The move to smaller displacement turbo engines really isn't for improved fuel economy, it's primarily to meet emissions requirements. Trucks will never get good mpg because of weight and design. Ford's aluminum body trucks seem to be the best but it's really a marginal difference across the industry.
@@sgtkurry True enough...which keeps the emissions the same for more power because for some stupid reason, everyone is infatuated with power numbers. A truck will be completely laughed at and negatively reviewed if the power numbers are not "best in class".
I got a feeling mpg is going to tank when guys start putting big tires on these things. Glad to see they went to coils in the back. The ride was one of my biggest beefs with the tacoma.
Really ? I find the ride in the current Tacoma awesome. Maybe that’s because my last truck was a F250 . It was like the axles were bolted straight to the frame . Stiffer than stiff. My 23 Tacoma trd off road rides like butter. The coils will be even better I’m sure .. but one downside is they won’t handle a load as well, And I don’t like that radius arm suspension link that now hangs down off the frame rail ahead of the rear wheel . It’s a big loss of ground clearance in a crucial spot for rocks when the going gets rough
@@gordboyko769 it’s a 3/4 ton thing. The springs in the front are stiff to support the engine and the leafs are big for payload. Fords probably the worst. Ram does coils for the 2500 in the back and gm does ifs in the front. I’m spoiled with the way 1500 trucks ride it’s like night and day from 20 years ago. Full-size trucks riding around like Cadillacs lol. As far as ground clearance and the radius arm jeeps have had them for years and that doesn’t stop people from wheeling lol. Guys will just lift tacos to the sky and enjoy the extra articulation.
You can still get leaf's on lower models and shocks make a huge difference for ride quality on a leaf sprung vehicle. The last gen TRD pro rides so much better than other tacos because of the fox shocks
I still think they would have been better keeping the 3.5 and just updated it with this 8 speed trans and lower gearing. The SR5 with front air dam and lighter 245/75r16 tires consistently got +25 mpg if u tried. I get 15-16mpg towing a 16ft boat.
We had the 3.5L in a Lexus for a few years. Probably the best engine i've ever owned. Silky smooth and plenty of power...also would get 30mpg all day long at 80mph.
Not sure a transmission with more gears would substantially help fuel economy, especially on the highway where it is really just the taller couple of gears paired with the final drive that will be influencing where the vehicle sits in terms of rpm. And on that note, I’m not sure reducing the highway rpm would benefit too much if you went with a taller rear and, as I feel after driving a couple of models that they’d constantly be downshifting to get into the meat of the torque curve which is relatively high in the rpm range.
@@ALMX5DP adding gears can help you keep the motor in the sweet spot for acceleration without having to lug the motor or over revving. Also adding a more powerful tune on the 3.5 helps it save gas. I always wanted a Tacoma with a v8 from Toyota. Looks like the only way that will happen is doing it myself lol.
That's a disappointment. So why the hell are we fed a 4cylinder if the mpgs are the same. And 50k starting price? 🤬 does toyota think their customers are stupid or what?
I have the 5.7 L V8 with a supercharger. I’ve gone over 500 miles per tank granted it’s 38 gallons but I still get 13.5 to 14.5 MPG and that’s doing 80 mph most of the time. So I’m definitely not impressed with that little four banger. Long live the past…
@@270eman LOL, he's driving a Tundra, he left that small bit of important information out...adding a supercharger really cuts the fuel economy in them LOL. My 08 5.7L V8 4x4 Tundra would get around 20mpg on the highway but after about 70mph that number would drastically start going down....14-15mpg was about the worst fuel economy I'd get and that was just in town....now, a few winters ago we had about 2 feet of snow and temps below zero for about a month straight....truck was in 4WD the whole month and...well I was lucky to see 10mpg LOL. I bought a truck to do truck things, fuel economy isn't important at that point, having the power and reliability is a heck of a lot more important. Someone buying a truck to use as an economy family sedan has rocks for brains to begin with...and this is where the problem is with a lot of truck buyers...they really just need a car, but they gotta show off to their friends so they buy the biggest most expensive truck as a status symbol instead of buying what they really need. Then they whine that their 1 ton dually crew cab truck is getting 10mpg on their trips to the mall and Walmart LOL.
@@costidisa That is not the comment we deserve, but boy is that the comment we needed! I used to say the same thing, but nobody listened so i stopped bringing it up. People act like because it will take the manufacturers some effort to make a full size pickup run 30 mpg that no one should try it, even the Prius' have stagnated on fuel economy the last couple generations, but these car companies demand more money for every generation of car though.
@@costidisa I'd be on board if the government wasn't involved. We're pushing new technology on vehicles that grow in size and weight every year due to federal "good intentions". Imagine a 1995 sized Tacoma with a hybrid engine. Can't happen, because government "emissions algorithm".
I honestly don't mind the "trucky" ride quality of older tacos, and my 2010 taco with the 4.0 and a 6 speed stick, I get around 300 miles per tank, and I fill up at a quarter tank left. Everything I keep hearing about the new tacos doesn't seem all that worth it.
My 2021 Tundra TRD Pro double cab was $48,880. It is hard for me to imagine a regular Tacoma is now closing in on what I pay for my full-size tundra just 2 1/2 years ago. Also, I don’t care about gas mileage but what I care about is range especially when I am towing, and I usually average around 15-15.5 MPG in city and around 17.5-18 MPG on the highway and I get well over 600 miles on a tank with my 38 gallon tank. It’s one of the best parts of my truck is I can travel and not have to stop all the time. 255 miles of range is a joke.
Agree with you on range. My 2018 SR5 TRD DC 4x4 cost $39k, and I got 0% financing from Toyota for 48 months. Even my 1996 F150 XLT has 35 gallons of total tank size, when I combine the front and back.
My old 21 tacoma TRD OR got 280/360 per tank city/hwy. The tank is 21 gallons but on E its about 18 gallons to fill up which leaves 3 gallons as a safety net. I avg 17 mpg overall which is horrible for a midsize
@@BenjaminCorriganI paid $51k out the door with a 100k bumper to bumper warranty on my 21 Lunar Rock Pro Tundra with 1 mile on the odometer. It's pretty absurd how much prices have increased in just the last couple years.
38 gallon tank? I assume Toyota finally pulled their heads out of their asses and put a larger tank in them in later years LOL. I always thought the 26 gallon tank was pretty pathetic for what Toyota was pretending to be a 1/2 ton truck built for work and towing...should have had a 30+ gallon tank all along.
I have a '21 trd off road, rear leafs were smooth but so soft, I swapped out the leaf pack. I don't understand about the "harshness" comments. As for gas consumption, Toyota missed another opportunity; smaller tank? Similar mileage as my gen 3? No diesel option.
To me it comes down to whether the hybrid will have improved efficiency, or just more torque/power like the strategy employed with the Tundra. With both, it'd be nice if the computer could have an eco setting that sacrifices power for substantially improved efficiency. If the non-hybrid could have gotten 25 mpg, and the hybrid 30 mpg, it would have been a real winner. As is, full size options start looking a lot more attractive, especially when a low-optioned full size will be similar in price. Those markups are going to be gross for the Tacoma.
Sorry but the Hybrid system is made for power not fuel efficiency with the added weight of the battery you actually get worse MPGs. This has already been proven on the new Tundra TFL just did a video on it.
@@scott8238, well the new Landcruiser is estimated to net 27 mpg, so a man can dream. My AWD hybrid midsize SUV can get 37 mpg, which granted isn't a body on frame truck, but still, surely someone can design an off-road worthy 4wd hybrid midsize or actual compact truck that can average at least 27, ideally 30. Ford not bringing the new ranger hybrid to the U.S. is excruciatingly annoying. Similarly annoying is them not offering the Maverick hybrid in AWD.
@@colbybrady2187 Supposedly we will be getting the Ranger plugin hybrid in 25. Maverick hybrid in AWD should be coming then too. I'd consider trading in my current hybrid mave for AWD but so far have not needed AWD. If the Ranger PHEV can get 30-40 miles on pure EV that's going to be a compelling choice since I would never have to use gas on my daily.
I used to own a 2014 Tacoma with the TRD trim and equiped with the 4.0 li V6. I could consistently get 10.6 li per 100 kilometre (25 mpg). It's interesting that my 4.0 li V6 gave better fuel economy than the new turbo 4 cyclinder does.
Beat me to it. My 13 TRD sport would support that mpg number with the old 4.0. I consider it thirsty to be honest. Kinda hard to believe that 4 cyl turbo cant be better. I had a Chevy full size rental for a week with their turbo 4 and it would do 27 mpg non hwys with ease.
@@darrendesautels5871 The 4.0 V6 was indeed a thirsty beast. I think part of the problem is that with the V6 Toyota had an engine that was better suited to move the weight of a Tacoma. I suspect, even with a turbo, the 4 cyl has to work harder to do it.
@@squidinkRC If you pin ther go fast peddal to the floor then no, you're not going to get 25 mpg. However, if you drive responsibily with an eye to getting the best gas mileage possible then yes, it is possible to get 25 mpg. I can only speak to my experience with my Tacoma, and I could squeeze out 25 mpg pretty consistently.
The V6 engine, Toyota makes is one of the best engines ever made from any manufacturer. This four-cylinder turbo will never replace the V6. The V-6 typically would go 250 or 350,000 miles. This new turbo will never ever come anywhere near that
Really been enjoying your Tacoma content! It's great that you got a few days to do the tests you wanted. Everyone that went to California had to follow the Toyota-prescribed events and so the reviews were quite repetitive.
As I said before, I love your content because it’s as close to my conditions in Alaska as anyone can get. You’re about the only channel doing demos in the snow. 👍🏻
I am in a perfect state with my 23' Lunar Rock and plan on sticking with it for the long run. I am curious about the durability of this 2.4L 4-cylinder pulling all that weight
My 2021 TRD Sport 3.5 does an easy 25 mpg on the interstate. I have a heavy fiberglass ARE work topper with probably no less than 200 pounds of tools in the box and average 18-19 mpg. My first Toyota truck was a 92 4 cylinder 5 speed and it got 30 mpg consistently. Auto manufacturers are going backwards in fuel economy. I was recently in Ireland and my rental was a Kia Sportage with a green diesel that puts out less emissions than a Tesla and got 50 mpg and the US politicians won’t let it come here because it’s too fuel efficient
Toyota said they’re not going after MPG, but rather power and torque. I imagine the hybrid could be a little bit better. Kinda surprised they shrunk down the fuel tank
If they really wanted to go after power, they should have just added the turbos to the V6 and added the 8 speed tranny. Toyota is clearly going for the "Just Stop Oil" maniacs. The same thing VW did back in 2009-2014 and we all saw how that scandal ended.
They said this is the bridge to electric vehicles. It makes sense they will make it perform mediocre by keeping you in with the tech and features because they understand the majority of the public likes to show off instead of buying something that will last multiple decades.
@@0HOON0 exactly. 3.5 owners who wanted more power went to a tundra v8 ir a Colorado diesel. But that’s today’s world. They trap you with the fancy new tech and never reveal the potential risk of failure with all that new shit added. Makes it more expensive to repair, maintain and replace. The more years go by. The more I want a 1980s or 90s landcruiser
Great Video, so switching from V6 to i4 turbo with same BHP that request more maintenance , less range and eating the same amount of gas and won't last as much as the old V6 ... hmm is it worth it ? Can u do a test hauling also ? wonder how much then it will eat vs V6 :)
you could say the same thing with the old iron block push rod v8 and going to a aluminum OHV varaible valve timing v6 in the tacoma. my 95 f150 5.0L only makes 190hp
I was considering a new Tacoma but that Mpg is terrible for a "hybrid" vehicle, the smaller gas tank is shocking, and the price is just nuts. You can get a full size for the same price as a midsize truck now, obviously not top of the line full size but some of the features on top trims are just unnecessary. I am not a Toyota fanboy so paying that premium for what you get is not something I would be willing to do. If they want to pull from other markets they need to do better. At this rate they might as well eliminate Lexus and just market all their vehicles as Toyota's since they cost the same.
I get 12.5 L/100 to 13.5 L/100 with my 20 Tundra. So, this turbo 4 is marginally better on fuel. This thing will be a pig on gas towing any good size RV.
According to Toyota: “Honmono no otoko wa nenryō tanku no ōki-sa de nani mo oginawanai nodesu!” Real men don't compensate anything with the size of their fuel tank!
My 1985 Toyota 4runner SR5 5 speed with the 22re engine and currently has 285k miles on it, no leaks or burning oil... sitting on 35's with 5:29 gearing and using pure gasoline 89 octane, no E10... 23mpg. and when using E10 fuel, it got 17mpg.
Wish all these mid-size would just go with 20+ gallon tanks. There must be some EPA reason they are going for 18 gallons. Same thing with my Ranger. Its not a crossover guys, 22-24 gallons would be nice.
The only issue i have with my 3rd gen is fuel economy and its the one thing they never improved upon. I do like the Access Cab doors too, think that will be an issue on this latest gen. Buy 4 doors or dont buy at all.
You are correct, why the hell can't they improve on the fuel economy especially with the 4 banger . I'll probably just keep my tried and true 4.0L. 2005
@@MW-bz1qe it has 40lb ft more touque at a much lower rpm over the 05-06 4.0L. If you tow at all that will make a huge difference and performance also if you drive at high altitude NA engines lose 3.5% every 1000 feet
For all the additional complications with the turbos + the hybrid over the old, simple, and reliable V6, the gains are hardly impressive. They should have left the option of the old V6. As is, it's a 'no' for me.
I love the new Tacoma but to get me to switch from my 5.0 F150 (growl is so awesome) I was hoping for the new Tacoma to get better fuel economy. If the hybrid system mimics the Tundra the new hybrid will simply add some power and MPG will stay around 20. I realize your MPG test was done in cooler weather, so it may improve a little but I can hit 20 currently on a regular basis during road trips and drive over 600 miles on a fill up.
Is the front left fender dented? 😉 All manufactures have the Tech to build trucks that get 28+ Mpg yet they don't for some reason! My old 80 Toyota 4x4 with 33's on it would get 27 mpg on the highway all day long @ 65mph. Bottom line is...Toyota just lost a customer because of Poor fuel economy and the Price difference to the USA is ridiculous! Toyota Keep your Junk in your own country!
I know a 2021 Chev Silverado with the 2.7 turbo which for what i do was perfect and being a full size gets better than this new Tacoma? So all this tech and it gets worse than its previous generation.
I have a 23 v6. . . I think its fantastic. I hate everything I’m seeing here with the next gen. From the horrible blocky toy-like dash and computer display to the smaller gas tank, reduced range, higher price, and the shark-like front end I wouldn’t even consider this next Tacoma. What I love about my 3 gen truck is its a truck and still reasonably old school. I don’t want any part of the futuristic design trend of EV’s and I DEFINITELY want real gauges like on my 3rd gen. The tech in the 3rd gen is unobtrusive and utilitarian, which is the ideal.
It really has nothing to do with MPG, The EPA aka Bidenomics is cracking down on emissions forcing manufacturers using 4 cylinder turbos. Let us all pray that Trump gets back in office next year and we will have our V6 and V8 back again!
👏👏👏 we can only pray that dementia Joe doesn’t get reelected!!!!!! otherwise I don’t think it’s really gonna matter cause none of us are going to be driving after that term unless you want an EV piece of shit
So it has less payload. Less towing capability. Cost a big chunk more money. Without hesitation I would also bet that once the new Tacoma was even towing 60% of its tow rating, that gas mileage would plummet well BELOW what the outgoing V6 fuel economy would be under the same load. So the Tacoma is much more like a car and much less like the truck it was and for a lot more money. And the biggest upside that I am hearing is that is it FINALLY as comfortable to sit in as all of its competitors have been for years. 🤔 Oh, and I just clocked a 10.0 l/100 km in my 'V6 Colorado with a similar drive.
Those are the exact fuel economy numbers I get for my 2019 Tundra 1794 CrewMax with the 5.7v8 - same driving conditions and speeds. But, my numbers are on summer blend 87 octane gas with 10% ethanol content. Maybe this test is like our winter blend fuels.
It won't change much at all even with "summer" fuel....what they don't bother to show is how long they let a vehicle sit and warm up that eats up a lot of fuel too, but when you live in a cold climate you have no choice, unless you want to run over everything because all the windows are iced up LOL. But, yep, I'd average around 18mpg mixed city/highway with my 08 Tundra...occasionally I'd hit 20mpg on long trips out of town/state, but usually 19 was the max....around town where I live the nonsense 20mph speed limits really chews up the fuel so I'd usually see around 14mpg in town.
Ya better MPG but they put a smaller gas tank in it so much for better MPG and really a 4-Cylender not for me it will never last as long as the V6 would, and I will never get a truck with a 4-Cylinder. They look nice and some upgrades are great, but it still has a 4-cylinder with a turbo that you will have to change out about 100 thousand miles the rear disk brakes are nice but that should have been done over 20 years ago or more. I love my 2005 Tacoma 4x4 V6 I have just turned 150 thousand miles and still going strong no leaks or problems at all I will keep my Tacoma till I die or if it dies, I might put the money in it and rebuild it and it would be cheaper than getting a new one you got to be nuts to pay $50 thousand + for a 4-Cylinder come on Toyota bring back the V6
Or they could just compare it to a gen 3 TRD off road or pro and you get to see if the new on is even worth it that way. I’m a current gen 3 owner and I love mine. I would love the new one but that dam 2.4 is just not for me. I don’t like hybrid technology either. More shit to go wrong. I was hoping the land cruiser would get a diesel but that’s only for Europe. We won’t get the diesel in America, even tho there is plenty of diesel here compared to the UK.
Disappointed in the MPG. For the cost and new tech I was hoping for closer to 30 mpg. Not willing to buy a 1st gen with these nominal gains. I’ll keep my old 6.0 and just buy a damn small car for work commutes. Disappointing.
Awesome video! Oof, damn Toyota, this is like when I had my FJ (lifted) getting 225 miles a tank. Now I have a Colorado ZR2 diesel and get around 600 a tank, which is amazing. Maybe the I-Force Max will be better, but judging by the Tundra results it won't.
Way more available torque while maintaining fuel economy seems alright to me. And while I'm not enthralled with twin turbo V6 engines, I love the idea of a turbo inline 4. Great small package that should be easy to maintain and service should you need.
I'll stick with my TRD Off Road V6, the turbo 4 won't have the reliability in the long run not to mention any bugs that needs to be worked out when you buy a brand new Generation of any vehicle!
Hey man, thanks for all the great videos, love the channel. I gotta say I was excited to see the fuel mileage for the new Tacoma and holy hell I was let down, they get the exact same mileage as I do with my 3.5l V6. I love all the features on the new ones but the gas mileage was the big one, and thats not even towing anything, maybe it will be worse when towing.... I think I'll keep my tried true v6 and see how reliable the turbo 4cyl turns out to be, in my eyes it's just something else to go wrong along with all the "safety" stuff they pile into the cars these days which drives the price up... $50k starting is insane.
This is really discouraging. Especially since they put a smaller tank in. I could get about 300 miles on one tank on my 3rd gen. Now, with basically the same MPG, it will only get about 240 miles on a tank. Big fail Toyota!
Well that is a bit disappointing. I can squeeze out 18 mpg city and 23 mpg highway in my Ram 1500 Classic Hemi. Would’ve expected the tacoma to get into the mid-20s.
1 mpg more at the cost of more money, less towing, less fuel storage, additional sensors, longer wheelbase, and less engine life. No way is a turbo 4 going to outlast the V6 naturally aspirated engine. Combine that with the only positive tradeoff- roadside manners, nope not worth the extra price. '23 TRD Pro is the last good Tacoma for off road, crawling, and towing.
Either my i4 Camry needs a tune up, or I drive it a little too hard, but this new Tacoma is averaging better fuel mileage than my car. I don't see why people are complaining. Not to mention it's still more power compared to previous gen. More power for your buck.
It's a hard pass for me. 60 to 70k for a Tacoma which likely suffers from Toyota's subscription service. I'll stick with my 2015 Ram 1500. While it won't match the Tacomas fuel mileage, it's reliable and paid for. Great video.
and the your RAM doesn't have a puny 18.2 gallon tank lol. Midsize cars have that size fuel tank. Here in Europe the diesel Mercedes E class can come with an 18.5 gallon tank, much much better range. I don't understand Toyota, 18.2 gallons in a truck.
@@FlyNavy1271 Owner it since new, over 8 years no problems just normal wear and tear. I'd but another. Plus all my options work without a monthly subscription and it didn't cost me 60k
@@simontallboy209I'm currently driving a 2021 Tacoma Sport XP. All my options work I've never paid a subscription and I paid nowhere near 60k either. The only difference is I don't own a truck made by a company known for substandard quality control and the absolute love of every auto repair shop on earth. Being the son of a father who own an auto repair business I am thankful for the garbage Chrysler produces as it's added quite a bit of money to my dads business.
So the gas mileage is no better than the previous generation had with a V6 and they made the fuel tank smaller. Doesn't look like I'll be buying a Tacoma, unless I catch a deal on a 2023 before the new model comes out in 2024.
I think with how most people drive, real world MPG will be worse with the new Taco. I had a 2017 and hated the engine/trans combination, so at least the new engine/trans pairing will drive better. But when drivers start getting into some boost the MPG will dive. And the fuel tank being quite a bit smaller will see people really hating the range these get.
Getting into some boost? Umm, its a heavy truck with a small car sized engine, its always needing boost to get out of its own way no matter how you drive these tiny turbo engine equipped vehicles you are always needing boost, and economy plain sucks in them.
@@wildbill23c you make up from the low end torque in these turbo engines with 300lb feet of torque, it is more than many 1 ton trucks had in the 90s and the tacoma is not much smaller than them either minus the dually versions
Makes me feel better about my 2019 Tacoma TRD off-road I averaged 20 to 20.5 mi per gallon and I still have my 20 gallon gas tank and I'll keep my leaf springs because I know I'm not driving a Cadillac I prefer the truck feel.
Turbo technology allows a cheaper engin build and helps meet global socialist emissions futures. Not a win forbthe consumer at all. Buy a older used Tacoma.
These 4 cylinder turbos are a scam. They are getting the same gas mileage as the old V6.. Aluminum hood, tailgate and enormous front air dam to try and eek 1 more mpg. GTF out of here.
I suppose I expected a bit better also. Especially considering the lower speeds that you drove. My 15 Tacoma pretty much matches that in similar driving conditions and that’s with the 4.0 and 5 speed auto. Heck, most of the US is doing 75mph nowadays at a minimum.
@@marcpikas2859 I’m not tracking. What does going that fast have to do with road deaths? The vast majority is cell phone use and a lack of paying attention. Heck some large cities you’re in more danger if you don’t go with the flow of traffic and choose to go slow.
@@marcpikas2859 how’s that? Because we’re free to do that? Heck, in South Dakota and Texas are some of the lowest fatality states yet they have interstates with an 80mph posted speed limit. It’s not like people are trying to go that fast in bad conditions.
That engine compartment is a mess. That little 4 banger and turbo is going to generate a lot of heat. My guess is it will tow like crap. You folks that want a Tacoma better buy a 2023
I’ll keep my 3rd gen. Got an 18 sport fully loaded w 107,000 on it. Been full bolt on and tuned since almost day one. Makes around 330hp at the crank and runs the quarter high 13s. Gets 21-23 consistently on the highway. Usually can do almost 500 miles a tank. I beat the crap out of this truck and not one issue. Couldn’t be happier.
So what was the point of getting rid of the V6. Those mpg numbers are the same, if not worse, than the 3rd Gen.Some 3rd gen owners are getting 23 to 24 mpg's
Is the gas tank comparatively really small? Expected range of only 411 km seems a bit limited to me. Filling up several times a week would be a real pain! Great video gents!
Most people are forgetting that while yes the new engine is smaller and more efficient it is also more powerful than the V6. We wanted more power and better MPG right?.... Not really possible when you consider all the factors ie. weight and so on. So we should be happy we get more power and at least a tiny bit better MPG.
they said they stuffed the 4cyl in everything due to cafe regulations but the MPG is the same, you've been lied to and sold a tacoma with a highlander engine
This is why i sold my 17 tacoma trd 4x4. I was average around 15 mpg with a bit bigger tires and a small lift, plus no power down low. Sold it for a duramax now i got power for days with about the same mpg
Not very impressed. I get about the same on my current 2023 trd off-road that’s all stock. Combined usually ends up right around 12.0 to 12.2 litres per 100km. And highways only if I do the speed limit I can get it down to 10.0 .. sometimes even 9.8 . This new powertrain is hardly an upgrade. Especially when you factor in the higher prices of the new trucks . You pay on average about 3-4 grand more up front for a comparable model on a 4th Gen vs the 3rd Gen. Only getting 1 mpg at best better fuel economy, you’d have to drive that truck for many many years and miles before you started saving money on fuel. And why did they make the tank smaller ? That’s one thing I don’t like about my current Tacoma. Tank is a touch small and limits your range between fill ups . Especially on longer trips . Now they make the engine just barely more efficient, but decrease the fuel tank size 🤦🏻♂️
The only engine that’s actually done well IF you keep your foot out of it is the 2.7 ecoboost. No reason a halfton should get better economy than a midsizer either.
I've owned all of the midsize trucks over the years and what I find so annoying is that prices keep going up, but there are a lot of compromises with these trucks. In this case, the 18 gal fuel tank is an absolute deal breaker for me. I drive A LOT and I refuse to buy any vehicle that I have to fill up every 3 days. That was an unnecessary self-own on Toyota's part, considering my current Frontier P4X has a 21.4 gal tank, which is also too small in my opinion, so 18 gal fuel capacity in any truck is downright stupid.
Any idea if the 4 cylinder turbos are cheaper to manufacture? They aren't helping their epa ratings so I'm guessing they're cheaper to manufacture which is why they're pushing them on us.
I wonder how the fuel in Canada differs from the U.S.? I wonder how those cold temps and weather in Canada affects MPG readings? I'm guessing a guy in the more southern latitudes would see better results.
In the long game, the small displacement - turbo engines will suffer from their greater complexity and higher maintenance costs. Without the upgraded transmissions would any of the new turbo rigs produce a more efficient ride?
You are spot on with your question. No, I don’t think they would be better and possibly they would have worse fuel economy without the new transmission and more importantly the numerically lower rear end ratios. I think it was in a TK video somewhere that they attributed the better fuel economy on the new Tacoma to the more efficient rear end ratio. That ratio is not possible without more gears in the transmission so the two work together.
Can the next video be without the air dam? That will be what real mpg looks like because everyone will be removing that hideous thing once they take delivery. Word on the street says it will lose 4 mpg would be interesting if that is confirmed.
Well! I have a 2019 Honda Ridgeline. I was waiting for the new Tacoma . But! Fuel economie is the same to my Ridgeline. Power is abouth the same & i'm not someone that goes off road. So! I gues i'l keep my Ridgeline. But! Dont get me wrong. The Tacoma is a beautifull truck & will probly keeps its value more then the Ridgeline.
