Will I regret if I buy a 2.7l taco?

I like the 4 speed auto in my 5 lug. Shifts well and will hold a gear jf it needs to. This auto will last as long or longer than the 5 speed. Ive owned a 97 and 02 2.7 5 speed 4wd and prefer manuals but the auto is nice and I’m getting 22-24 mpg in town

 

I agree with those that say keep the Tundra, but the 2.7 5 speed (contrary to popular belief) is pretty damn capable. I tow both my trailers with one through the hills of WV without a problem. Last October we took out Tab down the entire length of the Blue Ridge Parkway and through Great Smoky National Park without any worries. The 2.7 6 lug has the same frame, suspension and brakes as the 6 cylinders. My truck has an OEM hitch and I added 7 pin wiring and a RedArc brake controller. In other countries the HIlux with the same powertrain is rated to pull 5,000 pounds.
All that being said I would certainly keep that Tundra with the 4.7 and that mileage.

 

I've got a 2015, 2.7, 4x4, 5 speed that I've personally put 99k miles on.

• It's pretty much bone stock and I usually get about 22mpg with mixed driving, but I've seen anywhere between 16-25 depending on what I'm doing.

• I moved a pair of motorcycles, for a friend on Sunday, and didn't have any issues pulling the trailer. Estimated 1700 lbs total.
• It's small and easy to park.
• I honestly don't understand people who whine about the lack of power....I've never had an issue merging into traffic with light loads and small trailers. The only time I've really ever had an issue getting out into traffic was when I was pulling a sailboat AND had a bed full of camping gear, but I was also probably well past the max weight capacity.
  
  
• I'm starting to get tired of the 5speed.....It will probably last forever, but I'd rather have an automatic for daily driving.

 

Every truck owner I've met on the internet wanted their truck to have the capabilities of a Cadillac (comfort), Prius (efficiency), Corvette (speed), and Unimog (rugged and off road capable) and none of the drawbacks of any of those.

So yes, fully expect that there are reg cab 2.7 owners who think they're setting land speed records.

 

I have a base '13 (regular cab, 2.7L, 4 spd. auto, manual everything). I "updated" it when I got it with intermittent wipers and cruise because those are the two things in life I won't give up. I get a pickup truck because here in NH, if you own a home, you NEED a pickup of some kind. I've always owned basic pickups since owning a home here.

1995 Toyota pickup
2006 Ranger
2013 Taco

I always try to find a 2WD, 4 cylinder because that has always been all I need 99.9 percent of the time. I don't off-road, I'm not a contractor, etc., etc. I'm pretty simple. I do the vast majority of my own repairs (house and auto), so 4 cylinders are just easier to work on and generally cheaper to fix.

The ONE thing I did change when getting the Taco is it's automatic. Previous to this, all my cars and trucks have been stick because I've always liked the control a stick gives - especially when things get slick. But I'm old now, and appreciate the ability to hold a cup in one hand while steering with the other (at the cost of mileage and control). Another reason I switched to auto is that clutch work sucks, and I'm getting too old to crawl under the truck and wrestle with a trans, but I'm too cheap to pay someone else to do it.

During the winter, I mount snows plus about 300lbs of bags or bricks in the bed, and it's been great - does better than any front drive car I've had, not as good as 4WD or AWD, but the amount of days in a 365 day year where I feel it may have made a difference may be about 5-10 days.

I get about 22+ mpg in the winter and about 25 in the warmer months (sometimes about 26). With the Ranger, I used to get about 26 winter - just shy of 29 non-winter. I don't remember what I got with the '95, but I do recall it was less than the Ranger (the Ranger having a 2.3L Duratec).

I don't know how price differentials are now, but honestly, I would recommend a Ranger for you. It will definitely be cheaper than a Taco, because there won't be a Taco premium. For any given price, you get more - for example, my Ranger came with cruise and intermittent wipers, and it was a 'base' model (manual windows/locks/etc.).

The later year Rangers were also actually built by Mazda (so you may want to look at those as well), they are reliable, well built, parts are plentiful and cheap, and if needed there are tons of them out there to scavenge used parts from.

 

Have a 2.7 5spd 4x4 reg cab. There are many times I wished I had a 4.0 but it's always done what I needed it to do. Towed U-Hauls probably loaded down to 2000 lbs or more on 700 mile trips, climbed up steep grades that made my butthole pucker...etc never left me stranded it's so reliable. Only had to change the water pump at 165k.

You can't be afraid to give it the beans. I always shift around 3k when it's warmed up and you always have a little power to spare if you need it. These little engines don't make power till mid-high rpm.

I recently moved to Colorado. Power loss at altitude is noticable but there's no mountain pass you can't maintain 55 or 60 mph in 3rd gear. It'll do it.

I agree with people on here, the tundra is a great truck I would keep it but yes you will get better mpg with the 4 banger. Before my lift and 265/75r16s I was getting 21 to 22 mpg pretty consistently. Now I get about 18 to 19 with campershell, bumper, winch, and all my other goodies. Not a bad hit, that's the magic of the 4cyl.

 

Agree with everything you said, as a homeowner its hard not having a pickup. I got basically same truck as you but access cab and power doors/windows. The auto is a good transmission- no gear hunting and feels rock solid. Getting a set of snows for the winter driving at the end of the year

 

My first taco was a ‘02 2.7 4x4 5 speed (with the forest green metal flake). A beautiful truck if I must say! I know it’s a first gen but I imagine it would be about the same as the second gen. I now have a ‘07 4.0 PreRunner and honestly they both perform about the same. My ‘02 got like 16-17 mpg vs the 13-14 I get out of my ‘07. I’d totally recommend the 2.7! Only reason I got rid of it was because the frame was shot and out of warranty.

 

MPG comparisons on this site are pointless because very few keep their trucks stock. Not even sure why they keep being brought up.

 

Probably because OP stated that his Tundra was a gas hog and got 11mpg implying that one of his reasons for looking into Tacomas is better fuel mileage.

 

from my own experience, the 2.7L has power aplenty:
https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/bed-weight-capacity.446365/page-2#post-26588957

 

Cant speak for all but some dudes know what they were from when the trucks were stock

 

I'm not reading all of this, but I'll give you an opinion from somebody who owns a 2.5 gen 4cyl Automatic.

You will be the embodiment of regret if you get the auto and ever need to haul anything other than a cooler, your dog, and your girlfriend. The auto is gutless and wheezy. It can be kind of scary if you have to uphill merge onto the interstate or something similar. At altitude, it is way worse. Did I say gutless? Because it is.

I've heard gooder things about the manual. I'd say you'll be okay even with a thicc girlfriend, 2 dogs, and a 70 liter Yeti loaded with Coors Light and Modelo.

So the transmission is the key here from what the stickboys say.

 

Which makes you wonder why Toyota dropped a manual option for the 2.7.

 

It's always the market driving profitability w/ our trucks' options - Toyota is great at sticking with what is good enough to still sell (leaf springs, drum brakes, etc.) and also at cutting options that don't sell to make the production cost worth it (goodbye reg cabs, manual 2.7's, mechanical LSD's, etc.)

 

Yes, you will. The second gen is best with a 4.0. Don't get it with a 4cyl. I think the 4.0 and auto trans is the best tacoma motor/trans to date but people will prob hate on that opinion.

 

Some of the 4.0 trucks (pre-'10) are the best for power while having a simple ecu. Body size matters, too. Regular cabs never came with a 4.0, Access Cab could go either way - if I lived in the mountains and was only going 65 max and was on 4.88's with 33's or so, I think I would be fine with a 2.7, but out in the vast desert areas, you'd wish you had a 4.0. Double Cab (yes they at least make 2.7 prerunner and 5 lug Double Cabs) no way unless you're a contractor and want to save $$$ for a fleet vehicle haha.

 

I traded a ‘15 Tundra 4.6 for my ‘15 Tacoma 2.7 5-speed and have ZERO regrets. The Tundra was a numb, gas guzzling hog in my opinion. My Tacoma does everything I need it to and then some, plus it has heart, which the Tundra did not.

It’s all about proper expectations. If you expect a 4 cylinder Tacoma to do the work of a Powerstroke F-350, you’ll surely be disappointed. It sounds to me like for what you’re trying to achieve, the 2.7 will be just fine.

 

Many here seem to shit on the 4 banger but I think the 2.7 is a excellent motor. The A340E is a proven transmission used in many Toyota models. This combination is not quick but it has enough power to get out of its own way. You do feel hills but it needs to be driven like a big truck and give it some throttle before the hill. I have noticed that 3rd gear has a split or overdrive? which was a nice surprise. I really wonder how it handled 25 passenger buses in Japan…

I’ve thrown some money away on mine adding a LCE header/AFE down pipe & Pro Dry/HPS intake/TRD air accelerator/Tooter intake manifold spacer. These mods have made a big difference bringing the peak torque way down from 3800RPM and adding grunt. With very light throttle on flat it will pull in 4th from 16-1700RPM.

What I have have noticed on my 5 lug is how much my fuel mileage has changed after lifting it and adding 2.6” more tire diameter. I’m guessing it’s probably close to a V6 PreRunner now…

 

Just another data point from a stock rig (no lift, stock size 17" all season Michelin tires) with the 4.0... my 2009 Sport came with EPA ratings 16/19 IIRC. But since it got well broken in I routinely get 20 to 21 MPG in pure highway driving at 70 to 75 MPH. I have seen up to 22 on slower highway drives like on country roads. City I don't even bother to check, especially in the winter when I frequently use my remote start.

I also had looked at the old Tundras over the years and there was just no way I could sleep with myself getting maybe 14 MPG. Oof. I have also been seriously looking at the new 3rd gen Tundra but real world MPG is not living up the EPA ratings. I want one but I really don't need a rig that big... and the MPG for my use case is still too poor... so will probably wait for the next gen Tacoma. Hopefully good things coming with that.

I can't answer the OP's question but for me, I couldn't imagine driving my Tacoma with less power than I currently have. But that's just me. Disclaimer: I have never driven one with the I4 motor to make a direct comparison.