Why a fullsize?

[Angus_NB]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

I'm comparing with the GMC full size Sierra pickup with the 5.3 liter flex fuel engine that shuts down 4 cylinders on the highway, with an automatic transmission. The EPA mileage numbers on it are 14/19 which is just about what most 4X4 Taco 4.0 liter owners are getting. ...

The EPA mileage numbers for the 2006 Toyota Tacoma 4x4 V6 automatic are: 17/21 MPG.

[MGH-PA]

Originally Posted by Meatro

MGH-PA,

I hope you got some sort of benefit from the rants that have been posted, but I have to say it's all about needs. But in the same breath, the decision on a full or mid size truck is based on one's preception of what is going to fulfil those needs. I've owned/driven trucks my whole life. I love my 07 Taco and will probably get another one if the situation presents itself. I also rent fullsize 4x4 trucks for work on average 3-4 days per month and drive an average of 600km those days. I've driven the big 3 and each have their + and -. What it comes down to for me is that the 4x4 DC Tacoma fits my needs perfectly. I can tow a boat or camper. I can fit dirt bikes/quad in the box and can move pretty much anything I'll ever own. The 4x4 in Alberta is a must. My time is valuable and I personaly don't like to get stranded when it decides to snow 2', melt then freeze hard again over any given weekend in April.

The bottom line is that anyone can justify anything if they want to. $500/ year in extra fuel, or $50 per month more on new truck payments. I'm personally not concerned if someone pulls up beside me with their 8' high Dodge. I'm happy for them if that is what fulfils their needs, whether it be off-road or they just like big trucks.

The question is what would you prefer to drive?

Probably one of the most sensible posts in a while. I've actually come to the same conclusions you did. As a small update for anyone who cares, I decided to keep the Tacoma, because it truly does fit what I NEED. I would not be able to fully justify a fullsize truck Sure there are times when I need one, but I do have access to my dad's 03 F250 when I need it. For me, the Tacoma is the perfect balance of driveability, economy, and power. All of the reasons I was trying to convince myself of getting a fullsize for were more psychological than anything.

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by RCBS

jtsailjt

Sheep. you missed my point entirely. as for your GMC's, we have about eight to ten of these trucks in the fleet where i work. the man who maintains that fleet drives a Toyota. bigger is better does not always apply, even if it is an american creedo. i'm sure if the american public demanded better economy out of our vehicles, Toyota would gladly build you a "flex fuel" vehicle. the american public doesn't WANT to give up that extra legroom or power, hence the new 14mpg Tundra. look on the roads...every day i see some woman driving an excursion or suburban--by herself. we don't THINK we should have to give up size or power in the name of fuel economy, because fuel has always been availible cheaply. ...things are changing, even if most are too blind to see.

and EU healthcare--you win cause i ain't spending anymore time on ya. BUT, try parking your motorcycle unattended & unlocked in a major US city like everyone in Germany does, and see how long before it's gone. if you've traveled abroad in europe, i'm sure you'd have noticed that people aren't self rightious ***-hats like they are here...well, maybe France but they're a bunch of sissys anyway. if you will excuse me, i have to call my health insurance company that thinks my impacted wisdom tooth surgery is cosmetic.

Well you're right about one thing, most Europeans don't sound anywhere near as self righteous or negative as you do. I haven't cared for their political maneuvering in the past but even the French people seem pretty nice to me, and I go there a lot. I'll be leaving tomorrow for Nice for a 3 day trip there. I'm a pilot and can spend my layovers pretty much anywhere in Europe and this time of year, Nice and Rome are my first 2 choices, switching to Berlin or Frankfurt in the summer. Nice folks everywhere, just like in most US cities. And what does "sheep" have to do with anything? I also agree with you (obviously, since I do own a Taco) that bigger isn't always better. Many of those women you see alone in a Suburban probably agree with you too and cringe every time they have to fill the beast up with fuel just like you would. But what you don't seem to see or want to understand is that those lone women in Suburbans are frequently moms who are enroute to pick up their 2 kids and 3 of their friends to take them to basketball or soccer or dance or...practice. The friends kids mothers are working, so car pooling in one big Suburban makes a lot of sense. My sister had 3 Suburbans over the years to go along with her husband, 4 kids and 2 dogs she routinely transported. Sometimes she took it to the store and back all by herself but owning and insuring and maintaining an additional, smaller car just wasn't in the budget. It would have been real nice to get a smaller vehicle and now that she's down to a husband and 1 kid and one dog she's traded for a Lexus, but there are still times when they have to take 2 vehicles when kids friends or classmates want to come along too. But the Lexus is much more comfortable and fun to drive than a Suburban so she traded anyway.

I suppose if I had spouted off about a subject I knew nothing about like you did about socialized helathcare I might want to change the subject away from that too, and I fail to see how motorcycle security is relevant to this discussion at all. But since you insist on displaying your ignorance about yet another subject you obviously have no real knowledge of, I had to chuckle while reading your post because as it happens I recently bought a new Suzuki SV650 motorcycle and it's parked out front right now, unlocked, not too far from my 325I in the garage, but also unlocked and with the key in the ignition. Of course I don't exactly live in a major city up here in Maine, but it IS the USA and I've never had anything stolen. When I'm in Europe I've noticed that many parked motorcycles have these huge link chains with padlocks on them wrapped around the wheels. That seems awfully inconvenient to lug around to me and I've got insurance anyway so I don't plan to bother with one. Maybe they are commonly used in major US cities too but I know they are commonly used in Europe since every time I pass a group of parked motorcycles I check them all out pretty carefully and have been ever since I decided to buy one.


Instead of just mentioning the 14mpg Tundra as yet another way to express your contempt for American people, why not give some credit where credit is due to GMC for making their full sized trucks get better mileage than that? Or might that interfere with your anti everything American bias? And according to sales of the new Tundra, maybe the American people are a little smarter than you think they are because from what I've heard, the Tundra isn't selling well compared with the full sized GMC's and Chevy's, or even Ford's. Instead of stating what "we" Americans do or think, maybe you should restrict yourself to what YOU do or think, because that's all you really seem to know much about.

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by Angus_NB

The EPA mileage numbers for the 2006 Toyota Tacoma 4x4 V6 automatic are: 17/21 MPG.

That sounds close but perhaps very slightly optimistic to me, just like I'm sure the GMC's numbers are. So we seem to have about a 2 mpg (or 10%) difference between the 2 vehicles and I would guess that you can haul much more than 10% more in a full sized pickup than you can in a Taco so it's more efficient when loaded or towing. So a full sized GMC truck is a pretty reasonable alternative for those who need the extra room or even feel more comfortable with the extra room. Now if our Taco's got closer to 10mpg better than than the GMC's it would be more of a clearcut choice in that regard. But as the comparison stands now, I see no reason to get too down on those Americans who prefer more room, especially since they aren't burning much more fuel, even if in some of your eyes, these people don't "need" the bigger vehicle. As I've mentioned before, I choose to have a Taco to drive in the winter and to tow my boat and like it a lot, but my choice wasn't made because of 2 mpg and I'm not blind to the good things about other brands too.

[Angus_NB]

You are guessing that the GM is more efficient when loaded. Actually that's somewhat unlikely.
I wasn't 'down on those Americans who prefer more room', whatever that is supposed to mean. Just pointing out that if you're using EPA numbers for GM you should use EPA for Toyota not what people are saying they actually get for mileage.

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by Angus_NB

You are guessing that the GM is more efficient when loaded. Actually that's somewhat unlikely.
I wasn't 'down on those Americans who prefer more room', whatever that is supposed to mean. Just pointing out that if you're using EPA numbers for GM you should use EPA for Toyota not what people are saying they actually get for mileage.

Actually, according to edmunds, the EPA estimates for the Taco are 16/20, but I really don't think we need to be quibbling about one mpg either way. If those numbers are about as accurate as the GMC numbers, then we're talking about one mile per gallon difference on the highway. But lets just leave it at the GMC gets VERY close to the mileage of the Taco and hauls a lot more and that clearly makes it a more efficient hauler. And if you don't want to take my word for that either and want to look up those numbers for extended cab versions that I'm using for comparison purposes, the towing/payload numbers I found are 10,500/1734 and 6500/1360 respectively. When I said I was guessing, I meant that I hadn't crunched the numbers to express them as a precise %, but clearly you can see the difference in 10,500 versus 6,500 or 1734 versus 1360 and figure out that they both yield a much greater % difference than the miniscule difference between them in gas mileage.

As far as dissing people, if you weren't the one doing it, then that part of my post wasn't addressed to you. If you read through this thread there were others who were doing plenty of amateur psychoanalyzing and dissing of many things American, and especially those people who drive big, American, 4WD vehicles. I pointed out that frequently the facts don't support their bias against American trucks OR healthcare OR even motorcycle parking.

The MOST fuel efficient full sized truck is a GMC/Chevy and it very nearly matches our smaller Taco's in that area. But IMHO they're still not as fun to drive and don't look as good and aren't as easy to park in a tight spot and that's most of why I don't own one. Those things are more important TO ME than the fuel efficiency during the very few times a year when I have to tow something that's really heavy. I just am not able to share their smugness (or even anger) when I see someone driving a full sized 4WD GMC that's only getting one or two less mpg's than I am in my Taco. It's just personal preference.

[rs6654]

Main Entry: psy·cho·anal·y·sis Pronunciation: \ˌsī-kō-ə-ˈna-lə-səs\ Function: noun Etymology: New Latin Date: 1906

: a method of analyzing psychic phenomena and treating emotional disorders that involves treatment sessions during which the patient is encouraged to talk freely about personal experiences and especially about early childhood and dream

[rs6654]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

Actually, according to edmunds, the EPA estimates for the Taco are 16/20, but I really don't think we need to be quibbling about one mpg either way. If those numbers are about as accurate as the GMC numbers, then we're talking about one mile per gallon difference on the highway. But lets just leave it at the GMC gets VERY close to the mileage of the Taco and hauls a lot more and that clearly makes it a more efficient hauler. And if you don't want to take my word for that either and want to look up those numbers for extended cab versions that I'm using for comparison purposes, the towing/payload numbers I found are 10,500/1734 and 6500/1360 respectively. When I said I was guessing, I meant that I hadn't crunched the numbers to express them as a precise %, but clearly you can see the difference in 10,500 versus 6,500 or 1734 versus 1360 and figure out that they both yield a much greater % difference than the miniscule difference between them in gas mileage.

Scroll down to towing capacity at this page.

GMC | GMC Sierra: Trucks: 1500, 1500HD, 2500HD, 3500, Denali Pickups: Sierra Specifications

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by rs6654

Scroll down to towing capacity at this page.

GMC | GMC Sierra: Trucks: 1500, 1500HD, 2500HD, 3500, Denali Pickups: Sierra Specifications

And then scroll to the right and it says the towing capacity is 10,400# with the max towing package. Not sure why the 100# difference in towing numbers but it's very insignificant.

[rs6654]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

And then scroll to the right and it says the towing capacity is 10,400# with the max towing package. Not sure why the 100# difference in towing numbers but it's very insignificant.

4x4 Tundra ext cab 5.7 = 13/17mpg with 10,300 towing capacity right out of the box.

4x4 GMC ext cab 6.0 = 13/17 with 10,500 towing capacity with "max towing package". The next question is: Are 13/17 figures with 3:73 or 4:10 gears?

Anyway.... My point is that you cannot compare mileage with 5.3 and quote the towing capacity of a 6.0.

You need to keep it apples to apples to make a fair comparison.

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by rs6654

4x4 Tundra ext cab 5.7 = 13/17mpg with 10,300 towing capacity right out of the box.

4x4 GMC ext cab 6.0 = 13/17 with 10,500 towing capacity with "max towing package". The next question is: Are 13/17 figures with 3:73 or 4:10 gears?

Anyway.... My point is that you cannot compare mileage with 5.3 and quote the towing capacity of a 6.0.

You need to keep it apples to apples to make a fair comparison.

Sorry, I didn't mean to mix the numbers (I referenced edmunds and took numbers from there.) between models so according to the chart you linked to, the 5.3 liter engine tows a max of 8500# as compared to the Tacoma's 6500#. Going back to the comparison I was using, the flexfuel 5.3 liter engine gets 14/19 (not 13/17), which is VERY close to the Taco's mileage, and it seats/tows/payloads significantly more than the Taco does. My purpose is not to nitpick or knock down the Tundra, the Tacoma, or the Sierra, but instead is to merely illustrate that some American products (the GMC Sierrra in this case) use innovation and technology to provide performance that is even more efficient than that of vehicles (such as the Tacoma) that some seem to assume have it all over American products in this area, and are thus a very viable choice for savvy buyers. There are very valid reasons for buying a GMC Sierra or similar American vehicle that have nothing to do with the earlier talk of proving their manliness or other such silly assumptions people were making in this thread.

[Marazzito]

Originally Posted by kathyricks

It's mostly a social status thing. Just like V8 vs V6, 3/4 ton vs 1/2 ton and 4WD vs 2WD is mostly a social status thing. 4WD pickups ride rougher, are more costly to maintain, gets substantially worse fuel economy, and 4WD is rarely needed for traction, but you are perceived as more of a "successful, confident, masculine man" if you drive a 4WD both in the eyes of your male peers and the ladies. For a short man it's especially important to own a full size 4WD to help make yourself acceptable in social circles.

The worst possible combination is a clean shaven (people think wimpy and unmasculine) short man (people think unsuccessful or intellectual nerd type) driving a 2WD 4 cylinder compact pickup (people think poor or wimpy, choir boy type)

I drive a 4WD because I often need 4WD when driving in the snow several times a winter. I also need it when driving on muddy fire trails while towing. I got the V6 instead of the 4 banger because I use my truck to tow my Land Cruiser. Oh and I am a short man and I drive a Tacoma not a full size. To be honest, I look small be hind the wheel of a Full Size. But other than that, not a bad generalization!

[Marazzito]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

Sorry, I didn't mean to mix the numbers (I referenced edmunds and took numbers from there.) between models so according to the chart you linked to, the 5.3 liter engine tows a max of 8500# as compared to the Tacoma's 6500#. Going back to the comparison I was using, the flexfuel 5.3 liter engine gets 14/19 (not 13/17), which is VERY close to the Taco's mileage, and it seats/tows/payloads significantly more than the Taco does. My purpose is not to nitpick or knock down the Tundra, the Tacoma, or the Sierra, but instead is to merely illustrate that some American products (the GMC Sierrra in this case) use innovation and technology to provide performance that is even more efficient than that of vehicles (such as the Tacoma) that some seem to assume have it all over American products in this area, and are thus a very viable choice for savvy buyers. There are very valid reasons for buying a GMC Sierra or similar American vehicle that have nothing to do with the earlier talk of proving their manliness or other such silly assumptions people were making in this thread.

IMO, all cylinder deactivation does is scam the EPA ratings system, it is hardly as efficient in real world driving. If you compare EPA numbers, the Tacoma still is significantly better in the city. Of course the American made vehicles have their own technology, and IMO Toyota has more efficient real world driving vehicles with out the use of cylinder deactivation. The 5.7 is more efficient than the 4.7 because of new technology. I would be willing to bet the next replacement of the 4.7 (when ever that may be) will be more powerful than the 5.3 and offer better fuel economy with out cylinder deactivation.

[Marazzito]

Originally Posted by RCBS

you nailed it. we were all brought up to believe that dodge chevy & fords are not just the best, but the only thing you should drive if you're a "true American". i think this dogma applies to a lot more than just trucks these days. america is not "first" in much of anything anymore...manufacturing, health care, economy...but the people that live here "wouldn't trade it for anything else". most of the people who will make this statement, have never seen or known anything else about the world other than what they see on network TV, which i'm sure is not biased at all. my point is that America needs to wake up. we aren't the best anymore. i've not traveled the world or anything, hell i don't even have a passport, but i'm smart enough to know that just because "that's the way it's always been" is changing to "this is how it's gonna be". sorry for soapbox.

There is a reason why we are the Worlds only Superpower. Sure the Euro makes things look bad for the US economy wise, but it did take 15 countries in Europe to do that. Healthcare... don't even get me started. Social Healthcare is absolutely not the answer. The quality of Healthcare goes way down, the government essentially dictates medicine and obviously gives quite a hefty discount... and what you pay is what you get. I hate getting involved in these off topic talks especially about politics because you cant change my mind and I am not going to change yours but ignorance drives me insane. In a perfect world Healthcare would be free, but here in the real world it just doesn't work that way. You can't have the best of everything! I consider myself a "True American" and I drive a non-American vehicle! What you see on TV is not always the truth... as a matter of fact it rarely is. Sorry for the soap box... but you need to wake up!

[Marazzito]

Originally Posted by WilsonTheDog

Seriously, how can you comment on such things when you've never traveled?

I'll put it this way: What's your definition of "first"? What criteria is used to come to that conclusion? We DO have the best system of government, a democratic republic (socialism and communism are miserable failures time and time again). We DO have the best healthcare system in the world (since you haven't been to Europe, you don't understand that in the UK you typically wait 6 months for a doctors appointment or up to a year for an MRI; I have friends who come here once a year for vacation and healthcare). Economy, we've had unprecedented growth in the last few years. Sure, things have slowed down in the last year but come one, stop reading the paper and watching the news because all you get is doomsday predictions that are simply unrealistic. For example, do you honestly think that 95% of the population being employed is bad? Check out France where an 8% unemployment rate is cause for celebration. When was the last time a news organization made money giving us good news?

I will agree with your initial statement regarding the domestics. I personally will not buy something just because it's American made. I'll buy what I WANT and what's best for ME, not what's best for Joe Blow the Detroit factory worker making $35/hour to pop some rivets on an assembly line.

Come on, folks. Life is great here. Turn off the TV and live it.

Well put!

I would like to add we are not in a recession, only a growth recession. If you paid attention to the fact our economy was at an all time high and booming prior to the recent slow down and didn't believe everything you saw on CNN you would probably realize this.