Topic: Test Drive: 2013 Toyota Tacoma 4x4 DoubleCab V6

[Vanstar]

I have two nephews and one friend who drive this exact same truck. They are all extreme outdoor types and they swear by the Tacos. All bought them used and although this was a money-saver, resale is very high on these units.

The fuel consumption in this report was in winter with a tight motor. My friend says he averages 13.5 L /100 km in Vancouver traffic, not bad for a vehicle of this weight.

[Fobroader]

I have two nephews and one friend who drive this exact same truck. They are all extreme outdoor types and they swear by the Tacos. All bought them used and although this was a money-saver, resale is very high on these units.

The fuel consumption in this report was in winter with a tight motor. My friend says he averages 13.5 L /100 km in Vancouver traffic, not bad for a vehicle of this weight.

The Taco is the only pickup that will take a real pounding offroad, also the aftermarket to make them really capable is huge. I agree, if you have to get a small truck, get a used Taco.....new.....I dont know.

[OliverD]

Unfortunately, I think it's pretty much impossible to profitably sell a modern compact truck at that price point.

Depends on what your definition of a "modern" truck is?   

2WD with some type of traction control, 4 cyl, cab and a half, made in Mexico.  I don't see the problem for 22K.

Well sure, base price of a Tacoma AccessCab 2wd is just over $22k (before freight). But we were talking about 4x4s.

[SaskSpecV]

I honestly think there has either got to be a huge price difference or a major gain in fuel mileage for these mini trucks to become real players on the truck market.

No, I don't think there has to be a "huge" difference in price OR mileage for compact/midsize trucks to be competitive with full-size trucks. Some folks JUST DON'T WANT a full size behemoth of a truck, and would happily buy an equivalent midsize instead - even if it was the same price as a half-ton, and the mileage was comparable.  Just the fact that a midsize truck is a more manageable size could sway a lot of buyers who need some utitlity, but not full-size capability. 

But the problem is that those full size behemoths have all the latest technology, most advanced powertrains, most configuration options, and are priced competitively against each other.  The midsizers have no competition and thus no incentive to improve.  Frontier? Ridgeline (not even a real BOF truck)? GM debacles?  No Ranger? No Dakota?  As AS pointed out, Toyota is happy gouging the Taco fans as long as they have nowhere else to go. 

So your choice is to take an old-tech, unrefined, outdated, overpriced midsize truck (that would otherwise meet your needs nicely), or a much more current, competitively priced full size truck that is larger than what you would like.  It doesn't mean that there's no market out there for compact/midsize trucks - but the market for overpriced, outdated small trucks is justifiably small!

[Fobroader]

So if someone offers you two vehicles, one is smaller, less capable, uses quite a bit of fuel and you cant get any modern features on it you would take it for the sake of a couple of feet of length?? I know 2 small truck owners, one has a Taco/one had a Frontier. The Taco guy has been kicking himself for the last 3 years for not buying a 1/2 ton, the Frontier guy traded it in for a Tahoe because the Frontier guzzled gas and couldnt haul his Supra. The both payed high $30's for their trucks and ended up with huge buyers remorse. Now, if they had payed lets say $10K less, im sure that they could have lived their decisions a lot better. Im not saying they arent both numpties for buying the wrong vehicle........

[dkaz]

If I could get an F-150 or Tundra with a manual, it'd be a no brainer. I'm probably never going to hardcore offroad and I'll need to haul material around for work.

[Fobroader]

And you can't get the CrewCab in Ecoboost. 

That's odd bc Ford sold one to me.  Methinks you know not what you post about.

I thought you cant get the Ecoboost in regular cab but the extra cab and crew cab are available.

[Solstice2006]

Compared to a full size truck the Tacoma costs more, tows less, hauls less, offers less passenger comfort (what with those go-kart like seats and all) and burns more fuel (or at least no less).  Given its proven reliability, you can regret not having bought a full size for a long time to come. 

I am not all hung up on the "bigger is necessarily better" philosophy, but the Tacoma offers but few comparative advantages.

How does the Tacoma cost more compared to full size trucks?  Are you talking used?  The Tacoma 4x4 Double Cab V6 starts at $30,000, the Ford F-150 CrewCab 4x4 starts at $40,000.  And according to many websites, the Tacoma  burns at least 15% less (not stellar, but still a fact)than any V8, and probably about 10% less than the real world fuel economy of the ecoboost.  And its supposed to tow less.  Unless your over 6' and 250lbs, the seats are just as comfortable as any other light duty truck.  I find sitting in a full size truck I can't see around as well, sitting too high, and loading is a pain in the butt.

I do wish the Tacoma diesel was offered here, but given Toyota is stuck on this hybrid mission, a diesel in the showroom would never work here.

MSRP means nothing in the full size segment.  Ford, GM and Dodge heavily discount.  Further, the dealers (at least in the GTA) are incentivized to slash even more off the already incentivized price. 

Also, I am not sure from where you are drawing you data re the Ecoboost.  I own one and easily achieve better fuel economy than what people are reporting here with the Tacoma.

Re comfort, I am over 6' and nowhere near 250 lbs (160 actually due to excessive running).  Even I find the Tacoma seating position tedious b/c the seats are too close to the floor.

None of which is meant to say that there is nothing going for the Tacoma.  I just think it is fairly described as having a niche appeal.

MSRP means nothing in the fullsize?  So I guess the fullsize trucks aren't the only ones that are overpriced?  People are saying the midsizes are too expensive, because the fullsize segment takes $5000-$8000 off the MSRP.  Yet Toyota doesn't have to take much off to sell the Tacoma.  That's business, and probably why they have no reason to change it. 

Regarding comfort, your over 6', what do you expect, how comfortable are you in a Focus.  Same scenario.  Just like the rear cab is going to be tighter than a full size.  Still hell of a lot better than the Ranger, and the Colorado.  Not the Dakota, it was a bigger truck. 

As for fuel economy, the EPA shows the Tacoma as more fuel effficient than the Ecoboost.  And it has comments from owners just like you.  And you can't get the CrewCab in Ecoboost. 

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32124&id=31853

I wonder if I will get more smites than when I comment on large suv's, and back up cameras.....

I am always amazed , that people who never drive trucks always know the most about them 

I read about trucks, discover the facts, and know not to buy them.  Unless it was a need, but not to tow something 3-4 times a year

[Solstice2006]

And you can't get the CrewCab in Ecoboost. 

That's odd bc Ford sold one to me.  Methinks you know not what you post about.

Well I apologize if there was an error in the post regarding the ecoboost in the crewcab, the ford website kept upgrading me to the  v8 everytime I hit crewcab.  No need to be rude.

[SaskSpecV]

So if someone offers you two vehicles, one is smaller, less capable, uses quite a bit of fuel and you cant get any modern features on it you would take it for the sake of a couple of feet of length??

Agreed, the current midsize trucks aren't a good option for most people - but it doesn't mean the midsize trucks are inherently a bad choice. But when the MNFRs haven't updated or refined the midsize trucks in nearly a decade, and still charge premium prices for such outdated models, the choice is pretty easy.  I'm saying that there's still a large market for good midsize trucks in North America - but not midsize trucks that are well past their best-before date! (and grossly overpriced too)

[Ex-airbalancer]

And you can't get the CrewCab in Ecoboost. 

That's odd bc Ford sold one to me.  Methinks you know not what you post about.

Well I apologize if there was an error in the post regarding the ecoboost in the crewcab, the ford website kept upgrading me to the  v8 everytime I hit crewcab.  No need to be rude.

As much as I don't want to further any rudeness, even that post just reinforces that you really are out of your element in a truck thread.  The 5.0 is not the "upgrade" but rather the Ecoboost.

I read about trucks, discover the facts

Come on AP,  he reads, no point in using one daily to get information , if he reads about it 

[Solstice2006]

And you can't get the CrewCab in Ecoboost. 

That's odd bc Ford sold one to me.  Methinks you know not what you post about.

Well I apologize if there was an error in the post regarding the ecoboost in the crewcab, the ford website kept upgrading me to the  v8 everytime I hit crewcab.  No need to be rude.

As much as I don't want to further any rudeness, even that post just reinforces that you really are out of your element in a truck thread.  The 5.0 is not the "upgrade" but rather the Ecoboost.

Upgrade was a poor choice of words, the selection of v6 was not available. You testy fullsize truck owners.  Must be the $1.34 a litre that has you guys so steamed.  And your right, any turbo from Ford is not an upgrade, just some BS marketing!    

[Solstice2006]

And you can't get the CrewCab in Ecoboost. 

That's odd bc Ford sold one to me.  Methinks you know not what you post about.

Well I apologize if there was an error in the post regarding the ecoboost in the crewcab, the ford website kept upgrading me to the  v8 everytime I hit crewcab.  No need to be rude.

As much as I don't want to further any rudeness, even that post just reinforces that you really are out of your element in a truck thread.  The 5.0 is not the "upgrade" but rather the Ecoboost.

I read about trucks, discover the facts

Come on AP,  he reads, no point in using one daily to get information , if he reads about it 

I have read the statement over and over, it makes no sense.  What is the point? I supposed your saying that since I don't own a truck, I don't deserve to have an opinion, and that any statements like fuel economy on small trucks vs full trucks have no merit, because I don't own one.  And that I may have made a mistake, not exactly my fault the shitty Ford site doesn't easily configure the CrewCab with the turbo V6, when I thought only the V8 was available.  And that I happen to think (not the only one here) there is a market for small trucks, they just need to be updated like fullsize trucks are, and other car segments.  And again, not the only here, find the Tacoma comfortable, but hey I am not over 6', so that isn't an issue for me, and several others. 

[nlm]

I note, though, that I paid in the range of $26k for my 2011 F150 Supercrew XLT 4x4 Ecoboost (with back up camera and tow package).  That is $4k less than the Frontier, even with the cash incentive to which you referred.  The mid-size trucks would need a much bigger incentive to attract a buyer sharing my profile.

That's a pretty good price. Cash deal? Part of a fleet purchase? When I was looking, the 2011 XTR SuperCab, 4x4, MaxTow, Eco and tailgate steps was offered at $38k and terrible financing rates. They wouldn't budge on price or rates only saying that their customers go get their own financing. The guy wasn't movtivated to make a sale anyways, which kinda pissed us off so left and ended up buying at GM.

[Snowman]

Compared to a full size truck the Tacoma costs more, tows less, hauls less, offers less passenger comfort (what with those go-kart like seats and all) and burns more fuel (or at least no less).  Given its proven reliability, you can regret not having bought a full size for a long time to come. 

I am not all hung up on the "bigger is necessarily better" philosophy, but the Tacoma offers but few comparative advantages.

How does the Tacoma cost more compared to full size trucks?  Are you talking used?  The Tacoma 4x4 Double Cab V6 starts at $30,000, the Ford F-150 CrewCab 4x4 starts at $40,000.  And according to many websites, the Tacoma  burns at least 15% less (not stellar, but still a fact)than any V8, and probably about 10% less than the real world fuel economy of the ecoboost.  And its supposed to tow less.  Unless your over 6' and 250lbs, the seats are just as comfortable as any other light duty truck.  I find sitting in a full size truck I can't see around as well, sitting too high, and loading is a pain in the butt.

I do wish the Tacoma diesel was offered here, but given Toyota is stuck on this hybrid mission, a diesel in the showroom would never work here.

MSRP means nothing in the full size segment.  Ford, GM and Dodge heavily discount.  Further, the dealers (at least in the GTA) are incentivized to slash even more off the already incentivized price. 

Also, I am not sure from where you are drawing you data re the Ecoboost.  I own one and easily achieve better fuel economy than what people are reporting here with the Tacoma.

Re comfort, I am over 6' and nowhere near 250 lbs (160 actually due to excessive running).  Even I find the Tacoma seating position tedious b/c the seats are too close to the floor.

None of which is meant to say that there is nothing going for the Tacoma.  I just think it is fairly described as having a niche appeal.

MSRP means nothing in the fullsize?  So I guess the fullsize trucks aren't the only ones that are overpriced?  People are saying the midsizes are too expensive, because the fullsize segment takes $5000-$8000 off the MSRP.  Yet Toyota doesn't have to take much off to sell the Tacoma.  That's business, and probably why they have no reason to change it. 

Regarding comfort, your over 6', what do you expect, how comfortable are you in a Focus.  Same scenario.  Just like the rear cab is going to be tighter than a full size.  Still hell of a lot better than the Ranger, and the Colorado.  Not the Dakota, it was a bigger truck. 

As for fuel economy, the EPA shows the Tacoma as more fuel effficient than the Ecoboost.  And it has comments from owners just like you.  And you can't get the CrewCab in Ecoboost. 

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32124&id=31853

I wonder if I will get more smites than when I comment on large suv's, and back up cameras.....

I am always amazed , that people who never drive trucks always know the most about them 

 

[pcsp]

The problem with Toyota basically saying "take it or leave it" regarding the Tacoma, is that this blemish hurts their brand in NA. Do most consumers associate Toyota with old technology, inefficient packaging, borderline comfort, and awful fuel mileage? Probably not, but this vehicle is doing a  lot to change that perception. I actually owned a 1992 3.0 V6 Toyota pickup and it enlightened me as to how bad even Toyotas could be on fuel. 20 years later the Tacoma appears to achieve about the same results. Toyota could do so much better. I know I'm not the only one waiting for a true compact pickup (190" in length), manual tranny, diesel, and decent creature comforts. I'm not, however, holding my breath. The mini-truck is dead in NA - long live the mini-truck.

[dkaz]

Toyota's V6s have always been gas guzzlers. My brother had an early 90s Camry V6 for his first car and boy did that car move... from gas station to gas station.

[nlm]

Toyota's V6s have always been gas guzzlers. My brother had an early 90s Camry V6 for his first car and boy did that car move... from gas station to gas station.

Their 3.5L in Camry and Venza spec seems to get good gov't ratings though?

[Vanstar]

Toyota's V6s have always been gas guzzlers. My brother had an early 90s Camry V6 for his first car and boy did that car move... from gas station to gas station.

Their 3.5L in Camry and Venza spec seems to get good gov't ratings though?

The level of  technology has improved quite a bit in the last two decades, not just for Toyota but for all brands.

[OliverD]

The problem with Toyota basically saying "take it or leave it" regarding the Tacoma, is that this blemish hurts their brand in NA. Do most consumers associate Toyota with old technology, inefficient packaging, borderline comfort, and awful fuel mileage? Probably not, but this vehicle is doing a  lot to change that perception.

Does it really hurt them though? The Tacoma has a relatively high MSRP, sells with few discounts, and has outrageous resale values. Doesn't seem like it is hurting them too much.

Besides, it's still tied with Nissan for offering the newest design in the segment despite the fact that the current Tacoma is in its eighth model year. This segment simply isn't competitive. A few years ago Dodge/Ram, Ford, Mazda, Suzuki, Chevrolet, and GMC all had compact/midsize trucks. Those have all disappeared.