Short trip (>2km) mpg

I will agree that it is a source, but best is a relative e term. It is a sample of less than 10% of Tacoma sales. That would be equivalent to saying that TacomaWorld is the best single source of info on the Tacoma.

 

What is a better source of user data for fuel economy?

 

Trolls eat drama bullshit and rumors. Dont try to feed a troll logic, they may choke so they typically just look the other way.

 

It's convenient in that it's readily available, but it's anecdotal at best. It isn't like EPA is citing Fuelly metrics.

 

Again please provide a better real world collection of user/owner/operator data.

 

Personally I have zero fucks to give over my MPG. It's a truck. If I get 24, great. If I don't, so what. You can stick with Fuelly if it validates your complaints for you (which are never ending), just admit it's anecdotal.

EdgeCrusher is right.

 

Not enough of a true sample size to accurately say the 3rd gen doesn't get the mpg as advertised. It's still relying on human data entry that isn't 100% accurate. Compare it to this site. There's a lot of people on here with 3rd gen problems but that is a very small amount compared to the total trucks in service (or people with out issues). So whether or not that is true, there just isn't enough data consistently and accurately collected to say. I believe the EPA estimates to be accurate most of the time in this vehicle with ideal driving conditions and a certain driving style. If not even slightly under real world numbers in my case, however I know this will change/even out in the winter months.

 

Not sure that there is a better source at this time (that is why I said best is a relative term). Just because it is the best available, doesn't mean it is that good. A good source would be to take a random survey of Tacoma owners rather than just those who choose to use a mileage tracker. Of course no one is going to take the time and money to do that but that would be good user data.

 

Ok so you have nothing to offer. Thanks anyway.

You say you give zero fucks yet you take the time to reply. Uh huh.

 

methinks you want to discredit the "objective" source because it does not support your "subjective" opinion.

 

Um no...in fact as I stated before. Fuelly supports my statement that the 16-17's get 6-7% better fuel economy than the 14-15's
But, it is still questionable data.

 

You should look into mitsubishi's mpg investigation if you think the epa does through testing of every vehicle. Spoiler alert: mitsubishi lied, only cost them their company. Vw got by with obvious cheat diesels for decades. Dont give the epa too much credit.

 

Well...I guess that settles it.

 

Yep. Like a moth into flame I got reverse smittybaited. So ashamed.

 

I love MPG threads! Guess Mine!!!!!!!

 

First tell us if you like your truck. Then we'll guess.

 

I have yet to average less than 20mpg on a tank.