So Toyota is wussing out on the Engine, dang it. 270HP but add gearing

Rated torque and HP are rarely the determining factor on tow ratings. For example, because people seem to keep missing this, the F150 Ecoboost gained no more power and used the same 6 speed transmission in the 2015 as it did in the 2014. Yet the 2015 truck is rated for, on average, 500 lbs more than the 2014 truck. That 500 lbs came from a stronger frame and lighter body. If the Tacoma lost a few pounds and gained a stronger body, yet kept torque at relatively the same value, then that would explain the new tow rating.

 

No crying here. Maybe you should turn off the baby camera of your 5 year old daughter in the background .

 

No one posted anything like this yet (I dont think), so here's some 7th grade algebra.

HP = (Torq. X RPM) / 5252

since we know HP = 270, and solving for Torq., we get:

Torq. = (5252 X 270) / RPM

Inserting RPM values where we MIGHT see peak torque, here are the POSSIBLE peak torque numbers:

4000 rpm = 354 lb.ft.
4500 rpm = 315 lb.ft
5000 rpm = 283 lb.ft
5500 rpm = 258 lb.ft
6000 rpm = 236 lb.ft
6500 rpm = 218 lb.ft

For comparison, the 1GR reaches peak torque of 283 lb.ft at 3800 rpm.

 

Actually a few people have gone over this formula...

Optimistically if the truck is around that 5200 rpm mark for peak torque, with a fairly flat curve, then that would make most people happy. The D4S with the right tuning might be able to make that possible. The torque curve is what will really determine how this engine feels with and without weight.

If the redline of 6000 RPM from the photo's released is correct then I would say the 5500 RPM number (258 ft lbs) is likely the lowest number we could expect. Engines rarely, if ever because I haven't seen one, make peak torque right at the redline.

 

As far as being concerned about having "a car motor in a truck," no need.

Nissan used the same 3.5 across a wide variety of vehicles, from their "sports car" to their SUVs, and crossovers. I believe their 4.0 is just a modified version of the 3.5, so - "car motor."

Chevy is using the same 3.5 in it's camaros, cadillacs, and impalas for the Colorado.

Ford used the same v6 in the ranger and mustang (when the Ranger was still in production). I believe the same coyote platform is used in both the Raptor and the Mustang also.

Dodge uses the same v8's across a number of its vehicles.

Point being, when these engines go into production I think versatility is a serious consideration. Engineers are able to configure them for all kinds of applications. Our same 4.0 from the 2nd gen Tacoma is 40 less HP than the FJ and the 4Runner. I have to assume this is to give it an even wider power band.

If you're concerned about not having enough torque to have a serious work duty truck, consider a full-sized pickup. I have no doubt that the smaller motor will deliver better gas mileage at the expense of torque being delivered later in the power band. I also think this will be an acceptable trade off for all prospective buyers. Most wont compare it to the previous year's tacoma. They'll compare it to its competitors, and it's starting to look like they'll be comparable.

 

Well said. It is the same Coyote engine in the F150 as the mustang, just a different intake shape and exhaust headers with a different tune. I also suspect the cam lobes to be different but I've never found a source that tells me one way or another on the 2015's.

The Ecoboost 3.5 L premiered in the SHO and the 5.0 L Coyote in the Mustang. Both are pretty kick arse truck engines power wise. Especially compared to what else is out there from GM with their "traditional" truck engines.

 

The truth is out there

 

I suspect the purchase cost on the diesel will be out of this world, though, so between that and the added cost of diesel fuel it would take a long time to make up the difference (or you would never make up the difference) no matter how good the fuel economy is.

 

All true. At least the Diesel might make better than sticker mpg, which will make some people happy. It's sort of off topic, but if you think discussions like this one are funny you should check out the Chevy guys on 355nation. They are having the same fight about the new Diesel between guys who think the HP is to low and there isn't enough gearing to compensate. No one is ever happy it seems lol.

 

Some pics from the Bass Pro Shops demo in Canada. KIND of growing on me....

 

The oil burner Colorado win eat it for lunch tho'. Looking forward to test driving one.

 

Rest of the world zzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

 

Toyota could essentially turn the Tacoma into a Corolla with a bed, and 90% of buyers would rejoice at the new MPG numbers.

How many truck buyers do you think actually need a truck to tow or haul? The 2 legitimate reasons they even exist.

Very few, compared to the buyers who just plain want a truck. The market caters to the majority.

 

Were you able to get anymore information regarding torque rating, fuel economy etc?

 

Quotes from one of the Canadians actually there:

 

LOL...there is always that this shit verses that shit argument. Just buy for your needs, and everyone's needs/desires are different.

My driving style and my needs...I certainly don't need a ton of HP...I tend to be a lugger and like to keep around it 2000 rpm...diesel (while loaded) will do that with ease. That and the EcoBoost....too bad it isn't getting the mileage claims they said it was going to get, or I would be all over that....and too bad it isn't in a Ranger (as you said no one is ever happy) VVVVVV VVVVVV

 

One could even argue that because its not a boxed frame, its usefulness for those two reasons is debatable. Mid-sized trucks just aren't sufficient work trucks for those that REALLY need one. As you also state: the market seems to have determined that there is a need demand for a truck that doesn't necessarily do those things all that well. It's deficiencies certainly haven't hurt resale value.

 

If we want to get really technical 1/2 tons, fully boxed or not, aren't great work trucks either. Most trucks working in construction, agriculture, and forestry are 3/4 ton or heavier. It's not because 1/2 tons can't handle the loads. They can. With constant abuse though on rough roads with load 3/4 tons, being slightly over built for that purpose, tend to hold together a bit better.

In my company sales staff gets 1/2 tons to get them out of the odd muddy yard and haul around some trial product from time to time. Scouts and delivery trucks are 3/4 tons.

That being said I work my little Tacoma from time to time. I scout fields and the smaller Tacoma let's me get places I simply can't with a 3/4 ton.

 

Have a bud in the mining industry in Africa, said the American 3/4-1 Tons they can't keep out of the shop...where-as the lighter duty HiLuxes just keep on chugging along. They basically use them for the same thing, running around the mine.

 

Taking this back to the original concern, I have serious doubts that the .5 liter reduction negatively impacts these uses in any significant way. Most will be happy with the extra MPG. Those that are disappointed may not find the current Tacoma to be sufficient for their needs in the first place either.