Clutch
<---Pass
^^^this^^^
Full size crew (short bed) vs. Tacoma Double cab
- Thread starter hikingff77
- Start date
^^^this^^^
Plannerman
Wandering Explorer
You know, these threads of "x" vs. "y" would be a whole more productive if the two vehicles being compared were listed by specs only, not name or brand. For example: I'm trying to decide between a full-size truck with such and such dimensions, weight and passeneger carrying capacity, and trailering capacity... And a mid size with truck such and such dimensions, etc, etc.
Once brand gets mention, all rationale thought seems to evaporate.
Once brand gets mention, all rationale thought seems to evaporate.
Except my Silverado has been more reliable than several Toyotas, is more capable and gets better gas mileage and that seems to be the norm.
What I'm saying is if a full size is just as reliable, can haul more, cost less, get better mpg than the mid sized then why bother with the mid sized regardless of brand then I gave en example of a full size model/brand and a mid sized model/brand to illustrate that.
I get asked this a lot at work when co-workers are showing off their new toyota midsized 2wd v6 that gets 19mpg highway and ask why would anyone buy a Chevy. I asked them why my full sized v8 got 21 before I changed things. I ask why they are spending $1500 on repairs on a 5 year old Toyota when my truck is 10 years old and hasn't needed anything more than a $150 starter and a $50 wheel bearing and theirs has never left the pavement.
The older toyotas may have been better but they all rusted out so you can't find any to compare but you can drive down any country road and find Chevy/Ford/Dodge still going so you can't find any older long lasting toyotas.
Last edited:
Been waiting to reply to this topic, so to mirror all of the relevant replies saying if you need the room, power, etc, get the full size.
As to eugene's reply, LMFTFY,
Yes. As in my 4Runner got 12-16, the FJ-C similar, and the Taco 14-17, but without the bedcage/etc. so in my eyes it was a wash and met the other two. The Ram, 16 city, 21-25 hwy, averaging 15 in stop and go lately. **Yes, all my rigs are daily drivers also.
I've been through GM's, Toyota's, and now Ram (Mopars). Mopar so far is mirroring my experience with my 90's GM's, which include my S-10 SCLB built for Baja trips. I beat the living snot out of them and the Toyota's always seem to need repairs here and there that nickel and dime you, same was true with my Tacoma DCSB and FJ-C loaners, whether it was driveshafts, timing belts (3 in total during time I had them), the stupid main pulley on the timing belts going bad prematurely, etc-etc. The money I've spent on a domestics vs. imports is not equal. The only things I had to buy for the last two GM's besides the usual stuff (oil changes, transmission flush, airt filters) was a trans and steering box on the S-10 after killing both hauling way too much cargo in a 16' box trailer over and back via the Cascade Range, and a rear diff on the fullsize after getting stupid in deep mud.
This round, I got a domestic over a Tundra for a reason. I'll say talk to some of the guys over in the Tundrabirds thread via pm to get their feedback.
Picture a 4th Gen Ram Quad or Crew Cab built up..oh wait, someone already has done it? You could even do a 1500 up.
Even D45's 3rd Gen looks nice!
Last edited:
Plannerman
Wandering Explorer
Because not everyone wants the size of a full size, especially for technical backcountry travel. Different people have different priorities. (Why is this so hard for so many of is to understand?) I love extra the capacity of a full size but prefer a smaller truck for easier maneuverability.
Sent via fat thumb
east_tn_81
Adventurer
I get so sick of threads like this one. It starts out with a good question. Then somebody starts talking about Toyota is **** no gm is **** so on and so forth. Who cares get back to the question.
Clutch
<---Pass
Oh, you're always going to get that when someone asks when comparing brands and models. Usually what I see is, people always recommend what they own, what they have experience with and are proud of...people tend to be very proud of their vehicles. (I am guilty of it too
) yeah, it always turns into a pissing match...me being me... I like to poke fun at the pissing match. I like the Silverado's. Would be pretty dang cool to build an extra-cab version of this.
^That. Forums should have their first clause you have to type your initials in to proceed as
In the end it's good here. If the O/P wasn't prepared for people's opinions they're here now. It's just opinions. Base your own decisions on what you find credible.
Clutch
<---Pass
Really comes down to test driving them all, and see what you like. I have driven all of them recently, they all seem good to me. There is no clear winner anymore...too bad we can't take the best bits of all them, and build one super truck.
east_tn_81
Adventurer
what this is really going to come down to is specs. What specs best fit your needs nothing else. This is not about the brands that everyone supports. test drive all of them. When i shop for my rigs i always take the whole family and i pile in two car seats to check for room and comfort. good luck.
Clutch
<---Pass
It is a bummer that most of the brands have gotten away from manual transmissions...that pretty much kills the idea of me moving into a full size truck. And really, the Tacoma is more than enough for my needs...I could get by with a vehicle like the Subaru Outback. Wagons kinda suck when you spill a can of gas inside them though...
98dango
Expedition Leader
OK I just spent 45 minutes of my morning finding all this
2004 chevy 1500 crew cab. 2004 Tacoma dcab
5.3. 3.4
4 speed at. 4 speed at
295 hp. 190 hp
15/18 mpg. 16/19 mpg
9.5. Compression ratio. 9.6
416. Cruise miles 314.5
17.8. Power to weight ratio 19.5
5244. Curb weight. 3705
8.5. Ground clearance. 10.0
75.0. Height. 67.5
230.2. Length. 202.9
65.0. Front track width. 57.5
66.0. Rear track width. 57.3
143. Wheel base. 121.9
78.5. Width. 70.3
6. Seating 5
7500. Towing. 3500
8500. Max towing. 5000
1756. Payload. 1395
These are for American trucks this is what I felt important I have numbers for cab size if we need to go that far.
2004 chevy 1500 crew cab. 2004 Tacoma dcab
5.3. 3.4
4 speed at. 4 speed at
295 hp. 190 hp
15/18 mpg. 16/19 mpg
9.5. Compression ratio. 9.6
416. Cruise miles 314.5
17.8. Power to weight ratio 19.5
5244. Curb weight. 3705
8.5. Ground clearance. 10.0
75.0. Height. 67.5
230.2. Length. 202.9
65.0. Front track width. 57.5
66.0. Rear track width. 57.3
143. Wheel base. 121.9
78.5. Width. 70.3
6. Seating 5
7500. Towing. 3500
8500. Max towing. 5000
1756. Payload. 1395
These are for American trucks this is what I felt important I have numbers for cab size if we need to go that far.
Clutch
<---Pass
Toss a super charger on the Tacoma will put 285 HP at the crank....240ish at the rear wheels...which is great for that little truck... stock 190 is plenty.
All and all, it really is an apple to oranges comparison. I will say the Tacoma "should" get better mileage for what it is. For me it makes up for that in another areas...that whole less is more, is one of the reasons I have it over fullsize...90% of it's life is spent unloaded running around town...weekends it gets dirt bike hauler duty.
Though I still hem and haw about getting a fullsize.
Last edited: