2016 4x4 fuel economy figures across brands

Dagosa, so if I look at the PreRunner:

1) 2015 DC SB 2X4 V6 = $23,400 and gets 17/21/19 MPG
-comes with SR package
-remote keyless entry system, cruise control, sliding rear window with privacy glass, side glass with privacy, power outside mirrors, steering wheel with audio controls. Removes passenger-side door-key cylinder.

2) 2016 DC SB 2X4 V6 = $26,285 and gets 19/24/21 MPG
-comes with SR5 package
-power windows/mirrors/locks, basic six-speaker Entune audio system with a 6.1-inch touch screen, Bluetooth, USB, voice recognition including Apple Siri Eyes Free, a backup camera, and a GoPro windshield mount, keyless entry, cruise control, a leather-wrapped steering wheel, a larger 4.2-inch color LCD on the instrument panel, fog lamps, variable intermittent wipers, and tinted rear glass

I'm leaning towards the 2016 model because for the extra ~$2,900, I get quite a bit (+ a quieter ride and 2 more MPG etc). But Im very hesitant because this is a new model and will have bugs. I dont want to be a guinea pig.

Which PreRunner model would you take?

http://blog.caranddriver.com/truck-you-money-2016-toyota-tacoma-priced-starts-under-25-grand/

 

There is no Pre Runner

 

Interesting note on fuel economy from the Autoguide.com review (http://www.autoguide.com/manufacturer/toyota/2016-toyota-tacoma-review):

What I found interesting:
1. Indication that Toyota's published numbers may be corporate estimates, and not official EPA numbers. (Of course, manufacturers provide the numbers most of the time to the EPA, so this distinction may be moot).

2. While they averaged a measly 16mpg overall (probably with a heavy foot checking out the power), 70mph cruise at highway speed showing 25-26 is exciting to see.

 

But there basing all this off the fuel readout and not actual calculations. From my experience the averaged readout is usually low but the instant believable. From everything I've read part throttle applications is where the new Tacoma will shine which is good for me as I drive with a very light foot.

 

They averaged 16mpg for the whole day, which included all the off-roading, crawl controlling, etc. I was excited to see the 25-26 number as well, but that is just the readout from the truck, not actual usage. Only time will tell...

 

The readout from the truck is take wheel mileage and dividing by the fuel metering. That's a very accurate number with modern fuel metering systems

25-26 is very good to see at 70mph. I usually drive at 60 but that's 1400rpm in 6th gear so it may not be able to push that

 

I agree that the "instant" display is pretty accurate but the average is less accurate as the system is probably storing/averaging at some rate that doesn't capture all of the actual changes in fuel use during acceleration and deceleration. I guess the faster the sample rate the more accurate it will be.

 

I was always curious why pump->fill->click->top-off->click->do math has been considered more accurate than a metered reading from the vehicle's systems (which I am sure vary in implementation & accuracy by some unknown amount by brand and model)

 

Yes, for a single tank number I'd trust the computer better but, after 10 or so tanks the variances in fill amounts will average out and you should see a consistent trend vs computer and your data gets better will more fill ups. Just be consistent in your filling technique. On my motorcycle where most of my gas spending goes you can get even more consistent fill ups as you can see the fuel level. Plus, with a small tank you accumulate number of fills much faster. Both motorcycles I've had that had fuel info were short on the average. Triumph was about 1.5mpg low and Honda is about 3mpg low. My Mazda is off by 1mpg or so.

 

^understood, but unless you use the same pump every time I wonder if the differences in pump fill rates (which may impact the moment of vacuum shutoff/click) would make your results less accurate than you think (induce unknown amount of variance).

For example:

Fill 1 (no topoff)
300 miles / 15.5 gals = 19.35 mpg
then
topoff for $0.50 / $3.30 per gal = 0.15 gal extra put in
adjust to 300 miles / 15.65 gals = 19.16 mpg
....for a total potential error of 0.18mpg on that tank, all b/c of a roughly $.50 topoff, all depending on when you decide to stop.

And this doesn't account for tire size differences affecting the ODO reading.

Kinda off topic I guess. But I wish I knew how the trip computer fuel consumption algorithms worked.

 

Yes, step one is to verify odometer with GPS. After that I think you end up with more accurate info for a total average (with enough fill ups) but each tank is not necessarily more accurate with manual calculations. Eventually you should have a feel for how much offset there between the two methods.

 

I hear you but I can only say this. My kids live in Mass and NH. Their truck is a minivan.....Mass gets snow, but unless you have AWD for the tarred roads, 4 wd is useless. Plus, 4 wd handles worse on slippery roads when in 2 wd which you must be in when roads have patches of snow. In this area, it is seldom if ever, all snow covered and you would damage your 4 wd system if you leave it in.

When I lived in town in central Maine which gets more snow then Mass does in it's wildest dreams, I had 2 wd pick ups. Had winter or AT tires but always put weight I. The trucks never got stuck. I have 4 wd now, because I live by a lake in the woods on a mile and a half dirt road that stays frozen and is steep and snow covered...so you need 4 wd. My kids in that area get by fine. You will regret having 4 wd every time you fill it up......in real life driving, 2 wd does much better then EPA ratings for sure. The new Tacos all have the pre runner ground clearance. That is criticle for snow travel. Weight and good tires and you're fine.....

4 wd in Mass is for bragging. The key for 2 wd is the LSD. I rely on it more the believe for I town snow travel....I never put the truck in 4 wd in town on tarred roads that are patch covered with snow. Now, an AWD car..that's a different matter.......truck based 4 wd is not made for town roads.....

 

Like I said, if I lived where you do, I would buy the 2016 2 wd in a heartbeat.....but, this is important. AT tires and weight in the back if you anticipate any snow travel. You will love the LSD...it works awesome. I use it exclusively and not 4 wd when in town on snow covered roads.

 

Thanks guys. Im pretty set on the 2016 2X4 DC SB. These darn things need to come to my lot! I had my car inspected yesterday and saw a Tacoma 2015 TRD with a bunch of extras like tube steps etc, for $31k. It looked beautiful. Muuuuuuust resist.

 

16 MPG is not bad if you are 4 wheeling mixed with city driving. Actually pretty dang good.