Cruiser guy with Tacoma questions
- Thread starter 40tude
- Start date
tanglefoot
ExPoseur
The manual transmissions are usually more reliable and need less attention to keep them going. They also make better use of the available power. Fuel economy will likely be very close between the two. For 1st-gen 4wd Tacomas with the 2.7L, the estimate is 18 mpg combined for both transmissions, but the manual trans has one extra mpg (20 vs 19) on the highway than the auto (fueleconomy.gov).
If you already have a capable 4wd, why not daily drive a car instead of a truck? For getting from place to place on the road, I much prefer a car. The comfort, maneuverability, and cost of operation are so much better. Front-wheel-drive compacts with manual transmissions are my personal favorites.
If you already have a capable 4wd, why not daily drive a car instead of a truck? For getting from place to place on the road, I much prefer a car. The comfort, maneuverability, and cost of operation are so much better. Front-wheel-drive compacts with manual transmissions are my personal favorites.
Last edited:
surlydiesel
Adventurer
Having owned 3, 4 bangers with 5spds, I wouldn't even think about an auto. The 5spd is "peppy" but by no means fast and I couldn't imagine how slow it would be behind an auto. Someone will chime in with an Auto I hope but my 2cents is get the manual. Oh and if you don't need a 4X4 the 2wd 5 lug trucks get awesome gas milage by my standards. 26mpg on the highway is what I read about regularly. Put in a rear traction device and they will go lots o places you shouldn't be with em.
I get between 19 and 22 in my reg cab 4X4 with a few hundred pounds of gear, E rated tires and roof rack bars that are normally without accessories, unless on a trip.
Fun little trucks.
-jorge
I get between 19 and 22 in my reg cab 4X4 with a few hundred pounds of gear, E rated tires and roof rack bars that are normally without accessories, unless on a trip.
Fun little trucks.
-jorge
Prjktjho
New member
I have a 12' RC in automatic and for lack of better terms, it is slow. My friend has a 5speed and it does seem like it has a little more "go" to it. I'm not a fast paced guy so it works for me. With 235-85-16's, I get about 21mpg combined. I'm sure 1st gen trucks will compare similarly.
WAND3R3R
Adventurer
40tude, I have a 2013 access cab, Tacoma T/X TRD. I drove from Central Kentucky to Sarasota, Fl this week and with my truck loaded with lots of camping gear and a hardtop ARE cap, I got 20 MPG. I drove 65 pretty much the entire trip when on the freeway. Hope this helps with your question about Tacomas and MPG.
-AK
-AK
Box Rocket
Well-known member
I've got an 80 and a Tacoma with a V6 and automatic trans. I really don't know why the automatics get such a bad rap. I have no problems with mine and even with large tires, stock gearing and lots of other weight the Tacoma feels plenty "zippy", much more than my 80 does. It could be the combination of the auto behind a 4cyl. I'm sure that wouldn't be great since the 4cyl are down on power anyway and losing some through the automatic probably makes them feel very slow. But to me its a very different thing with the V6.
The V6 has a better reputation for reliability and in my mind that makes it much more desireable than the 4cyl. Any slight drop in mpg with the V6 are worth it for the extra power and reliability.
The V6 has a better reputation for reliability and in my mind that makes it much more desireable than the 4cyl. Any slight drop in mpg with the V6 are worth it for the extra power and reliability.
tanglefoot
ExPoseur
The 2wd does do a good chunk better on mpg than the 4wd. In the 1st gen, it has the smaller-displacement 2R-Z 2.4L (vs the 2.7L 3R-Z in the 4wd), less weight, lower rolling resistance and better aerodynamics.
This was my solution to wanting a truck bed:
This was my solution to wanting a truck bed:
surlydiesel
Adventurer
Yep. Huge amount of mpg gain with the 2wd 5 lug trucks. Not so much the "prerunner" trucks but low to the ground (more aerodynamic), lighter as was stated above, smaller tires, smaller motor and a good deal of fun to drift. Always reminds me of my old Volvo 240...
I'd love to have a 2wd yota for a commuter. I would put in a mechanical rear traction aide though.
-jorge
I'd love to have a 2wd yota for a commuter. I would put in a mechanical rear traction aide though.
-jorge
Revco
Adventurer
2001 Reg Cab Tacoma 3RZFE 4cyl 5-spd 4x4 with 265/75/16 AT's on steel wheels and 4.30 gears, I average 20mpg city/highway and get ~320 miles to a tank of fuel. I started running mid-grade fuel recently to cure a slight detonation, which seems to have helped the mpg a little bit.
Flagster
Expedition Leader
x2 from an 80 series and 2nd gen tacoma owner...
My auto has been great for almost 100K...seems to like shifting from 5th to 3rd a lot in the hills when you are in cruise control but you get used to that
At least in the early 2nd gen tacomas the autos proved to be much more reliable than the 6 speeds...don't know about the later trucks after 2012...
eblau
Adventurer
I've had a 2wd 2RZ Taco and a 4WD 3RZ taco, both with manual transmissions. The 2wd was a basic single cab and had decent passing/ accel. power (its light duh). The 4wd was a dog and got even worse after the obligatory tire upgrade 265/75/16 AT's. If I were to get another Taco it would be a V6 with a manual trans. End of story. I'll take the hit on MPG to be able to cruise at 80mph and pass trucks without downshifting to 3rd. I couldn't imagine living at higher elevations with either of those 4cyl.'s That being said the 2RZ/ 3RZ family of engines are absolute tanks reliability wise and have enough power for any sort of low speed offroad terrain you could throw at it (assuming its geared correctly)
Similar threads
