2016 TACOMA AUTO VS MANUAL

Yeah, the skis are 186cm, so they barely fit diagonally in the bed. Didn't plan the colors, 44 years in the ski biz, so skis are constantly changing hands.

 

I was thinking about making that switch...
How much OUCH money might I ask?

 

Overdrive ratios.

OP you will get worse mpg at 80 like you were driving with the manual with terrible 0.85 OD that will have you spinning high rpm at 80, vs shifting between 5-6th with the automatic.

There will be no fuel savings with the stick.

 

I'm still on the fence as to which I want. I haven't been able to find a stick to test drive and appreciate this threads info.

 

2nd gen manual! Nearly 300k miles. Seen an automatic better than that?

 

The 6MT has a double overdrive, .85 and .71. The auto double overdrive is still higher at .69 and .58. The difference is compounded by the different rear ends of 4.30 and 3.91 respectively. Final drives come out to 3.05 for the manual and 2.27 for the slushbox. Even with the parasitic loss inherent to conventional automatics it's not very surprising that they get better fuel economy.

 

Oh, didn't realize the new 6 speed MT finally has some decent OD gears.

So stick has 3.91 and auto has 4.30, or vice versa?

 

I've said since I first drove both transmissions that the new 3.5 seems better matched to the 6 speed manual. I'm averaging 21 MPG on winter gas on hilly Colorado roads with the 6/M so far, which is what I would have expected from the auto based on the EPA numbers.

 

All the data you want and more! https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/2016-gear-ratios-at-awesome-mt-now-with-double-overdrive.387347/

 

The manual has 4.30 gears and the auto the 3.91. That's with the V6 though, with the 2.7 it's the other way around.

 

I say buy what you like and don't sweat a 1mpg difference between the transmisons. I've never driven a v6 Tacoma with a MT, but the auto didn't seem bad in the one that I test drove.

The 4 cyl is defintly a night a day difference. Being able to run out 3rd when merging in heavy traffic makes the 2.7 much more tolerable.

 

Thanks

Toyota continues to make sure the manual spins way higher than it needs to with poor gear choice.

 

Disagree it spins perfect. 1st gear would be worthless with 3.9 gears in the manual.

 

Odd, since with 3.91 it would be just like 1st gear in the 2.7l. What's worthless about it?

 

I haven't driven one yet, but I hazard a guess that I would have liked an even deeper final overdrive for better mileage. I am okay with downshifting if required to maintain momentum on hill. Still gotta drive one though.

 

I hated the gearing in my 2007 2.7l mt. I would end up having to run it in 4lo lots of days while over landing around Nevada. Could never get started if there was much of an incline in high range. Just way to high of gears with the transmission it had. Really my biggest complaint with my second gen.

 

I have 6500 miles, all in the mountains except for one trip to Kansas. Lots of 6th gear on that one and 23.5 mpg, so the gearing seems to be sorted. Here, I'm usually in 4th or 5th, in town there's enough torque to drive around in 3rd mostly

 

my auto sucked until i added fluid now it kicks ass!!!

 

I always wondered why Toyota didn't make 5th-6th gear on the new M/T the same as the auto, so both can get same mpg highway...I don't understand much with transmissions, but did Toyota do this so you wouldn't be shifting as much in OD, going from 6th-to-5th-to-6th-to-5th-to......?

 

I guess they assumed that, but most manual drivers would rather deal with that than an automatic that jumps between 4-5-6 as so many are complaining about.