4cyl. work truck ?

Pretty much, heck my 7.3 diesel gets 18 combined city and highway mpg. That truck weighs 4 and a half tons too. The northstar V8 they used in Cadillacs got around 25mpg highway if I remember correct. I think it had the cylinder canceling technology though where 2 cylinders would shut down cruising on the highway.

 

I use my truck for work. Logged every tank of fuel since brand new. Wish I could figure out how to post my fuel log on here. Anyways my overall average is 16.95 mpg. I have a canopy, and loaded with about 500 lbs of tools its whole life.

Hmmmm. Maybe figured it out.

See if this attachment works.

 

I think I see a pattern emerging here. Everyone that is complaining about owning a 2.7L has 4.10 gears ie a 4x4 or prerunner. I tend to agree with this as I sold a 99 prerunner 2.7L auto b/c it would never get more than 18-19mpg. My personal opinion is: If you're not rocking a 5 lug (3.55 or 3.30 gears) the mileage gains are not worth the power sacrifice.

 

I, too, got this truck to save gas, having traded out of a full-size. If you get a loaded 4x4 V6 it's a beautiful truck but you won't meet your objective.

My 2.7 4x4 regular cab 5-speed got 23.7 mpg on the last tank and has never been below 22. That's with a truck rated at 21 mpg highway. The 2WD is rated at 25 with the 5-speed, so it would be better by a fair amount for certain. The 2.7 is very satisfactory with the 5-speed and it will save you on gas. If you want maximum economy get the the 2.7 4x2 5-speed, or if you hate shifting, the same setup with the automatic. Four-wheel drive always costs you a couple mpg at least.

 

I average 22+mph with the 4x4 Access Cab.
You really need to look at how you will use the truck. If it is stop and go in town nothing will get good mileage. If you feel the need to play stoplight racer, it will be worse.

The 4cyl will do anything you want it to do. It will be a little slower, cheaper, and get better mileage.

If you are in a hurry, get a 6cyl. If it is really a work truck, get the 4cyl.

 

I completely agree, the four-cylinder has exceeded my expectations. I thought it would be kind of a dog but it's actually one of the snappier four-cylinders I have driven. And the problem with V6 compact trucks, to me, is they get the same mileage as full-size trucks so the only reason to get them is if that's just what you prefer, because the math doesn't work.

 

Yea. Use www.fueleconomy.gov for reference on any vehicle.

EPA estimates have been pretty close for sensible driving conditions since they the revised method was put in place a few years ago. They even show 'corrected' numbers for older vehicles.

While it's possible to get better than EPA numbers, you have to work at it a bit, sort of a junior hypermiler as it were.

Most folks will get less for a number of common reasons, including poor driving habits, poorly maintained vehicles, vehicle modifications that are negative on MPG (like those you are considering).

I've tracked a couple of my rides for over 12 years, every drop of fuel and notations if there are unusual conditions for the tank (cruising, loaded, running autox, etc.) and know exactly what to expect from each.

Can't help you on the Taco though, as I've not even been through the 1st tank on it. I can tell you that I'm liking the numbers I'm seeing on my ScanGaugeII average MPG though. However, I'd not repeat those yet, as it may not be totally calibrated until a few tanks have been run.

'13 Access Cab, 4 cly base auto. Perfect for what I want. Hauling kayaks, bikes and Home Depot runs.

 

About 22.

I have a 1999, 2wd XtraCab, with a five speed. Power enough to tow a U-Haul, no problems. But fuel economy isn't the greatest.

As to the work-truck question: I'd go with 2wd, for the simple reason you can get into it cheaper. If you're going to WORK it, meaning beat the snot out of it...a used 4x4 will hold its value better, up to a point.

At the end, both trucks will have about $100 scrap value. SOMEBODY is going to be holding the bag when the truck hits that point, where fixing it isn't worth what it costs.

If you're looking for traction, on or off road, get 4wd; but just to haul stuff...get the cheap truck.

 

Right. And, whether you're a leadfoot who can't come close to the EPA rating or an eco-driver who exceeds them, the ratings show the relative efficiency of different vehicles so you can compare them.

One thing I have noticed with trucks though is they usually get the same economy rating whether you have a crew cab, long-wheelbase four-door or a short-wheelbase regular cab. Maybe they average the economy of the different body styles, which might account for why my little regular cab Tacoma does better than its ratings.