Fuel Economy Update for May - Show Me the MPG - 2016 Toyota Tacoma Long-Term Road Test

Edmunds.com

Fuel Economy Update for May - Show Me the MPG - 2016 Toyota Tacoma Long-Term Road Test

We've been driving our 2016 Toyota Tacoma for more than 8,000 miles now. We've yet to achieve the fuel economy that the EPA says we should be getting.

Read the full story here

bohio

"the expectation of getting dramatically better fuel economy than a full-size truck probably isn't going to be realized"... ya think? How about restating the objective to getting even slightly better fuel economy, because "dramatically" is -- aside from being the wrong choice of words -- not easily defined. Would a 2 mpg improvement over the F150 or a Tundra be "dramatically" better?

If the Tacoma merely matches the F150's fuel economy, then it seems the only reason to consider a Taco would be its slightly smaller size for those who want to park inside their garage or park in general in lots and spaces where they otherwise feel less able to do so in a full-size truck.

And all of that with rear drum brakes and a problematic driver's seat. Toyota resting on its (stale) Tacoma laurels and loyalists. But the resale... uh-huh, there's a silver lining I suppose. Let's see the Tacoma match the resale of the Colorado that Edmunds documented not so long ago. And that version with the gas engine; could be even better with the diesel powerplant.

longtimelurker

Are you folks going to try towing with it with a 5,000 or 6,500-lb trailer to see how it does and what mpg it gets, like you did with the F150, the Silverado, the Ram and the Colorado? I mean, you did get the tow package.

Oh, wait...it probably could not tow that much, and would be completely gutless if it did. And I bet those grabby rear drums would be a pleasure to tow with and would offer some interesting fade characteristics going down two thousand feet of mountain switchbacks.

dmacy

+1 on towing with the Tacoma. It seemed like the Colorado was towing on a regular basis and compared to full size trucks on how it performed.

g35buf

The usual full size truck mpg from a midsize truck. I lived it...My Ridgeline averaged 16.3 mpg (Fuelly). Then I got a RAM 1500 with the Hemi and ZF 8 speed and got 16.5 mpg in the same driving mix. Whaaauuuppp?

That's the reality though...I think the new Gen 2 Ridgeline will be more respectable than most midsizers (finally) but not dramatic - maybe 20 mpg combined in real life (TBD).

You can actually get this 18 mpg average in a RAM 1500 with the 3.6 V6 and 8 speed and of course 22 mpg in the EcoDiesel (which ironically seems to be getting about the same as the new Colorado/Canyon MIDSIZE diesel...not surprised)

dmacy

g35buf said:

You can actually get this 18 mpg average in a RAM 1500 with the 3.6 V6 and 8 speed and of course 22 mpg in the EcoDiesel (which ironically seems to be getting about the same as the new Colorado/Canyon MIDSIZE diesel...not surprised)

Fuelly shows the GM twins with the diesel averaging 2-3 mpg better than the Ram EcoDiesels, depending on what year model Ram you compare it to.

dmacy

dmacy said:

Fuelly shows the GM twins with the diesel averaging 2-3 mpg better than the Ram EcoDiesels, depending on what year model Ram you compare it to.

http://www.fuelly.com/car/chevrolet/colorado/2016?engineconfig_id=229&bodytype_id=&submodel_id=
http://www.fuelly.com/car/ram/1500?engineconfig_id=238&bodytype_id=&submodel_id=

bobbcat

Brent, I am wondering if you or anyone at Edmunds has done a "real" MPG check the old fashion way on this truck, by setting the trip meter at a gas fillup, and dividing miles driven by gallons used, as noted at the next fill up. The reason I ask is that so many vehicles' trip computers are notoriously optimistic when reporting mileage. My 2016 Duramax Colorado is getting roughly what the EPA says it should, but the computer always reports my fuel mileage about 5-6% better than reality. I still love the Tacoma and I almost bought one. Nevertheless, I enjoy reading the long term reviews on this truck.