New England B.S. Thread

I'll get the net for my front bumper probably next week. I am expecting +130 to +140 including winch and lights and everything.

 

lol I can get 18 on the highway. Haha

 

In all fairness my factory tires are at like 36 psi, my NMW tires I run at like 32ish, they are at about 30 right now, as I still haven’t topped off since last trip.

 

a 12k w/ synthetic from HF is about 75lbs, steel would be about +15 to that I think.

The front definitely adds (relatively) significant weight vs the rear since the receiver gets pulled for the rear. But you still take some stuff out for the front, too.

Without the winch - I feel comfortable leaving stock suspension on for the front and rear bumpers, sliders, and skids. I guess that's what I'm getting at for weight and net weight too I think any MORE weight (IE with a winch) and I would be doing front coilovers. Springs, but if I'm doing springs, and I'm at 75k, might as well do the whole coilover.

I'd be comfortable towing a 3-4k pop up/trailer with that, too.

 

Yeah that 14.x is because I bomb up the highway doing 75/80 everyday lmao. If I behave it goes up to like 16/17...but I'm impatient lol

It's unfixable at this point

 

....


Anyone else going lawn crazy the next couple weeks here ? Lol

 

Trying to dig out years of neglect and poor choices with landscaping in the new place, at least to get a jump on next year's landscaping.

 

I need to. I need to rent a tiller for the front lawn and throw down some new loom and throw down some seed

 

I figure if I’m not home all summer, then I only have a few months to look at it, so I let nature do nature type things.

 

I want to do something like this

 

What the hell are we doing? All this complexity and higher prices just to gain an mpg or two? My 10 year old truck with larger tires and a ladder rack with a bunch of wind catching kayak and ski racks on it averages 17 mpg and I’m typically driving 80 mph on the highway. What mpg would a 4th gen modified like that and at those speeds get?

 

It's also an effort to offset/counter the added weight inherent to what comes with increasing safety and capability and tech. The same 3.5 in a heavier truck-- as we see from user experience-- would mean worse MPG, and the consumers wouldn't have that (imagine trying Toyota trying to sell a 4th gen Taco that got 2-3 MPG worse than a 3rd gen). Unfortunately the best solution is to mitigate weight altogether but that comes at an even higher cost.

 

https://www.nhtsa.gov/laws-regulations/corporate-average-fuel-economy

The MPG has to come up. As safety features are added, and weight is added, fleet-wide MPG has to come up, no matter what. At the expense of anything else. 5x maintenance cost, etc etc doesn't matter. All that matters is MPG.

The final CAFE standards increase at a rate of 2 percent per year for passenger cars in MYs 2027-31 and 2 percent per year for light trucks in model years 2029-31.

This is presented without opinion due to rules of this website.

 

What's funny is, it seems Toyota is at an advantage with the 2% / year because they started at such a low point. The Tacoma is still on par, if not lower, than many of the half ton offerings.

 

What added weight?

Everything Toyota has ever added to the Tacoma is essential, there is no "fluff" weight added to these trucks, ever. Everything is essential and the truck cannot operate without it there.

 

You know how diesels use def... guarantee you that comes for gas vehicles soon enough

 

Never considered that, interesting. Though gasoline engine NOx is something like 85% lower due to lower heat and pressure

 

That's a fairly complicated system, I can see the auto industry fighting that hard. They beat diesels into submission and I think the only reason it actually got implemented was because there was a huge upside in the performance side of the equation. They tried detuning diesels to make them more environmentally friendly and you ended up with something that still spit soot and NOx but was a dog. Now, we have all the EPA bullshit, but at least the engines are tuned right and make a ton of power! They're just using the after treatments to clean up the emissions. If they added something like DEF to gas engines, you gain a lot of complexity and no performance gains. There's no up side.

 

Ah, yes, NOx emissions have to be lower. The diesel engines on the road are terrible. We need to attack the problem of diesel engines.

 

What’s overall better for the environment, a long lasting vehicle that lasts 300K plus miles but gets X for mpg or a vehicle that ends up in the junkyard after 150K miles but gets slightly better mpg? The environmental cost to manufacture two vehicles rather than one has got to be higher than the savings in emissions.