2016 Toyota Tacoma: Seat Folding Maximizes Cargo Capacity

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 10,305
edited February 2016 in Toyota
It should be no surprise that my vote goes to the Tacoma's backseat folding strategy. The resulting flat surface and considerably lower loading height makes it much more functional. And it's hard to argue with two types of hidden bins that add up to more total cubby storage. Midsize trucks don't have as much interior space to work with as full size trucks do. It pays to make every cubic foot count.

Read the full story here


  • daryleasondaryleason TexasMember Posts: 501
    Okay, I see the hinges for the floor mounted storage area, although your pic didn't include the latch (at least, not that I saw). So let me ask, where's the jack & tire iron located at? On my 2013 F-150, they put it in an absolutely horrible location. To get it, you have to raise the rear passenger side seat base, undo two nuts, raise the rear drivers side seat base, lift out a cubby tray, reach into the hole, pull the jack case towards you, flip it, lift it out. It's out of sight, but a total pain in the middle of the night, in bad weather, with anything in the back of the SuperCrew cab. Is the Tacoma set up reasonably or is it some sort of convoluted nightmare?
  • longtimelurkerlongtimelurker Member Posts: 455
    That is a better seat design than the Colorado.

    But be honest and admit that in order to not have to slide the Tacoma's driver's seat forward, you had to remove the rear seat headrest, which you don't mention and you don't show the headrest in the stowage position in the folded-forward seat bottom. In order to fold the Toyota's rear down the way the Colorado's was folded in that photo, with the rear headrest in place, you would have had to scoot the driver's seat forward at LEAST eight inches. You use the term, "apples to apples comparison," but you are not making one.

    That is the weak link in the flip-forward rear seat bottom design...the lower hinge point for the rear seatback makes for a much longer seatback that reaches further forward when folded, meaning that you have to remove the headrests to fold the seats any time the driver's seat isn't all the way forward and bolt upright.
  • actualsizeactualsize Santa Ana, CaliforniaMember Posts: 451
    True, I do have to remove the headrest. In the Colorado I have to fold it, using the button you can see in their photo. Advantage Colorado on that score.

    Twitter: @Edmunds_Test

  • nagantnagant Member Posts: 176
    The Tacoma still has the advantage of the hidden storage behind the seatback AND under the floor. Chrysler and the Asian brands seem to do better in small little details like this than GM does.

    Oh and I rode in a Diesel Colorado yesterday. It was pretty smooth and quiet but such a dog over about 40 with no load (its a 4WD) I would hate to be towing on the freeway with a big load.
  • longtimelurkerlongtimelurker Member Posts: 455

    True, I do have to remove the headrest. In the Colorado I have to fold it, using the button you can see in their photo. Advantage Colorado on that score.

    Another advantage to the Colorado's layout is the amount of space on the rear floor with the seatback folded - there is enough space there for at least two of your grocery bags there, and something even taller than those would fit if you folded the headrest, and you can access the entire space with the seatback folded. There is not much room on the Tacoma's floor with the rear seat bottom folded forward - maybe something eight inches high would fit, but not more, and with pretty poor access - with the seats already folded you'd be restricted to something maybe four inches high.

    Anything that would need to be prevented from sliding around or tipping, or that was dirty on the bottom, I would much rather place on the floor, on some good floor mats, rather than on the folded-forward seatback in either vehicle.

    I have two hatchbacks...one with the Toyota's layout and one with the Chevy's. There are advantages to both setups.
  • metalmaniametalmania Member Posts: 167
    Looking at both of these setups, the Toyota obviously has more thought put into it and I like the flatter surface and lower load height - but I also think I'd prefer not to lose the space between the front seatback and the rear seat base. If I had to choose, I'd probably still take the Toyota's setup - the additional storage cubbies might come in handy, but I don't think I'd be terribly inconvenienced by GMs solution either. On the other hand, having recently sampled both back seats at an auto show and sitting "behind myself" where I would have the front seat if I were driving, I felt that the GM twins were roomier to actually sit in.
  • 23hammer23hammer Member Posts: 14
    Hi Everyone, I am interested in a Tacoma. I have a Ram now and drive a TON of miles. I don't NEED a full size pick up but I prefer to drive something with a bed on the back. I am 6'4" tall and have a family of 4 that includes an 8 and a 10 year old. Do you think my kids would be comfortable in the back seat of a Tacoma with the seat positioned for a tall driver (all the way down and back)?
Sign In or Register to comment.