If you were going to have a do everything Tacoma or Tundra, what model would you get.
- Thread starter deeve
- Start date
Clutch
<---Pass
It is...a little bigger though.
The DC's are even a little wider than the AC 1st gen Tundra's, the body's are slightly different too.
http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/63863-Tundra-AC-VS-DC!
I don't know if this will work for everyone ,but here is a comparison on the cars.com Vehicle Compare page. The Jeep is in there because that is my other car and a good frame of reference for me. The Gen 1 Tundra is in the middle still between the current Tacoma and current Tundra. The Specifications section toward the bottom has the measurements. Looks like a good size....
http://www.cars.com/go/compare/trim...T10AE0,USC50TOT098A0,USC50JES052C0&compType=E
http://www.cars.com/go/compare/trim...T10AE0,USC50TOT098A0,USC50JES052C0&compType=E
surlydiesel
Adventurer
I have an 09 quad cab tacoma and there is no way I'd want to sit in the back seat for 6 hours on a trip. The front seat is big enough for decent length trips for me but if my wife was willing to drive a full sized truck, we'd be in a Tundra. The 09 is her winter driver/boat mover/our vacation vehicle. Also the dual zone temp ability would be good for us. She's always hot and I'm usually cold.
I also have an 06 access cab with a 5spd that I run around in. The wife also can't drive stick, so since I want to drive a stick, we have 2 trucks. If the Tundra came in a manual trans, that's what I'd be driving all the time. I know I'm strange but I still like selecting gears myself.
Get a Tundra.
-jorge
P.S. for reference I'm 6 foot 225 pounds.
I also have an 06 access cab with a 5spd that I run around in. The wife also can't drive stick, so since I want to drive a stick, we have 2 trucks. If the Tundra came in a manual trans, that's what I'd be driving all the time. I know I'm strange but I still like selecting gears myself.
Get a Tundra.
-jorge
P.S. for reference I'm 6 foot 225 pounds.
Dipodomys
Observer
The Tundra has always seemed a little large for my needs, but they are very nice trucks. I have a 2008 Tacoma Double Cab with the short bed. The bed is short for sleeping, obviously, but fine for everything else, even hauling plywood so long as everything is tied down. You could go for the long bed version, but then you're getting into quite a long vehicle, which may or may not be a big deal depending on where you plan to go. I prefer the slightly less overall length of the short bed.
As for the rear seats in the Tacoma, nearly everyone who has sat back there has complained that the seats get uncomfortable fairly quickly. It's not so much that they are cramped as much as the angle of the seats and the seat backs. At least that's what I've heard. I never sit back there, so I can't offer anything beyond that. I have no info on whether a Tundra's rear seats are better, but with more room I expect people would find them more comfortable.
The TRD Offroad package in 2008 came with a locking rear diff and an "offroad" suspension that basically consisted of some Bilstein shocks with the regular springs. I'm not sure what's on offer currently. The diff is great, the suspension was a dud and not worth the extra cost. It had very limited travel and bottomed out on speedbumps. If you put two kids and some gear in there, you'll be a lowrider for sure. I quickly ditched the factory suspension and upgraded to an Old Man Emu suspension from ARB, which was a vast improvement. So the only thing I ended up keeping from the Offroad package was the rear locking diff. If I had to do it over again, I would have bought a regular model without the Offroad package, and installed an ARB airlocker rear diff and also the same suspension I ended up adding. It would have been a little cheaper, and the ARB airlocker is better than the Toyota unit, in my opinion. It's not as fussy to engage, for one thing, and I had one in my old FJ40 Landcruiser and loved it. I'm fine with the Toyota locker in my Tacoma and don't plan to replace it, but like I said, if I had to do it over again...
As for the rear seats in the Tacoma, nearly everyone who has sat back there has complained that the seats get uncomfortable fairly quickly. It's not so much that they are cramped as much as the angle of the seats and the seat backs. At least that's what I've heard. I never sit back there, so I can't offer anything beyond that. I have no info on whether a Tundra's rear seats are better, but with more room I expect people would find them more comfortable.
The TRD Offroad package in 2008 came with a locking rear diff and an "offroad" suspension that basically consisted of some Bilstein shocks with the regular springs. I'm not sure what's on offer currently. The diff is great, the suspension was a dud and not worth the extra cost. It had very limited travel and bottomed out on speedbumps. If you put two kids and some gear in there, you'll be a lowrider for sure. I quickly ditched the factory suspension and upgraded to an Old Man Emu suspension from ARB, which was a vast improvement. So the only thing I ended up keeping from the Offroad package was the rear locking diff. If I had to do it over again, I would have bought a regular model without the Offroad package, and installed an ARB airlocker rear diff and also the same suspension I ended up adding. It would have been a little cheaper, and the ARB airlocker is better than the Toyota unit, in my opinion. It's not as fussy to engage, for one thing, and I had one in my old FJ40 Landcruiser and loved it. I'm fine with the Toyota locker in my Tacoma and don't plan to replace it, but like I said, if I had to do it over again...
Thanks for all the advice and suggestions. The 2005-2006 Tundra is really growing on me. If I am honest, the unbreakable Tacoma legend has a lot to do with my appreciation of them. For a long time I have only looked at Tacoma's and when I get in them though, especially the new ones, I find I am a bit disappointed with them. Mostly the smaller size. I guess I built them up a lot in my head. lol.
Anyway, the 2005-2006 Tundras "look" perfect for my needs. I just need to get my butt in one and see. I am finding there are a lot in the 120-150k miles that looks nice. Not many mention the timing belt which I would need to get replaces ASAP I think
DAVE
Anyway, the 2005-2006 Tundras "look" perfect for my needs. I just need to get my butt in one and see. I am finding there are a lot in the 120-150k miles that looks nice. Not many mention the timing belt which I would need to get replaces ASAP I think
DAVE
marathonracer
Adventurer
I loved my 03 Tacoma because it was as you said unbreakable but I have found my 06 tundra just as a rugged, dependable, and capable (given its wheelbase) The 2uz is a great powerplant and if you are looking at 05-06 you get vvti as well. One of the biggest things I noticed right off was the interior space of the dc... Night and day compared to the Tacoma. There are several 1st gen tundra fans on this forum.
lqdchkn
:)
Personally when I realized my FJ no longer fit my needs I was going to go Tacoma. It has the best aftermarket, is a proven platform many times over and I prefer mid-size as it's a better fit on narrow trails. However I made an exception to this when Chevy announced the diesel for the new Colorado. I would still be looking at the Taco had the diesel not been an option but as my truck needs to be my daily, I needed the MPG/drivability (torque) the diesel offered.
.
IMO take a second look at the diesel Colorado, even though the aftermarket is still playing catchup in a big way.
.
If your sticking to Toyota for sure I'd go 2nd gen Taco. The aftermarket is there and IMO theres no sense in paying a premium for a truck that doesn't really get any significant difference in MPG, unless you have to have the new styling.
.
IMO take a second look at the diesel Colorado, even though the aftermarket is still playing catchup in a big way.
.
If your sticking to Toyota for sure I'd go 2nd gen Taco. The aftermarket is there and IMO theres no sense in paying a premium for a truck that doesn't really get any significant difference in MPG, unless you have to have the new styling.
Last edited:
The aftermarket support is a big consideration. Depending on what I get I'm not sure what I might want to upgrade, but having options is always great. I'm planning on trying it out and upgrading what I find I need. So many great choices. I will take another look at the Colorado. I'm waiting for those diesels to show up to the dealers, but if they are shipping they are not hanging around long.
Clutch
<---Pass
You can get the DCSB SR V6 4WD for $31K, SR5 is $33K...diesel Colorado is at the very least $39K. That savings buys an awful lot of fuel. Sure the GM will get better fuel "economy" but it will cost ya! I don't quite understand spending a lot more money to save on fuel. You can get a Ram EcoDiesel in the $30K range...that makes more sense than GM.
I wouldn't own that GM out of warranty, the Tacoma ...yeah no problem.
Last edited:
I had a first gen tundra 2006 (TRD off rd access cab) for several years and really loved it. Never had any issues at all. I had 185,000 miles on it and had never done the timing belt. That truck ran so nice and was comfortable.. The V8 had just the right amt of power and got decent gas mileage as well (16-17 mpg). I unfortunately ran into another truck and my insurance company totaled it I got $10,000 dollars for it which I thought was very fair.
Now I have a 2015 tacoma TRD Sport Dbl cab long bed. The V6 feels like it lacks a little power but makes up for it in gas mileage I routinely get 18-20. Not great but it does make a difference. I felt the tundra was overall more comfortable it handled better, felt more natural in its size, the tacoma although great feels a little awkward in its size Long and narrow. The tacomas seats are stiff and uncomfortable (SR5's are better I think) I'm 6'2" 250 lbs, the TRD boulsters push in too much on my sides. The double cab is roomy enough. I think that it shouldn't be an issue for you really. I wouldn't give up the Tacomas traction control over the tundra which had nothing. The Tacoma is just awesome it feels safe and secure on snow covered roads in 4 and 2 wheel drive. I think being a good driver is important but man having the backup of traction control is worth it's weight in gold. Just the other day I was on a slick snow covered rd in 2 wheel drive. The back end of the truck started to slide out on a corner and the traction control made the correction before I had time to take my foot off the gas. (Yes I could have been in 4 wheel,,, well I wasn't) the tundra was mor fun in snow for sure. The Tacoma is way safer and less likely to get me into trouble.
You need to think about how realistic family camping trips are. 16 year old daughter- that trip might happen once or twice and it's mostly because she is playing some sort of an angle on you. The 9 year old son won't care if it's uncomfortable because he will follow you to hell and back for the next few years. By that the wife will be burnt out and it will be just you and the youngest son. Or more likely just you and your off roading buddies.
Seriously though. I think I'd go for the 2nd gen Tacoma over the 1st gen tundra. I miss my tundra a lot but the Tacoma is more reliable, more capable and is a great truck. There is a reason they are so loved. Hope this helped.
Now I have a 2015 tacoma TRD Sport Dbl cab long bed. The V6 feels like it lacks a little power but makes up for it in gas mileage I routinely get 18-20. Not great but it does make a difference. I felt the tundra was overall more comfortable it handled better, felt more natural in its size, the tacoma although great feels a little awkward in its size Long and narrow. The tacomas seats are stiff and uncomfortable (SR5's are better I think) I'm 6'2" 250 lbs, the TRD boulsters push in too much on my sides. The double cab is roomy enough. I think that it shouldn't be an issue for you really. I wouldn't give up the Tacomas traction control over the tundra which had nothing. The Tacoma is just awesome it feels safe and secure on snow covered roads in 4 and 2 wheel drive. I think being a good driver is important but man having the backup of traction control is worth it's weight in gold. Just the other day I was on a slick snow covered rd in 2 wheel drive. The back end of the truck started to slide out on a corner and the traction control made the correction before I had time to take my foot off the gas. (Yes I could have been in 4 wheel,,, well I wasn't) the tundra was mor fun in snow for sure. The Tacoma is way safer and less likely to get me into trouble.
You need to think about how realistic family camping trips are. 16 year old daughter- that trip might happen once or twice and it's mostly because she is playing some sort of an angle on you. The 9 year old son won't care if it's uncomfortable because he will follow you to hell and back for the next few years. By that the wife will be burnt out and it will be just you and the youngest son. Or more likely just you and your off roading buddies.
Seriously though. I think I'd go for the 2nd gen Tacoma over the 1st gen tundra. I miss my tundra a lot but the Tacoma is more reliable, more capable and is a great truck. There is a reason they are so loved. Hope this helped.
Dkline90 it does help..thanks! You know, it makes sense about the truck and your honest thoughts about the camping/off road stuff rings true to me. As much as I like the idea of it, it really will mostly be my son and I. You and I are about the same size, so I appreciate your insight. I am going to check out a DCLB Tacoma and a DC 2006 Tundra. I think even though the long bed might be kinda awkward, it will be more useful.
Everyone is bring up good points and I do appreciate the feedback.
Everyone is bring up good points and I do appreciate the feedback.
lqdchkn
:)
.
Not trying to sell you, I know what's right for me but if youre still interested checkout Cars.com. At one point there were 67 listed nation wide....today 3, lol
.
.
There's more too it that just that. Given the Tacoma's 15mpg and 21 gallon tank (a rough 300 mile range) you'll pass everything but a gas station. As mentioned for me personally HAVING to fill up EVERY week or sooner just to go back and forth to work sucked. The diesel even getting just 25mpg will allow me a range of at least 500 miles, will stretch me to every other week, much more reasonable IMO and you can't relate that time saved and convenience a direct monetary value.
.
Also I'm not interested in a full size truck so there are no other options for me
For the OP that may be relevant though.
Last edited:
Similar threads
