Better MPG

exactly, put a cat back in, they are there for a reason

 

I did spark plugs and a stock air filter as soon as i bought the truck. Im a major believer in Seafoam, i do it to my BMW about once a year, always with entertaining results, thats probably next on the list along with the deckplate mod. Though with 200k miles, i take its safe to assume the a/f sensor wouldn't be operating an peak efficiency.

 

I see similar threads on all the Tacoma forums with much helpful info from many people but most seem to miss the thrust of the problem, the engines themselves. I have a 98 with a 3.4l, its an automatic and 4x4 yet it doesn't get much better mileage than my old fullsize Jimmy. The problem lies in the numbers, at first glance the horsepower and torque numbers are very similar but the 3.4 seems to produce most of its torque in the higher rpm ranges and for gas mileage the torque needs to be at its max or near to it in the normal driving range of say 1400-2500 rpm instead of 3600 rpm. I would wager that a cam change is probably the only way to get consistently better mileage, then the max torque could be moved down the rpm range and the gear ratios could be reduced a bit and still have the same amount of power. This is much like the big tire and drop in power issue that some see, you move the engine out of its optimal operating range. Tacoma's are great little trucks but you shouldn't have to jump thru hoops to get good gas mileage on a vehicle this size, I never changed a sensor or even a fuel filter on my old Jimmy(always got around 15 mph) and if the bodies weren't such garbage and I hadn't watched the Top Gear crew try and destroy an old hilux I might still be driving it. Just my 2 cents on the issue but torque always tops horsepower for mileage and driveability.

 

x2 did this yesterday it helps,also get a new air filter,switch over to all synthetic oils

 

So what im hearing is that i should have just gotten the 3.4L engine, since the lack of pwer of the 2.7 is just causing the truck to consume nearly the same amount of gas to get the same job done.

Do bed covers make much of an improvement?

 

Mythubusters covered this topic a few years a go... Yes an Tonneau cover is the best thing (over a shell or removing your tailgate).

Just did the deck plate mod, I am on my second tank and am seeing about one mpg increase.

Speed kills mpg! The slower you drive the better your speed, to a point. Find your thresholds for better mpg. For me 68-74 makes no difference, but above 75 starts to hurt my mpg. I don't know how to drive below 65 on AZ freeways' (you'll get run over if you do)

One thing I have learned as that you burn about the same amount of gas while accelerating up to cruising speed. So if you take longer to get to speed you will burn more gas than if you get up to speed with a purpose (I will get flamed if I don't add that I am not talking about "jack-rabbiting").

Remember, if you wanted to get good gas mileage than you should have bought a different kind of rice-burner... Looking this good, in this good of a truck, has a price!

 

Hmm, I just seafoamed mine at 221k and either that or switching to a 0w-30 oil smoothed out my idle. I did both within about 2 hours of each other, so I don't know which did it.

Previously my idle would drop to just under 500 rpm, then shoot up to 1000. Then drift slowly back down and shoot up again. Now it's steady at 750 rpm. This is with the engine warmed up.

I also noticed I can shift up farther without losing power. There's a road I test any changes out one, lots of different grades, speeds, and even some on going construction to test the suspension. There is a particular up hill section where I was having to stay in 3rd going 40 mph because of the grade. Annoying since I was sitting at 2300-2500 rpm to maintain speed. Now I can upshift to 4th and cruise up it at 1700-1900 rpm.

 

Rolling the throttle on helps in the mileage department. only feed the motor as much as it needs to accelerate smoothly. If you wack the blades open everytime you take off, it will burn more fuel. this goes for carbed or injected vehicles of any kind or make. If you have ever drove a vehicle with a mileage computer, you would see those percentages compareing throttle position to mileage attainable/resulting and speed.


Aggreed, if you want good mileage, get a smart car.

 

To a degree...

In the same gear in both scenarios at the same time, I would completely agree.

But, on heavier vs lighter acceleration, the shift point changes drastically for an automatic. In theory, someone could shift the same in both scenarios with a manual transmission, but that is usually not the case. Higher RPM at same speed will mean more fuel usage, even if its just 200 RPM difference, its still using that much more fuel to get to the same speed.

So, even and steady will still win the fuel race. Of course I'm talking within reason, as the difference between 1% throttle and 5% throttle will not show any improvements, but say 25% throttle and 50% throttle should (examples... I dont know the actual throttle % to say what would be light vs normal vs heavy acceleration).


I do completely agree with you that these aren't fuel efficient trucks and if fuel savings is the main concern, they're driving the wrong vehicles, but along those same lines, I dont think its unreasonable to try to get as much fuel efficiency as we're able to. 30 mpg wont happen, but then again, even new cars these days aren't really doing much better than that.

 

I see a dealer sticker mileage guess, as a mechanic shop quoted estimate, it only has to be within 75% of the quoted price, with mileage, that 25% leeway can be a huge difference. it also all depends on how you drive and where you drive.

call me nutty but thats my opinion.