever around....like stop signs in Boston, are just suggestions. We have less control over cars as the years go by.

 

I actually couldn't care less if the truck came with power seats or not. Just a good old fashioned pump height adjustment would be all I ask for.

 

Exactly!! Just some way. any way for that seat to be adjusted up or down would be fine. One size does not fit all!