Why all threads over MPG ???

My 2005 with a well above stock TRD S/C setup on the 4.0 will get 20-22MPG unloaded if I only get into a little bit of occasional boost, 1-2PSI at most. But the best part is unlike the Gen-3, I can put my foot in it just a tad in 6th and accelerate easily compared to the 3.5L, actually wish it had a 7th gear for ultra sippy highway cruising. It weighs about 4,500 pounds and is around 407hp / 420tq. If I get into the boost to say like 6-9psi well then it is more like 13-14mpg.

To make it even more interesting my 8 speed Audi RS7 is tuned and also weighs 4,500 pounds and is also a 4.0 motor. But...it is a twin turbo V8 kicking out 645hp/656tq. I can see 26mpg and I even got a solid 25mpg doing 90 from the Nevada-Utah border almost the whole way to Salt Lake. Now if I start goosing it for those sub 3 second 0-60 times it will also drop by about 10MPG like the S/C'd truck.

My point being is that aside from really wanting to go hybrid / electric and get rid of pouring crap into our air and I will asap on the road rocket, I think by putting what I consider an underpowered NA 3.5L in the Gen-3, it has to work harder to overcome drag, hills, passing, etc. So I am not surprised it is just a minimal improvement over the Gen-2's 4.0.

I wish they would have taken the 4.0L to a new level and maybe even offered a turbo in the Pro version. This is why you see a fair number of full sized trucks getting right around the same and sometimes better mileage on higher displacement motors in moderately heavier trucks, they simply overcome inertia and drag easier and maintain momentum easier as well.

I'd pay $50K for a 3.0 turbo diesel Taco that put out 350hp / 400tq and got 28-30mpg highway.

 

Realistically, the core buyer of Tacoma could not

 

Yes! A diesel engine would be awesome, I'd definitely upgrade.

 

These MPG threads are some of my favorites. And the gang’s all here: not a Prius forum, California sucks (because trucks and $3 gas are my raison d’etre?!), I don’t care about the cost of fuel, smiles per miles, one could buy a sedan instead, anecdote to counter your anecdote, I care/know about emissions and air quality, 2nd Gen engines are the best, fuelly says x, diesel something diesel plus Europe, etc.

It was kinda cool to have Instagram and its jargon make the thread this time, no?

 

Doesn’t matter to me. The lower MPG of the Tacoma with 87 octane comes out about the same operating cost as my previous 2009 WRX using 91 octane. Plus I’m not pinching pennies.

 

Wow this thread seems to have taken a slight downward turn. I just got my best mpgs though 26.4 mpg and 26.3 mpg (only got a snap of the 2nd trip). 2.7 4 cylinder 4x4 ACLB

 

Because if you advertise your product to get 23-24 mpg and it only gets 16-17 mpg, why not be up front about it. It's all about marketing and money. Toyota is not going to say Tacoma gets 16-17 mpg in their brochure when all their competitors are claiming 20-24. Even thought it is not a 'huge' thing, it could be the "one more thing' that turns me/others away from purchasing it. I mean, the Tacoma is meteor-proof, right?

To me, it is not a huge thing, even if Toyota made the claim it only gets 18 mpg. I would probably be more on the side of "really, about time you were honest about that", than me just going "no, this will never see 24 mpg EVER, I don't care what your marketing hype is".

But there should be concerns on this forum is a truck is only getting 15 mpg, and it's only highway, on flat ground. I think that is a valid concern when people post these questions or concerns and would like help to maybe identify a potential issue. And I see way to often the same old "take it back to the dealer and ask them". Really? if that is going to be the standard response from a majority, why even have the forum at all. How about a checklist of items they could look at before going to the dealer? Because the same ones that respond with "take it to the dealer", ARE THE SAME ONES that post "DEALERS ARE STUPID, DON'T TRUST THEM, Don't let them touch your truck!!!". or is that just me noticing that?

 

I think it is more of the EPA way for calculating mpgs OEMs need to game that system to show the best mpg for their vehicles but that means early upshifts and no ability to pass without dropping your foot. This means real world and EPA don't match. Honestly I don't really even use window sticker mpg ratings anymore. I just use fuelly.com and these forums.

I didn't get the ecoboost V6 for that reason also, claims as good or better mpg than the tacoma but real world shows 16mpg as once you dip into boost you are burning fuel. It was actually better for us the old way with bigger engines that showed worse EPA ratings but in real life got better mpg figures like the 4.0 and even the big V8s in silverados and F150s

 

To be fair to the Tacoma's 3.5l v6, aerodynamics will affect it's performance differently than say for an Audi sedan. Audi, BMW and Lexus V6's and v8's can easily get mid to high 20's on the highway because they are powering smaller, more aerodynamic vehicles turning smaller profile tires....it's not as if the engines themselves are that much more fuel efficient, rather its that they're powering vehicles with more efficient designs. That's an important distinction.

The other midsized trucks with gasoline v6's, and even the new Ranger ecoboost, get about the same mpg's as does the Tacoma. The 1/2 ton gasoline pickup's definitely get worse mpg results, despite the big fish tales coming from some owners...fuelly and magazine longterm testing confirms that.

People are wrong to have high expectations from a gasoline engine powering a big, chunky, 4x4 with the aerodynamics of a brick...you're just not going to get great mpg's with that kind of setup, plain and simple.

Well expecting 350hp and 400lb-ft and 28-30mpg is a bit unrealistic. The newer Toyota 2.8l inline-4 diesel, and the older 3.0l, produce about 180-200hp and 320-360lb-ft (which is more than adequate for a midsized truck) and can easily get high 20's/low 30's for highway mpg's.

Diesel, or some form of hybrid or fuel-cell setup, is the only way truck owners are going to realize significantly higher mpg results.

 

I believe if the only issue someone has is the lack of mpg with their truck, they need to take a look in the mirror because that is where the problem lies. There is nothing wrong with the MPG performance of these trucks, it's all about how it driven. Some people tend to not be honest with themselves about their driving habits and would rather point the finger at someone or something because it can never be their fault. Throwing out low mpg claims with little to no long term data to back it up IMO is just trolling.

 

I believe it is more people who try to drive their trucks/cars to to achieve the mpg but can't that are frustrated by the window sticker ratings.

I for instance bought a Mustang 3.7 V6 that advertised 31mpg... literally never saw over 30mpg doing all highway even at 55 mph couldn't get it. 26mpg wasn't bad for 300 hp but... was disappointed that I couldn't even get that despite my best attempts. I drive super light footed and hypermile so you can't blame my driving style. I get 27mpg out of a 3.2 V6 AWD in a 5000lb volvo.

 

It's better than the old 10-12mpg I was getting on my old beater Chevy. I bought a truck not for efficiency, but because I like to sit higher and have a better view point than in a car, dragging my ass on the asphalt. Roomy zoomy cars are fun but I prefer the height of a truck.

Plus this is Florida, I bought a truck so I'm not playing the game of which roads I can or cannot drive down after a down pour. MPG is fine on the Taco.

 

I have heard the same argument with every vehicle I've ever owned. Yet I seem to be able to always achieve the posted mpg. Go figure....

 

i'm actually quite impressed with my taco. i get around 22 in awful bay area traffic (i'm talking 1-1.5hrs for a 33mi trip) and around 25 otherwise. i went in expecting under 20 so that's kinda nice

but with gas being shy of $4 a gallon here i still want to cry every time i fill in the tank, especially when i drive at least 80 miles a day

 

got 22.2 out of my last tank

 

Just picked up a manual transmission 4cyl and am getting 23mpg on the first few tanks. I drive six hours every weekend though - so, plenty of highway time in that number.

 

I just want to know where OP is buying his $3 gas at

 

No MPG complaints here in Flat Florida!

 

I think he's somewhere in SoCal

 

Car & Driver tested the new Ridgeline as getting better than EPA estimated MPG, I think it was 32 or 33. Bear in mind that the Ridgeline literally weighs only 200 pounds less than the Tacoma, has the same size engine with similar rated power. Of course, most Toyota drivetrains, if you ignore the hybrids, do get worse gas mileage than their segment competitors. So what's Toyota's excuse?