The Gen 3 2.7L 4-Cylinder Thread

I don't really see why it would cause a change in consumption, the only difference is the higher octane fuel is less volatile which is necessary for higher compression engines to avoid pre ignition. Unfortunately the wives tale exists that higher octane = better gas.

 

I've had my 4x4, AC, 4 cyl, SR-5 for a week or so. All is good so far, but it only has 500 miles on it so far. Yesterday my dash display showed 24.3 avg mpg. How accurate I don't know. In regards to gasoline type, I noticed on the gas cap it notes to use up to E-15 gas only. It also shows that famous circle with the line through it with E20-E85 inside. So the other day I'm at the gas station for the first time and put the cheapest unleaded in. I didn't see anywhere on the three choices of gas that noted anything about E-15 etc. Anyones thoughts ?

 

e-15 means the fuel is 15% ethanol and 85% gasoline...I'm not sure but I don't think all states use that mixture? Strange that it would say to use that only

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/11/30/aaa-e15-gas-harm-cars/1735793/

 

The E stands for Ethanol, basically an alternative "bio fuel", and 99% of gas stations have a sticker indicating their fuel content is maximum E10 (no more than 10% Ethanol). You will KNOW if you run into an E85 station, as only a few vehicles run on it and they are well marked stations.

By E15 only I'm quite certain they mean no more than E15.

 

I like how it handles curves on a 2 lane highway I travel between towns. Sweet!

 

Got almost 9K on my SR5 4X4 Access cab.

Some thoughts: If I use "S" mode and set it to 5, the truck runs great and gets good mileage (22 mpg) At 75 MPH the RPM is at 2400 RPM. Truck is quite and smooth. When I had my 2006 SR5 2WD same 2.7 engine and manual transmission, I would be turning 2600 at 75MPH.

6th gear is purely a 2nd overdrive gear they needed on the dyno to make the EPA happy.

Now cruise control flat out sucks. I had it on my 06 manual, but never realized how bad it sucked on an AT. If I drive with cruise off, the truck will maintain 5th no problem with inclines and wind, and that is when I am adding throttle to maintain the exact speed. But with cruse on, it does the down shift dance.

I think everyone complaints (both 4 cyl and V6) about the shift happy AT is more to do with cruise control than the AT.

 

I've test driven a few of the new 16s, and am interested on the thoughts of the guys living in mountainous areas on the 2.7 for going through the passes.

I'm moving out west and don't have the ability to road test the 4 cylinders metal on longer uphill stretches where I am now.

 

Mine pulls up the continental divide in 4th on highway 90 outside Butte just fine. You can keep it at 70-75 the whole way if you really want to. The only time I wished I had more power is driving on 2 lane highways with short passing areas. Not too much get up and go from 60 or so.

 

I'm on the same page with Jeff. 5th is almost useless in the mountains, but 4th pulls great, and isn't turning too high rpms. I commute in the Bay Area and travel over hwy 17 everyday, I'm averaging 23.2 on fuelly.

I love the truck, and I don't think I'd be any happier if I had the v-6. Guys that do my commute in stock 2nd gen 4.0's are getting 17-18. I don't know anyone with a 3.5l yet.

 

I've had mine just over a month and have just under 1000 miles on it. I did the math at the last fill-up and it came in at 24.5 mpg. That's all local miles here in the mountains of western NC. I'll get a feel for the highway mileage on an upcoming trip to upstate NY. I'm very happy with the truck overall and glad to be back to a manual transmission.

 

it is a slow truck, you are not going to win any drag race.. i you want power, you have to press hard the gas. the 6 speed tends to shift up fast to lower rpm. i have 3000 on it and i love it. simple reliable good looking truck.

 

Hey Max, finally found a neighbor on the forum. I just got a four banger, 4x4, access cab, SR5. I live in San Jose. Maybe I'll see you on 17 lol

 

^ I'll keep an eye out. I rally over 17 and 85 almost daily. I now have 2,500 miles, and she's really running strong. I don't see too many acces cab 16's around, even though Santa Cruz is land of the Tacoma.

 

OK guys...long time lurker..looked through all the threads I could find and didn't see much in regards to my question, which is what is the average mpg those of you with the double cab 4 cylinder seem to be getting? Possibly looking at one in the next year. Just curious. Thanks.

 

I have the DCSB SR with the auto trans 2.7....My fuelly signature is below. I have side steps and mud flaps but am only averaging 19.5 MPG. I am not entirely disappointed in my MPG's but I was hoping I would get in the 22mpg range. To be fair I have had some instances where I let the truck idle a bit. I have a relatively flat commute here in TX but that does not seem to be helping. I am more than satisfied with the truck regardless. I just ruined my sun visor taking the warning label off though

 

There's a member on the forums who's getting 27.5 mpg (2.7L AC 5MT 4x4) with AFE dry air filter, and the LCE headers (lowers peak tq, from 3800 RPM to 3150 rpm).

There is no reason why the automatic in your guys trucks shouldn't get worse highway mileage in your trucks. You have the 2nd over drive gear, where.as the 5 speed manual has just the 1.

Really pissed Toyota skimped out on a new 6MT for the 2.7L. The new Chevy Colorado has a 6MT in the 4 cyl 2.5L. Bunch of bull shit. Same thing with calling the new Tacoma a gen 3, when it's really a Gen 2.5. They only updated because of competition.

Same thing goes with the 6MT on the 3.5L making the OD gear less than equal with the 6speed automatic. Clearly they are incentivized by some higher power to get people into automatics. Assholes

 

I think I read the gen 3 is 500lbs heavier than the G2. Not sure if that's correct for the 4cyl, but I'll assume it did not get any lighter. I have a '10 access cab prerunner 4cyl manual 5 speed, and get right at 24mpg doing a 95% 55mph highway commute right at sea level. Anyone that claims they do any better, especially when you add on the weight of the DC, 4WD components, auto trans, I simply can't believe without seeing with my own eyes.

A couple of other comments. I think adding a 6th gear would be completely useless in the 4cyl. This truck has so little power, it's just not useful in the real world. As far as promoting slushboxes, as we can see with all the complaints about gear hunting in the gen 3 and sluggish starts, the slushie offers the singular advantage of being able to program the performance to enhance fuel economy. Mash the gas pedal and your truck say's "whoa, not so fast there champ, I'm gonna slow this input waaaaay down cuz the EPA is forcing me to". Just one more reason to avoid automatics, IMO. But anyway, programming is why manuals no longer have the fuel economy advantage they once had over automatics. Thus, as manufacturers struggle to find every tenth of a MPG they can find to meet economy requirements, this is just another casualty. Blame it on progress, I suppose.

Finally, I think you give Toyota too much credit with your gen 2.5 comment, particularly if you choose the 4 cyl. This version is the 3rd "facelift" to the gen 2, IMO, with a couple more electronic gizmo's tossed in. I see no reason whatsoever to get rid of my Gen 2 for a Gen 3, I'd be throwing my money away for pure vanity. Still, even a gen 3 with the 4 cyl manual transmission remains one of the best values in the automotive world. It will run forever, with a bare minimum of maintenance costs and the lowest depreciation rate of any new vehicle on the planet. It still has that goin for it!

 

4x4 2.7L 5MT AC
Gen 2 curb weight - 4030 lbs
Gen 2.099 (3) curb weight - 4195 lbs

Not enough to make make a significant difference...

Yes I give to much credit to them for calling it a gen 2.5.

Also, I disagree with the engine having to little of power for 6th gear. There's plenty of times I could use it on flat ground, etc. Let me be the deciding factor but give me the damn option to shift into the higher gear possible.

Also automatic transmissions are only more efficent for the general population who is to stupid to drive efficently. Hypermilers continue to crush EPA MPG in manual transmissions. So no, they aren't irrelevant, just people are stupid in how they drive and the automatics have better gearing ratios which the manual transmission could have identical but no no, f $£÷ the manufactures.

Finally I agree you'd be wasting money in the name of vanity on a new 16', but you fail to forget they added dual vvti to the 2.7L and they changed a few other things in this engine. Also they under rate this engine to push people into V6 sales.

The 2.7L is the best vehicle period. Yes, the best resale, reliability, longevity, cost of ownership. It simply trumps everything.

 

I would think the side steps would be relatively negligable in regards to decreasing MPGs...same with the mudflaps. Could be wrong though. I am surprised your mileage is so low, although I do know that excessive idling is a killer. Have you driven it with four (including driver) adults? If so, how does it perform in regards to passing and braking?

That is a good point, I did find it odd the v6 ratings were so similar, although it does sound like some members on here are getting surprisingly high mpg's for a 4x4 v6 dc.

My whole reasoning for the I4 dc over the V6 is the initial price point. Dealers around here are selling them for about $24k-$26k. The cheapest V6 i've seen is around $29k. These are all 2wd obviously. 2014+ of same configuration go for about same price as the cheaper new ones. Need a DC because we are expecting a baby in January so there needs to be room for a car seat. Plan on having more so need room for more car seats.

 

The DCSB SR 4 banger 2wd is a great value. If they made it in manual 4x4 I would have been very tempted.