Tacoma Confessions

[Jacket]

Jestem w Polsce.

Fun flashback. Looks like Lockhart and Beef Basin.

The Tacoma was a lot of fun. The biggest trade off is the truck bed. It's really nice for packing storage space, flexibility (with the soft shell) for hauling motorcycles or other dirty stuff, and weight reduction. But the wagon makes bags/gear/boots/food much more accessible inside the cabin, and offers a lot more security on long trips in and out of town. Plus if you have 100 lb dog and 2 kids, the Tacoma doesn't really handle that mix well.

The 80 isn't actually flush with leg room in the second row, especially when I sit with the chair all the way back. But otherwise it feels more roomy than the 2nd row of the Tacoma.

I don't really know what the right answer is - maybe having one of each?

 

[Caribou Sandstorm]

Jestem w Polsce.

Fun flashback. Looks like Lockhart and Beef Basin.

The Tacoma was a lot of fun. The biggest trade off is the truck bed. It's really nice for packing storage space, flexibility (with the soft shell) for hauling motorcycles or other dirty stuff, and weight reduction. But the wagon makes bags/gear/boots/food much more accessible inside the cabin, and offers a lot more security on long trips in and out of town. Plus if you have 100 lb dog and 2 kids, the Tacoma doesn't really handle that mix well.

The 80 isn't actually flush with leg room in the second row, especially when I sit with the chair all the way back. But otherwise it feels more roomy than the 2nd row of the Tacoma.

I don't really know what the right answer is - maybe having one of each?

That is where I am leaning.. The back of the 3rd gen Taco might be slightly bigger than a 2nd Gen. but keeping my 100, gives us options. The 100 has the DVD player anyway and is a fan favorite..

Ben is weighing in at 75 lbs now so 5 more lbs and he can sit in the front seat, also giving more room to the back. I am not going to put the seat back very far anyway.

Lucky for me, Melinda is happy to drive a 100 series as a townie and may be our family desert trip rig.

The Taco would by my DD and guy trip desert rig. Plus all the utility of a pick up truck bed.

Heading to the Denver Car Show today with Barry at 3pm to check it out!!

http://denverautoshow.com

 

[DaveInDenver]

The back of the 3rd gen Taco might be slightly bigger than a 2nd Gen.

The 3rd gen bed is essentially the same as the 2nd gen. One significant change is Toyota removed the silly uneven transition from the bed sides to the bed front wall. On 2005-2015 trucks there is a slight drop across the front and now it's like 97% of other trucks ever made and is flat across the rails to the front wall.

This is for the Double Cab.

2nd gen:
A - 25"
B - 60.3"
C - 41.5"
D - 56.7"
Bed Wall Depth - 18.0"

3rd gen:
A - 25"
B - 60.5"
C - 42"
D - 52.5"
Bed Wall Depth - 19.0"

 

[Caribou Sandstorm]

Dave thanks for the measurements!!

I was thinking "back" meaning back seat. What do you know about the interior differences with the 2nd and 3rd. Maybe the same? Maybe just the outer body is wider?

 

[DaveInDenver]

Dave thanks for the measurements!!

I was thinking "back" meaning back seat. What do you know about the interior differences with the 2nd and 3rd. Maybe the same? Maybe just the outer body is wider?

Double Cab, Short Bed:

2nd gen
WB: 127.8"
Length: 208.1"
Width: 74.6"
Height: 70.1"
Track: 63.0"FR, 63.4"RR
Turn Radius: 40.7'
Ground Clearance: 9.5" FR, 9.4"RR
Approach/Depature/Breakover: 35/26/21
Curb Weight: 4090 lbs
Head room: 40.1"/38.5"
Hip room: 53.6"/55.2"
Leg room: 41.7"/32.6"
Shoulder room: 57.7"/59.3"
Interior passenger volume (cu. ft., behind front/rear seat): 55.8/43.1


3rd gen:
WB: 127.4"
Length: 212.3"
Width: 74.4"
Height: 70.6"
Track: 63.0"FR, 63.2"RR
Turn Radius: 40.6'
Ground Clearance: 9.4"
Approach/Depature/Breakover: 29/23.5/21
Curb Weight: 4425 lbs
Head room: 39.7"/38.3"
Hip room: 57.2"/56.3"
Leg room: 42.9"/32.6"
Shoulder room: 58.3"/58.9"
Interior passenger volume (cu. ft., behind front/rear seat): 57.5/42.6

 

[DaveInDenver]

I haven't compared our Tacoma measurements to Imelda's, but the driver's seat positions does feel a little cramped. It looks like Toyota bumped it up a little, which is good. But I bet they just shrunk the center console a little and one of my middle-term goals is to remove all that plastic and put in a Tuffy, which would give some leg & hip room for sure. Stated volume inside isn't much different.

Otherwise, it looks like the basic truck hasn't changed much, track width, turn radius, wheelbase, length, breakover, etc. The body obviously has which is indicated in the clear differences in approach and departure angles and overall length. Pictures of the truck show there is a lot more room in front of the radiator than in the current truck, which isn't really all that tight.

 

[Caribou Sandstorm]

I haven't compared our Tacoma measurements to Imelda's, but the driver's seat positions does feel a little cramped. It looks like Toyota bumped it up a little, which is good. But I bet they just shrunk the center console a little and one of my middle-term goals is to remove all that plastic and put in a Tuffy, which would give some leg & hip room for sure. Stated volume inside isn't much different.

Otherwise, it looks like the basic truck hasn't changed much, track width, turn radius, wheelbase, length, breakover, etc. The body obviously has which is indicated in the clear differences in approach and departure angles and overall length. Pictures of the truck show there is a lot more room in front of the radiator than in the current truck, which isn't really all that tight.

Yep Barry and I noticed that room in the front end yesterday. Looks like you could easily place a Winch in there and mount a plate to handle the winch, would not take much to link plate to frame, is my guess.

They did not have the 2017 TRD Pro there, so that was a bummer.

Overall I was not that impressed with the show. Probably won't go again any time soon.

I am definitely leaning back toward the short bed though, the long bed wheel base is too long. Not worth the extra foot of truck bed to sacrifice that much increase in wheel base.

 

[DaveInDenver]

Yep Barry and I noticed that room in the front end yesterday. Looks like you could easily place a Winch in there and mount a plate to handle the winch, would not take much to link plate to frame, is my guess.

They did not have the 2017 TRD Pro there, so that was a bummer.

Overall I was not that impressed with the show. Probably won't go again any time soon.

I am definitely leaning back toward the short bed though, the long bed wheel base is too long. Not worth the extra foot of truck bed to sacrifice that much increase in wheel base.

The DCLB is a battleship, isn't it? The 127" wheelbase (Access Cab, DCSB) is already pretty long, plan on multi-point turns, but the extra foot of wheelbase and 3+ feet of turning circle makes the Double Cab with a 6' bed r-e-a-l-l-y long.

 

[Corbet]

I confess if I could get this same rig a mate of mine picked up in AU I'd be all in. Here is his new bush rig. Not sure what plans he has for mods.

 

[powderpig]

So this thread got me thinking about a new truck as well. With my VW still up in the air as to what will happen. I was seeing some real interesting ideas popping in my head for the lite weight pop up camper on a small pick up. While I did test drive a few vehicles this weekend. The most impressive one was the Baby Dmax 4 door Colorado. I did drive a Taco, and the Tundra as well. Then Robin and I went to State 38 distillery(organic mescal, yum yum).
I know it is not a Toyota, but for the same money(all were with in 2500 of each other, Tundra being the most).
The 4 door was a real solid rig, felt like it was a bit bigger in the cab(I did not need to duck to get in the door, and I am not really that tall). Seats were better for my body, amenities were above the tacoma's that I looked at(TRD level trim vs Z71). Fit and finish were nice. over all truck had a nice feel to it.
Looking under the body(yes, I did crawl around under it), parts seemed beefy enough.
But the nice thing for me to see, was the Isuzu 4 banger under the hood. That little engine did move the truck along quite well. It did not sound overly loud, even under the light stress of going 80 up Floyd hill, While it did not have super quick acceleration, it did move well.
The 6 speed auto shifted well, and smoothly. Down shifted well. Even it Tow haul mode.
While we did not have a need to play with the Exhaust brake, I can only image how well it can control the pay load it can haul. And it has a integrated brake controller as well(like the tundra, and not the tacoma).
This is the truck that Toyota needs to be bringing in to our market, There is already a Colorado aftermarket following for this rig(Icon has a lift for it), there is a company that a second turbo kit for it to make it go from 181 HP and 364lbft torque to 240 hp and 420 torque(the even had a 10k lb sled to pull behind it with out issues or getting the EGT about 1200 degrees, which is impressive, tranny temps were approaching 180 which is close to the 200 max). With a little time, tuners will have this figured out to get both better HP/Torque numbers as well as fuel ecomany out of this rig.
Anyhow, options are popping up for all sorts of cool stuff coming out of the Corporate wars for selling one a new product. I can see in the future a little pick up, with a pop up camper just for what you state Chris, those quick fun trips out into the desert or other places. While I will never give up my cruiser, I may just find the coin to get the Dmax and set it up for those longer trips(especially now that Ty is 15 and with a learner permit. Co pilot for those road trips), and with fuel effiency of the Diesel power plant ( i have even seen a extended range fuel tank for the Colorado with a 34 gallon capacity).

 

[DaveInDenver]

Hopefully the Colorado sells in enough numbers for other companies to notice and there's enough of them used in 10 or 15 years when we're looking at planned replacement our Taco. But Toyota NA is pretty set on hybrids and Mike Sweers has said many times with little wiggle room that they are not going to make a diesel Tacoma. It's hard to imagine Toyota not hearing the constant yipping of bringing in some of their danged D-4Ds for the economy. Which is the real sticking point, they can't bring in the world engines since they won't meet the EPA Tier III rules. So they'd have to develop a US-specific line of small diesels and that's just not financially viable. It would the VW TDI situation.

http://www.torquenews.com/1083/toyota-explains-why-there-no-2016-diesel-tacoma-coming

On the slide-in camper, one thing to watch is your GVWR. It's a technicality, but you'll almost definitely exceed the Tacoma's ratings with them. Adding springs obviously helps and the brakes are probably sufficient. Not sure the frame is built to take it long term. Somebody needs to make frame plates for the 2nd gen Tacoma like they do for the 1st gen to beef it up. In any case, the book on my 2008 gives an effective cargo payload of about 980 lbs (5,450 GVWR - 4,470 lbs fully fueled and just me, although I did have some recovery gear in it at the time).

A Four Wheel Fleet is 845 lbs dry. So add a second passenger, sliders, bumper maybe, fridge, second battery, food, dog. You'll easily exceed the GVWR by 350 or 400 lbs without even trying.

 

[powderpig]

Well if Toyota wants to stay with diesel in Europe after this following year(2017 ) it will need to be at the same level of emissions rating as our 2017 EPA requirements(from what I have read anyhow).
One can then see it will be not that great of a leap to bring in Diesels for NA, if they meet those Euro requirements. Or is Toyota going to pull out a huge market for Diesel powered vehicles in the EU(which they have a good size market)?
I do hope something happens to compel them to go to Diesel. The modern diesels are wondering balance of many attributes that many of us want. Power, performance, and fuel economy.

 

[DaveInDenver]

There are significant differences in how Europe and the U.S. classify and test vehicles.

For one thing Europe recognizes diesel (Euro 4-D and Euro 5-D) and gasoline (Euro 4-G and Euro 5-G) as distinct. That's mainly why Toyota doesn't want to deal with EPA Tier III here, you have to make your diesel engine produce the same emissions as gasoline. This particularly is very tough with NOx, which will always be an issue with diesel and ultimately what VW got caught exceeding. The Euro NEDC test cycle has for a long time favored diesel because of this while being tougher on gasoline, which isn't the case with the EPA FTP-75 (which is what caught VW). Both Tier II and Tier III EPA rules are generally still more strict than both Euro 6-G and Euro 6-D, particularly with NOx.

European emissions are done by vehicle, as such a medium or light duty truck doesn't impact a passenger car in a brand offering. Here emissions and fuel economy are done corporate wide. For example, CAFE drove Ford to ditch the Ranger and put all their eggs in the F150. So one vehicle impacts the fleet average while the Euro technique of per-vehicle standards means if you're willing to accept whatever limitations (and costs) associated with a particular vehicle then a manufacturer will probably offer it. This is also why they have so many different options in different countries, having a small production of niche vehicles isn't a downside corporate-wide, e.g. why Toyota can sell all the different Cruisers alongside Hilux in most places. One does not impact the other. There are other reasons besides fuel economy and emissions keeping them out of the U.S., like crash testing. But all the barriers just compound so that it's just not economically viable.

 

[DaveInDenver]

Comparison of standards, mainly related to NMHC/NMOG (Nonmethane Hydrocarbons/Organic Gases) and NOx.

 

[AxleIke]

I can tell you that my folks love their 2004 ext cab taco with a 4WC for the exact reasons you state Robbie, but also for more.

They can get out camping much faster as its just a matter of putting food in the fridge and filling up the water. Its got solar and a plug, so batteries stay pretty topped up. Plug in while you are loading and its good to go.

They also use it in the winter to go skiing: drive up, camp on a side road or lot, and then first on the slopes. They've taken it up to Canada and had a blast camping in the cold at Bamf, because its nice and warm.

Very fun combo. Not as easy to pop in and out (to use the truck bed) as they would like, but some sort of back up camera system might help with that (on the bed sides or cab corners, just temporary to get it in).

 

[powderpig]

Isaac< Robin and I are planning ahead in the coming years. Ty will be out of school in 3 years, and more than likely headed some place else besides here for college. Robin and I do want to ski and were thinking the same thing about camping out near the resorts and not having to be on the rat race of the crawl in the winter. And yes, we to want to travel thru Canada and into Alaska. What better way to do it with out laying on the ground all the time. Any how, we are getting into the middle ages and want a little more comfort as well. Those little campers offer a lot, in a compact space.
Anyhow, while this will not be a hard core rig, it can go places that other will not.
And you mention Banf, That is one of the places that is on Robin's Bucket list to visit and ski.
Yes, Isaac, some more of the reasons to look at this more seriously.

 

[subzali]

Robbie, make sure to ski Lake Louise. I had to choose between Banff and Lake Louise and chose the latter. I was not disappointed. Wish I could have done Banff too but that will have to be another trip. And don't be surprised that their opening dates are later than ours. I skied in the middle of December and was hitting rocks the whole day. Kicking Horse required a lift down the lower half of the mountain. Plan your trip for late December or after.

 

[AxleIke]

Yes, the capability is really the nice thing for these. He's taken it several places in Utah, as well as up to Baldwin Lakes, which isn't super technical, but quite rough.

Its no rockcrawler as you say, but you can camp in comfort lots of places where others aren't.

The key for the rougher stuff is being able to go slower. With the auto, not so much an issue. My dad's is a manual, and he could benefit from lower gears of some form or another.

If and when you think about getting something, we should chat. I modified my Dad's Taco bed to handle the camper on the rough stuff. He had it installed at 4WC, and they just used large eyebolts and thick fender washers, which ultimately bent and ripped the bed. Its very well plated now, LOL.

 

[Caribou Sandstorm]

https://youtu.be/jbmOYTMirrw

1st Gen-2nd Gen-3rd Gen Tacoma comparison

 

[DaveInDenver]

https://youtu.be/jbmOYTMirrw

1st Gen-2nd Gen-3rd Gen Tacoma comparison

Their MPG math is jacked. They showed 4.397 gallons for the 2nd gen and 4.406 gallons for the 3rd, which they said was run on a 98 mile loop. That means the 2nd gen was 22.29 MPG, not 20.73 that he shows. Also interesting that the 2nd gen was quite a bit faster, although that's not a real surprise since the 2GR-FKS makes torque much higher in the RPM band than the 1GR-FE does. The 3.5L torque peak is 4600 RPM vs 3700 in the 4.0L. Otherwise a pretty dull show, they didn't really discuss the similarities and differences in any meaningful way. Honestly the only thing I saw that I didn't know was the way the tailgate is damped on the 3rd gen, that's pretty slick to keep it from dropping.