2016 Toyota Tacoma reuses 2005-2015 cab design?

Looks like Toyota's complete Tacoma "redesign" wasn't really a complete one. Looks like they stripped a 2015 down to just the chassis and the cab structure (without the doors) and started from there. Is this old news?

2015


2016

 

Yes, and from pictures people have taken it looks like suspension components, the composite bed and other things are carried over, eventhough Mike Swears claims "only a seat belt bracket" is carried over. Be prepared for some arguing since some people are convinced its not the same and will argue whatever illogical point they can to say otherwise. But yes looks like its the same just doors reshaped and interior components are new, hence why people are referring to it as gen 2.5.

 

Don't forget a big part of the truck's character (and Toyota's development budget) is in the engine and transmission, which would be new if you opt for the V6.

Similarity in the suspension hopefully means we'll see a good selection of mid-travel and long-travel kits available at launch, instead of waiting a year for strut spacers to show up (as it was in the case of the Colorado).

 

Usafwx is correct. From what I've seen from pictures it appears to have the same bilsteins the current generation has...

 

Yeah, That's what I'm see too. No complaining, just was looking at the picks this morning over breakfast and made the connection.

 

I agree. For stuff like that who cares if it's the same means we won't have to wait to get aftermarket parts.

 

I still think that rear door looks longer.

 

Looks the same to me and i mentioned my thoughts in other threads in regards to the soon to be available 3rd gen.Best part of the body cause that front end and bed is ugly for the new 3rd gen!I'm sure i will eventually grow to like it though.

 

In one of the TFL videos with a product specialist, they say the truck is new "bumper to bumper". And that is kind of true, kind of not. The doors are essentially the same, but there are a few differences. A few extra lines and contours added to better match the front and rear body panels.
I can certainly understand why this is not a clean sheet redesign.

- Current dimensions are still what people want in mid-sized trucks
- Keeping the cab the same means the already high crash-test rating is likely to stay the same
- Toyota makes their money by reliability, not styling and power
- Product surveys suggested people did not want a big departure from gen 2 styling
- Cost (duh). Much cheaper for Toyota to keep cab the same than redesign a new one.

I now it's been brought up before but the current Ford Super Duty has had the same frame/cab since 1998. 1998!!! They have managed to improve upon it over the last 18 years and keep sales strong.

 

Toyota responded well to my biggest issue with the current generation, the gas hog dinosaur engine. They could have kept everything else the same and just changed the engine and I'd buy one. Apparently there are a lot of other idiots like me out there because that's exactly what Toyota is doing.

edit: Unless you love 4 bangers. Then you can jump in a lake for all Toyota seems to be concerned.

 

Is anyone else upset about the loss of the A-pillar grab handle on the driver's side?

 

Oh? that sucks...

 

Toyota did a bunch of customer survey's and almost everyone said that the look of the truck was one of the things they liked most about it, and that they did think a big change was needed.

Therefore, Toyota spent more time on engine, suspension (maybe?), and interior which is where it needed it most.

There was an article that talks about this somewhere...

Cheers,

Jay

 

If you needed more MPG you can always buy 4 banger.

There was no reason to offer two underpowered engines in the same truck.
Toyota tried that with 3.slo.
How that work out, not so good.
Now engine choices will be slo and slower.

 

I think the 3.5L in the 2.65 gen will be a pretty fast truck. Especially in 2wd access cab form. But that's useless speed imo. Studies show most people don't use mid size trucks as trucks so that high 200's hp at 6500 rpm will be nice to drag race minivans and Suburbans heading to Costco.

 

You driven the truck? Lucky for you you don't have to buy one buddy

 

You may be right that it is slow, but it is only as slow as the competition in the market segment. The numbers for the Colorado look impressive on paper but in actual tests http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2015/04/2015-midsize-challenge-acceleration.html its surprisingly close to the current Tacoma performance. They're all in that 8.0 - 8.5 second 0-60 time. So if you're going to call it slow, you gotta put it in the context of what it's up against. Slow is normal.

 

^Note the Pickuptrucks.Com challenge used a TRD Pro, whose BFG All-Terrains aren't as grippy on pavement as the highway tires used by the rest of the field. The Tacoma on highway tires (Rugged Trail) tested 8.2 sec 0-60 mph and 16.4 sec in the 1/4 mile, numbers which are right up the alley. http://special-reports.pickuptrucks.com/2012/01/2012-midsize-shootout-track-day.html

 

That is awesome you got to drive one? Share your info info and thoughts. Was it the shifting that made it feel slow or the throttle response? Maybe it was gearing? Let us know why it felt under powered without knowing the HP/TQ ratings. No one makes an ASSumption without having any info or trying it just because positive change is not their friend...

Tyler

 

^It's funny, isn't it? Toyota will be stuffing the IS350 engine in the Tacoma and people are complaining.