TTORA Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Is Ugly and Expensive. WTF? $35K for a freaking 4x4 TRD off road? Seriously? People buy that shit? If this site were not doomed from mismanagement, it is surely doomed by Toyota themselves.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,730 Posts
That's why I'm keeping my 2001 until the replacement frame rots out. In fact... The lack of affordable and appealing new trucks on the market pretty much has renewed my motivation to rustproofing this thing so I can try to keep it forever or until someone finally releases a decent mid-size diesel 4x4 pickup with a manual transmission.

Our older trucks were built so well and are cheap to keep running. 12 years and 140K of daily driving ownership on mine and not once has it ever failed to start, or left me stranded anywhere, or even really had a problem at all that ever affected how it operated from a functional standpoint.

Sure isn't fast... it isn't crazy powerful... it can't jump a 20 foot step up, or climb straight up a wall in stock form, but for a real-world super-capable vehicle that is enjoyable to drive, functional, and takes a lickin but keeps on kickin... it's damn near perfect for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
No kidding. I am still pissed that I had to sell my 03. Damn kids. I would still have that truck if I could have gotten two cars seats in it. I would buy another, but they are impossible to find and what you can find people want a small fortune for. In the mean time I will keep driving my POS Tundra. I really hate it in so many ways.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,730 Posts
What year Tundra?

I had a loaner for 3 months in 2011 while my frame was being replaced and although it was fun, I thought it was a piece of junk and the fuel economy was terrifying even with the 4.7.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,958 Posts
The guy at the Post Office bought a new Tundra which was really a really nice looking truck but got rid of it 3 months later because he said the gas mileage was seriously beyond terrible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Mine is a 03. I get 16mpg with the 5.7. I can't really complain considering I have never had a Toyota that got much better than that. Going back to my 94 with the 3.0. I got 15mpg with that and then only slightly better with my 01 and 03.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,730 Posts
Mine is a 03. I get 16mpg with the 5.7. I can't really complain considering I have never had a Toyota that got much better than that. Going back to my 94 with the 3.0. I got 15mpg with that and then only slightly better with my 01 and 03.
That's not too bad. The loaner 2010 that I had averaged like 11 MPG overall and only got 13.6 MPG when I took it on a 170 mile road trip with 100% highway driving at 65 MPH with the smaller v8. The thing is geared so tall that it's barely breathing at that speed... it should get much better than that. I usually get about 23-24 MPG in my Taco at that speed with 32" tires spinning at least 600 higher RPM and have done that same trip in my Tacoma a bunch of times.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
261 Posts
Mine is a 03. I get 16mpg with the 5.7. I can't really complain considering I have never had a Toyota that got much better than that. Going back to my 94 with the 3.0. I got 15mpg with that and then only slightly better with my 01 and 03.
2003 Tundra's didn't have the 5.7. Only the 3.4 V6 or 4.7 V8. And yeah, my dads 06 4.7 Tundra mileage is similar. He commutes in a cheap-o Rav4.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,340 Posts
I hated the 2016 at first glance. I still hate the fact it has rear drums and they didn't evolve the frame.

But the interior, and the traction aids/gadgets are on point.

I remember when everyone hated the 2nd Gen. Some still do.

.02
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,730 Posts
I hated the 2016 at first glance. I still hate the fact it has rear drums and they didn't evolve the frame.

But the interior, and the traction aids/gadgets are on point.

I remember when everyone hated the 2nd Gen. Some still do.

.02
They still have rear drums on the new Tacoma? WTF? You would think that doing any kind of towing would make the rear brake capacity more important for a truck than it would be in a (non-towing) car application. I kinda like the idea of having a parking brake that uses a different stopping mechanism than the regular brakes too, as you get with the inner parking brake drum on a rear-disc setup.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,958 Posts
They still have rear drums on the new Tacoma? WTF? You would think that doing any kind of towing would make the rear brake capacity more important for a truck than it would be in a (non-towing) car application. I kinda like the idea of having a parking brake that uses a different stopping mechanism than the regular brakes too, as you get with the inner parking brake drum on a rear-disc setup.
Not all Rear Discs have that Inner Drum Parking Brake anymore, seems like they have been phasing those out over the recent past.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
I went from my 99 tacoma to a 2013 tundra with the 5.7 it gets around 13.5 in the city, but have gotten 18.5 on the hwy on 400 mile trip with cruise set around 70. Any faster than 70 the MPG dip down pretty quick. Towing the tacoma it gets 11-12 mpg.

I did keep the tacoma though because I love it so much, and if it came down to it I would get rid of the tundra before the tacoma. I thought about trading in the tundra for a new tacoma until I saw the price tag on them. lol
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top