4th Gen Tacoma (2024+)

I’d still be open to test driving it to form my own opinion which buyers should do anyways. Losing all your interior storage really hurts the appeal for me though

I think I’m personally waiting to see what the next gen 4Runners feel like.

 

Six months ago, and on paper, waiting for the iForce Max seemed like a no-brainer.

Considering the significant premium in cost, additional complexity of two motors, sacrifice of under-seat storage, and a hefty weight penalty, I’m eager to see how much separation it offers from a standard 2.4T in the real-world.

In other words, before I plunk down my extra cash, I really need to see the first adopters here doing backflips over what a difference it makes over the regular noisy turbo four.

 

It should produce the same noise, since it has the same engine. To me, the advantage of the hybrid is its towing performance. For my needs, I chose to go with straight internal combustion.

 

It should feel like a 2024 Tacoma with a different body.

 

You know, I have multiple qualms about these trucks, they're too big, the track width of the wheels is too wide, it's not the nimble little Toyota that previous gens have proven to be off road, and the grill shutter mechanism is a stupid contentious point of failure that I feel will haunt this generation. But the iForce turbo 4 banger, to me, is an excellent little motor, I think Toyota really did their research when they designed these things. The motor and boxed frame is why I love my truck as much as I do.

 

Saw my first 4th gen TRD Pro this morning. These do look pretty cool. (Sorry for the glare)

 

Where? Likely already sold.

 

I finally picked up my TRD Off-road today and wow. Coming from a daily 2001 3rz and having driven my dad’s 3rd gen TRD Sport the 4th gen to me is miles ahead. The steering is crazy light and drivability is amazing. The truck just goes without hesitation.

 

I too base my truck purchases on 0-60 times. How does 148 ft-lb more of torque "kinda suck"?

 

I just drove by, so I’m not sure. It was at Johnson City Toyota

 

Adding 400 lbs to the curb weight, eliminating all of the underseat storage, raising those already tight rear seats an inch, and adding all this complexity to the drivetrain to still be slower than an entry level Ford Ranger sucks.

I'm a fan of the 2.4T iForce from my test drives, but let's be real here - for upgraded powertrains the Ford 2.7 V6 is going to beat the brakes off an iForce Max Tacoma and not come with any of those cons.

 

Yeah I have no idea why they didn't put the pack inside the frame area. Maybe the NiMH packs like the climate control or something, or at least that's where they are in all the rest of the vehicles in the lineup with NIMH and they didn't want to go too different condition-wise.

As for the TQ numbers - I bet peak TQ is right when the turbo spools up (so 2k rpm or so) and not at the top end (where the electric becomes less effective/torquey).

So, not a huge diff in 0-60, which is just the turbo 4 doing it's thing.

 

They do need cooling, my family had a Prius which had a vent fan for the pack. The Max models look to have their vent fan location near the rear passenger side door under the seat.

It most likely is a "torque fill" to get you moving before the turbo spools, but I also read it pulls consistently up to redline which is where the 2.4 starts to lose some steam.

 

Just went on the Ford website and built a Ranger XLT with a 2.7L EcoBoost. Fully pimped it's $51k including destination.

That 2.7 looks, on paper at least, like an attractive engine option.

I also liked how much I could customize the Ranger as compared to Toyota's "you can have anything you want as long as it's what we want" way of doing things.

 

For me I'd say the biggest con of the v6 is it comes attached to a Ford. 0-60 time is just not important to me for a truck. The pros and cons to the power train implementation (same with most these things) are going to be subjective to the individual buying. I hope your ranger purchase brings you happiness.

 

That is the downside to a Ford product being a Ford product. The 2.7 ecoboost in the Ranger will be a good combo performance wise.

The NA 3.5 from the transit paired with the 10spd and 3.73 rear would be a good combo for a lighter midsize truck. You aren't going to get as much low end as you would from a turbo. Put that drive train in a 3G Tacoma or a Ram Classic RCSB.

 

Is the 2.7L EB an all new engine for 2024?

 

My little turbo inline 4 has been really fun so far. It's got plenty of power, love the low end torque. Only time will tell on maintenance costs and longevity.

 

Don't think so outside of any build changes Ford made between 23 and 24.

Ranger was currently only available with the 2.3t 4, 2.7tt6 is now optional. 2.7tt6 is the 24 F-150 base engine. If Ford wasn't already churning out a lot of 2.7 engines they are now. More volume more potential issues? Bronco also has the 2.7tt6 as an option.

 

To me it doesn't seem like an advantage when the towing capacity is less with the hybrid due to the added weight.

As someone said, texas truck guys tested a hybrid limited and didn't feel the 465 pound ft of torque. Not sure if maybe it was because of it being pre production or what, but that's a disappointment.

Will have to wait to see more reviews, and I would be interested to see a 0-60 between both just for curiosity for merging purposes. (You would think all that added torque would result in a better time)

But as it stands, for me it makes more sense to get the non hybrid for reasons stated. Less weight/complexity and more rear room space.