Decision to buy a 3rd gen.

Start here: https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/poor-mpg-read-this.464679/page-2#post-13868891

 

Edit: Impeccable timing!!

 

Pretty much sums it up. I love my Tacoma despite its minor annoyances.

Though to be fair, I think my 3rd gen is more of a 2.5th gen. (2.7th gen? ) A 4x2 with the 2.7 and a utility package, oh gosh!
But really what that means is most of my parts bin is 2nd gen, I get the new sheetmetal and interior, plus the new automatic transmission (but keep in mind I get a 4.10 diff!) but not much else, so a lot of the growing pains we're seeing with the 3.5 I'm avoiding.

 

Typical Fanboy Post. It's obvious you were never considering another vehicle but a Taco. I own a Taco but have a lot of seat time in a GMC Canyon and I can tell you from personal experience that the only thing the Taco does better is offroad.

More HP and Torque
8 sp transmission
Better fuel mileage
Better towing
Fully Boxed frame
Rear Disc Brakes
Rear Step Bumper that's metal, not plastic
Metal bed, not plastic
Better Ride

These are all real advantages, I did not mention anything subjective like how it looks. Also, in every head to head comparison by an independant tester the Canyon/Colorado wins, except offroad. So, the bottom line is if offroad is your primary thing then by all means get a Taco, if not then the Colorado/Canyon is a much better and more refined truck.

 

probably the most honest post here. Taco IMO, does win out on resale value and looks (subjective of course). I actually prefer the plastic bed. And I like the ride in my Taco a bit more than I did on my canyon. (once again, subjective)

I need a truck as a truck. I don't pull a trailer very often. When I do, its a small cargo trailer. I use the bed a ton though. Needed resale value because I do expect hybrid trucks very soon. In which I will be trading it in towards one.

 

Just buy one.

 

None of the V6 Colorado models are rated at 26MPG highway. For the 2017 V6 Colorado, the 2WD model is rated at 25MPG and the 4WD model at 24MPG. The V6 Tacoma is rated at 23MPG highway. Personally, giving up 1MPG for a 4WD Tacoma over the Colorado was more than worth it for me.

If you're looking at 4-cylinder gas options, the Colorado wins hands down on fuel efficiency. The 4-cylinder in the Tacoma is nearly pointless at this point.

The Colorado definitely has a very slight edge on gas mileage, but that's to be expected with that nice 8-speed transmission and the front end optimized for wind resistance instead of off-roading. I'd love to see an 8-speed transmission in the Tacoma for better fuel efficiency, but people are already complaining all over the forum about the 6-speed shifting more frequently than they like. Maybe we just need a 10-speed, so people can't notice as much when it shifts.

As for the Diesel: It's nice to have that as an option, but the 2.8L Diesel is a very underpowered engine. The torque peak down low is nice, but in terms of actual power output it's only marginally better than the 4-cylinder Tacoma. Diesel is more expensive than gasoline here, so between the additional cost of the 2.8L diesel and the cost of fuel, the gas mileage numbers wouldn't actually translate to cost savings for me. If diesel became significantly cheaper than gas in my area or if I drove a massive number of miles each year that might change, but for my situation the 28MPG 4WD Colorado wasn't actually a significant cost savings.

 

You must not have researched much about the equivalent 4 bangers, then. Toyota's 2TR wipes the floor with the competition, the only reason the Colorado wins on fuel efficiency is the aerodynamics (read: low valences)

It's far from pointless, it's legitimately the best in class AND the cheapest.

I did some serious research when I bought my Taco. The competitors were Nissan Frontier, Toyota Tacoma, and Chevy Colorado. I have never owned any of those makes before so brand loyalty was not a part of this.

Power: Chevy likes to wave their dick about 200 hp but they have to begrudgingly follow it with a quiet little ...at 6,300 RPM... In terms of trucks 6300 RPM is winding it out to the moon. That makes sense for a sports car, not for a truck. Nissan kinda shits the bed here, with the lowest power numbers overall. Toyota advertises 160 for their HP figure but it's more like 164 because of the dual VVTi. But here's the kicker... that peak? 4k. 4,000 RPM. You hit your peak power a full 2,000 RPM (and change!) earlier.

Torque: Same story, the Taco makes its peak earlier than the Colorado. Narrower margin here, only about 500 RPM. With an LCE header though, ($400-ish bucks on sale) the Tacoma makes roughly 200 pound feet at 3500 RPM. That's damn impressive for a gas 4 cylinder. Trucks need torque, the "little" 2TR delivers.

Price: Let's talk comparably equipped "work trucks": 4x2, 4 cylinder, Automatic, Extended cab. The Tacoma with utility package comes in the cheapest, believe it or not. I got mine for 22k. Build & Price on Chevy = starts at 24k with the auto. Build & Price on Nissan = Starts at 23k.

Efficiency: The Tacoma and Frontier are in an almost dead heat here and return roughly the same numbers: 19/24 Taco, 19/23 Frontier. Again, the only reason Colorado takes it at 20/26 is because all its aerodynamics are so low. An inch less ground clearance and literal GARBAGE for approach angles. Advertised 17.1 degrees. You've got to be shitting me! I'm pretty sure Subaru Foresters get a better approach! With my air dam ON it's 29 in the Taco.

TL;DR No, the 4 cylinder Tacoma is very, very good. I didn't even touch on the reliability here either.

 

Ah, hahahahahaha!!!! Post of the day!! My first brand new car was a 1987 Plymouth Turismo "Duster "!!

Giant steaming pile of Lee Iacocca diarrhea with extra corn chunks and a rubber boot thrown in for good measure.

If there HAD been a "Turismo World" in 1987 I would have made @smitty99 look like a raving fanboi!

Speaking of Smitty, he didn't even try to talk me out of trading my 2014 a couple of weeks ago... not feeling the love...

 

I have a 16 colorado diesel and power is smooth and works well. 10 months now and 26k miles no issues except the reason I said I'd never own another is rattles and seat noise every time u move at all. In another 10 months it will of went from the quite truck to the loudest inside. Love the engine and trans and love the seating position and power seats except they are hard. I'm going back to Tacoma and even though seat comfort had me sell my 16 I'll live with it till they hopefully update and give us power seats and maybe better seat position

 

They won't update them. They haven't done it in 15 years why do it now. People still buy them without power seats and with the uncomfortable seats as is. You're better off buying better seats for your Colorado and working on tightening up the interior with sound deadening material because that's a lot easier and cheaper than putting in a new motor trans and seats in the tacoma

 

I had the Duster as well. Got so pissed off I wrote a letter to Iacocca and one of his minions wrote back telling me how priveledged I should feel to own a car of such quality. Last American car I owned.

 

Gotta admit I love the tacoma's fit. Mind you, I'm 5'7 and 160lb, but it feels snug and I fit great unlike in stuff like the F150 where it's giant and oversized.

 

Well the outbound noise is quite and all the noIselin is rattles inside the truck in dash and behind glove box somewhere. And somewhere behind passenger seat belt there is sometimes a cluck as running down Road if passenger. It was solid when new and same as problems I had with last Chevy back in 2007 Silverado. As far as colorado seats mine are OK and broke in since new and got used to them. They were just hard and firm. Tacoma seats are actually nice just need to be little bigger bottom for support and should make it adjustable up and down and tilt etc.with 10 way or at least 6 way. As far as seat position you are right it would be total new build and that ain't happening. Oh well. I didn't have problems with engine and transmission being that bad on the tacoma I had. Wasn't the 15 tundra I had by no means. Toyota I still believe is great truck.

 

If you're going for absolute cheapest and you don't care about power, the 4-cylinder is a workable option. Compared to the V6, though, the 4-cylinder barely gets better gas mileage but has significantly less power on tap. Yes, the Colorado's 4-cylinder makes power higher in the RPM range, but that's hardly a disadvantage. I'd rather have an extra 40HP on tap at high RPMs than not having it at all. Suggesting that the 4-cylinder in the Tacoma is somehow better for having less power because that less power is at a lower RPM is missing the point. You don't have to rev the Colorado to 6300RPM, but it's there if you ever need to, unlike the Tacoma's old 4-cylinder.

Jalopnik covered it well here: http://truckyeah.jalopnik.com/the-4-cylinder-toyota-tacoma-is-completely-pointless-1724669002

The strangest thing about the Tacoma 4-cylinder is that it actually gets worse gas mileage than the automatic V6 Tacomas on the highway, despite have less than 2/3 as much power on tap.

 

Specs for a 2017 Subaru Forester is:

• Ground clearance (min): 221mm (8.7")

• Approach angle: 23 deg

• Departure angle: 25 deg

• Ramp breakover angle: 21 deg

 

Just get a Ridgeline and be done with it.

You're welcome.

 

Now that is bad ass right there.......