MPG numbers at the Chicago show?

No manny trans in the fullsizes...good enough argument for me. To think a Subaru Forester is more manly than a F150.

 

Cool, but not what me, my roommate and the 3 guys at work that all have them are getting. Of course the guy that leveled his and but mud tires on it is now getting 15-17.

 

Hey, that is pretty good. I never know what to believe (even Fuelly, I am sure some people fudge their numbers on there) without driving one myself.

 

ya that 5.3l ecotec gets better mpg than a 4.0l v6 tacoma and makes like 380ft-lbs of torque!

 

Impressive numbers really. Though I think you mixed up the diesel and gas RAM links.

 

Can't argue there. For me though, a manual tranny doesn't do anything for me in a truck. Now, my RX7 on the racetrack (before I sold it two months ago) a manual tranny was a MUST....no if ands or buts!

 

whoops...thanks for the catch. fixed

 

But, it is a base model. 2 wd, with no options. As I said earlier, Toyota isn't gonna give you 33 mpg in a Tacoma because that would attract many Tundra buyers who have more chedder. Also, Ram doesn't have a mid-sized pickup to offer.
Think about why GM did not put the 4.3 liter V6 in the Colorado. The Silverado V6 gets about the same MPG as the Colorado but has substancially more HP and torque. They don't want too many people cross shopping. Putting the 4.3l in the Colorado would most-likely take away Silverado customers and put them into Colorados. GM is now offering the 4.3 V6 in pretty high trims (crew cab configs even) because it is such a powerful V6 that people are willing to drop down 2 cylinders.

Edit: Less HP but substancially more torque than Colorado 3.6 V6

 

Wow, I wasn't even aware of that engine. Just looked up the specs on it. Not a bad unit. That's getting pretty damn big for a V6 though. I'm guessing the stroke is really long. Very interesting figures too. The mileage surprised me though. I wonder what the cost per unit vs the Colorado V6 comes out to be.

In the end, I just hope we don't get fucked. The fact that the 4 runner had the newer 4.0V6 (and so did the FJ) but we didn't get it was pretty telling. They think we'll buy anything just because the Tacoma is such a solid truck. If they don't innovate and keep up the pace they won't be the leaders forever. Look at what happened to Apple and phones. They changed the world with the first iPhone and now almost 10 years later it's not much different. And that's why Android owns the global market share.

 

The ecodiesel is an Italian turd. A friends dad has one and its been at the dealer multiple times for stupid problems. At one point just sitting there waiting for instructions on what to do from corporate. He owns a crew cab 4x4 pretty high model, trust me, its not getting close to the 28 mpg highway claim for the stripped down work truck model.

You definitely will get from Dallas to Santa Fe and back in 1 tank because most of the way the ecoshit will be sitting on top of a tow truck.

 

Hmmm...that's very odd. Absolutely every article I've read be it a review or a long term test has shown VERY impressive economy numbers from that engine. Sounds like your friend's dad has what we'll politely refer to as a "unique" experience.

Edmunds seems to be doing quite well with theirs. http://www.edmunds.com/ram/1500/2014/long-term-road-test/

 

Actually it is a GM engine that was sold off to Fiat. My friend likes his and claimed to get 28 mpg in his 4wd Ram on a 2,400 mile trip. He was trying to see what was possible keeping his foot off the pedal and cruise never set above 65. Pretty good IMO but I'd far prefer a Tacoma with a gas engine that got say 4 mpg less. I'd hate to see what the cost of owning a Dodge with that engine would be over 7-8 years.

 

You can still get a manual on the large Cummins offered by Ram. It's torque numbers are dialed back though.

 

the consensus is if you want better MPG, upgrade to a 1/2 ton V8 truck. You don't buy a midsized truck for MPG but for better maneuverability.

 

^^ 1 up here

YOU DON'T BUY A TRUCK FOR MPG YOU BUY WHAT FITS YOUR NEEDS BEST

if there happens to be 2 trucks identical in meeting your needs in every day, THAT is when you pick the one with better color, then... IF they are the same color. You can pick the one with better MPG and that can be a valid reason.

It does suck that a bigger truck may get better MPG, but I wouldn't give up my truck and the fit for something else for MPG's.

 

^^ 1 up here

YOU DON'T BUY A TRUCK FOR MPG YOU BUY WHAT FITS YOUR NEEDS BEST

if there happens to be 2 trucks identical in meeting your needs in every day, THAT is when you pick the one with better color, then... IF they are the same color. You can pick the one with better MPG and that can be a valid reason.

It does suck that a bigger truck may get better MPG, but I wouldn't give up my truck and the fit for something else for MPG's.

 

That's right. And I soooooo want the 2016 to get just marginally better mileage than the Canyon. Pleaaaaaaaaase get better mileage!!

 

I am reasonable confident the 2016 Taco will get better MPG than the Colorado V6. Partially because the new engine tech in the new Taco is done for fuel economy reasons.

 

... or because it fits in your garage.

 

8spd Automatic