Any Comparisons of 0 to 60 time Second to third Generation?

Keep in mind the ~600 lbs weight difference from gen 1 to gen 3.

 

That IS how the Tacoma is marketed, off-road hooning machines.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgEWEqxjhJA

Besides, good acceleration is byproduct of the high towing capacity, because that's how towing capacity is rated per SAE J2807.

Ah, you are right.

You say that, yet when Ford offered haul-truck Alcoa aluminum wheels on the F350, buyers were complaining about the wheel's 100 mph speed rating...

 

my engine performance test is ..."can u pass 99% of the cars if you wanted? can u hold 70 mph??" PASS TEST, anything else is superfluidous

 

Well by that testing logic almost any modern vehicle would pass. Must be an easy pleaser.

 

Very good review for what it is. I'm not a downer on the 3rd generation, but it does show that it isn't a vast improvement over the older gens.

All that new tech, and it's slower and only 1.5mpg better.

The interior is a lot better, but the rest is a letdown.

 

What Toyota did was maintain as much performance as possible from the Tacoma while making it more efficient. 10% better MPG doesn't seem like much at first but that compounds over time.

 

SAE J2807 requires the truck loaded with trailer to maximum GCWR to do 0-30 mph in 12.0 sec and 0-60 mph in 30.0 sec. GCWR on 2016 Tacos is 11360 lb.

 

I disagree. They did the bare minimum in my opinion.

 

This is Toyota we are talking about here. Their niche has never been to blow us away with specs and MPG in their trucks. They build no-frills motors that last a long time. That is how they became the largest automaker on the planet. Meanwhile other companies invest tons of money into mechanically complex engines that break down or just straight up cheat (*cough* VW *cough*).
Another thing is that Toyota isn't gonna give you a 30 mpg gasoline motor just yet. Neither is any other brand. That will just cannibalize more-profitable full size truck sales. Sure the technology probably exists but in the long run it makes more sense to roll the tech out slowly as opposed to avoid blowing their R&D wad in one generation. Then US lawmakers would be like "See! 30 mpg! No make it 40!".

 

Manual 1st gen was not stock..He mentioned light weight and other reasons it was faster..No way a stock 1 or 2 gen are beating my 3 gen manual off the line...all nice utility vehicles...when I really wanna go fast out comes the Z.

 

Also, it was hard to hear in the video...but wasn't one of the trucks revv-ing for the start? If the Auto 3rd Gen was at idle, but the Manual 1st Gen was at 3-4k RPM and dropped the clutch...

 

Still haven't seen a dyno of the 2GR-FKS...

 

Agree with the power to weight but don't forget about rear end gears in the manual. only reason to own a manual is to takeoff deep in the RPM band..jmho

 

Ha! I actually just snorted. Nice hastas.

I hate the fact I know what those are.

 

He mentioned it was light because they were from the factory. Its not modded. Have you ever seen the specs on the first gen? They are like a feather in comparison. Not to mention its the acess cab manual trd (4:10 rear too) i was surprised that it was that close but all that adds up.

I used to own the exact same thing a 2004 trd manual, so i have a compariso. But based on just general knowledge and observations , making the assumption that there is no way you are loosing off the line is just because you dont want to. Sorry to say it but stock for stock, an automatic v6 2nd gen is gonna show you tail lights no matter how hard you dump that clutch.