Fuel economy

I traded in a newer Honda CR-V for my 2007 Tacoma 5MT knowing I'd take a hit with fuel economy - but not as much as I thought. Ironically, I'm filling up less thanks to the Tacoma's 21 gallon tank, probably chosen for the V6. The CR-V's was only 15.3 gallons. At the most I could go 5 work days before needing to fill up. This past weekend I just went to a couple local stores, and got 9 work days from the last fill up. Still had 1/4 of a tank, got 24.79 mpg. That's not that much less than my CR-V. I am conservative when I drive, but like to be at 70 mph on up hill sections of the highway to keep the engine in it's efficient rpm range in 5th gear. My commute is about 50/50 highway and backroad hills. I coast when at times when it's safe.

I know the mileage will vary and go down in winter - but that's great for a mid sized truck IMO, much better than I expected. I wonder if over 20mpg is common with the 2.7L?

 

The 5 speed 2.7 is a sweet spot for tacoma. Just the right amount of slow/fun/economical. I'd love one for retirement.

 

My 2.7L auto gets 19.5 mpg city driving with many stoplights. Highways fuel economy is heavily influenced by speed from 22 mpg at 80 mph to 26 mpg at 65 mph.

 

As a matter of fact - retirement is why I got a Tacoma. Not there yet - but getting close. Had an SUV and full size truck. Will eventually sell the other truck, don't want the expenses of 2 vehicles. Need a truck, and this Tacoma is the one. Sweet spot is right. And I did this prematurely because the 2.7 and 5 speed manual are very rare around here.

The slow/fun/economical attributes are very accurate. I'll add practical. And - for me a lot more comfortable than the CR-V.

 

Great miles per gallon - you may get better on straight highway than I do with your auto.

 

I've hit 24ish on long highway trips as well. 23 highway is more common for me, but I've started to drive slower lately. 21 city usually. When I first got the truck I was more often 18 or 19 city.

I think the 3rd gen 2.7 5 speed is rated at slightly better MPG than the 2nd gen, despite being heavier. Supposedly the 2016+ 2.7 is 10% more efficient, plus whatever benefit comes from the dual VVTi.

 

Anything 20+ mpg is good for a mid size truck IMO. With the MPG improvements I would have thought Toyota would still offer the 2.7L with the 5 speed manual. That would have been a very desirable and unique truck. I'm pretty sure the new Nissan Frontier is only automatic. Same with the Ford Ranger.

 

My 2012 auto regular cab 4x4 is averaging 21.5.

 

I don't think most Americans find a 4 cylinder manual very attractive. Too Euro. Requires too much involvement; luxury for most Americans is to be insulated and removed from sensation and participation. I don't imagine manufacturers like it either, as it's easier to hit fuel efficiency standards with an automatic transmission managing the engine.

 

I stand corrected. When I said 'That would have been a very desirable and unique truck' I should have added, 'to me'. I've always been non mainstream. I understand manufacturer's situation as well. Driving a manual just feels good to me, I like the involvement. As for fuel efficiency however, in the 40+ years I've been driving manual transmissions I typically exceed the EPA's fuel economy ratings as I have with this Tacoma. Then again, my vehicles are typically older where the automatic of that era would have been a 4 speed.

Toyota certainly isn't unique - manual transmissions are becoming more scarce as time goes on. I'll admit an automatic of the last several years will probably be more efficient than a manual.

 

Eight or nine speed automatic, sure they'll be more efficient, plus turbos and hybrids. It's a good thing, but like you, I'll miss the involvement of driving a manual.

 

I wonder how small displacement turbos will hold up as they get up there in miles. Actual geared transmissions as mentioned will likely be more reliable than CVTs. I like the CVT concept, always having the engine at it's optimum RPM based on conditions - but unfortunately as many age they tend to have trouble. The cost of a typical Subaru CVT replacement is said to be around $8000, many times equaling the value of the vehicle at that point.

 

My last 2 gas tank calculated mileage:
- 20.5 mpg - 2/3 tank mileage city driving
- 24.2 mpg - all highway driving 70-75 mph

 

Thanks for the stats. Yours still may improve a bit being new. Interesting the EPA rates the 2WD 3.5 V6 actually 1 MPG more on the highway, 24 vs 23. Maybe geared really tall? I see the new automatic with the 2.7L is a 6 speed. You exceeded the EPA's highway estimate like I did. Close to the EPA city figure of 19.

 

2022 SR5 DCSB 2.7L 1st tank observations, my normal city street driving habits, 10mph over posted was getting 16.6 mpg until 175 miles then it went up to 18.2 mpg for no apparent reason..Captain obvious here.. also noticed that if driven with slow acceleration aka 2k rpm max the mpg went up to 20 mpg even while driving mostly 50 mph to 60 mph on street roads..the local posted mph is 45 mph and 50mph..so its not overly reckless with no traffic..and even got over 21 mpg at 55mpg at 1,250 rpms just by keeping it at a 2k rpm max..the sweet spot tends to be from 1,250 to 1,750 rpms..I suspect that if driven the speed limit and kept under the 2k rpm max the 2.7L with 6 speed auto transmission would get somewhere in the mid 20s mpg range on city roads..all on straight, flat city roads with 10 stop lights each way to and from work 8.2 miles per way..that's all according to the dash computer..which is subject to change as it adjusts with more mileage of course..near 3 weeks of commute plus local errands has used 3/4 of a tank and put 225 miles so far..I can't complain the least as it appears 1 tank of fuel could last almost 1 month of driving with a 175lb driver and 8 lbs of accessories..6 lb rubber floor mats, 2 lbs of glovebox / center console dividers and console tray plus door sill protectors, cup holders/cubby rubber mat set etc..bone stock alloy rims and tires..a side note is although it's slower then I'd like to drive off the line of a stop light I'm by no means the slowest and pass at least half or more of the other vehicles and able to go over 65 mph at 2k rpm..basically drive with some patience and some sort self control will save alot of fuel..

 

My first post. My last gas tank I got 24.4 mpg on a 2.7. All of my driving is all on flat land highway driving so that probably helps. Plus I haven't used the air condition due to all that nice weather recently.

 

Sorry if a dumb question - is DCSB a Double Cab Short Bed? I'm new to Tacomas. If yes I didn't realize the 2.7L could be had in the Double Cab. The lower RPM figures are typical with an automatic - being lower than a manual transmission. I learned a few years ago that lower RPM doesn't necessarily mean lower fuel consumption. I still don't fully understand why - but it's nice having a lower RPM for more of a relaxed cruise and less noise. I had 1st gen Subaru Outback 5 speed manual. At 65mph the RPMs were 3,200 - drove me nuts. Couldn't understand why the engineers determined that ratio. And the engine was 2.5L, and of course in a vehicle with less weight.

If my 2.7L had a 6 speed automatic efficiency would probably exceed the 5 speed manual that I have. I like how the Tacoma is geared tall for a 4 cylinder. I'll use it to haul wood but for now I'm still commuting to work 5 days a week.

Similar to my mileage and somewhat similar to the type of roads. I'm liking this nice weather lately too - because I don't like hot weather and my air conditioning doesn't work!

 

Yes..DCSB is Double cab short bed..as DCLB is Double cab long bed..the only configuration the 2.7L is available in the double cab is short bed 2 wheel drive..unfortunately and if you choose to get the 2.7L 2TR-FE engine then the highest trim available is SR5 no trailer hitch, or any upgraded options with the exception of " appearance package " larger then stock alloy rims and tires plus painted over fenders for $685..the single and only option Toyota will sell the SR5 2.7L customers..yeah really wanted 4x4 but its only available in the ACLB acess cab configuration..they literally punish the 2.7L crowd to force that Camry V6 engine "upgrade " which is a serious down grade in my book.. seen 21mpg on busy city streets hitting just below 3k rpm for short periods to pass some vehicles..the 2TR-FE likes high rpms I'm told but I'm thinking seriously about the LCE header to bring down the rpm power band and a pedal commander to reprogram the gas pedal response..

 

Yes it seems Toyota restricts what you get along with certain choices - such as now I believe a manual transmission is only available with a Double Cab V6. And, the 2.7L is exclusive to Tacomas and maybe still the Highlander, therefore more of a truck engine. With the 3.5 V6 I highly doubt you'll see over 20mpg on city streets. I wonder if the 3.5 V6 has a timing chain like the 2.7L. I think, surprisingly, the Honda V6 of the same displacement is a timing belt. At least the 2007 Honda Pilot I had was.

Probably Toyota isn't the only one making engine/transmission choices depend on other options or vice-versa.

 

My 2010 regular cab 2WD gets 21-23 city, usually closer to 23 in the warmer months. I can get close to 25-26 in gentle highway driving.

5 lugs, stock size tires, only passenger is me 99% of the time..and my stereo.