Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Poor mileage acceptable to Toyota

2»

Comments

  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Yeah. Stock gears.....I'm staying with 31s, just gonna put them on 15x8 rims.
  • lagitanelagitane Member Posts: 25
    Just reading all the comments about mileage. Just bought an 03 Tundra V-8, 4x2. Terrible mileage. Getting just a hair under 16 mpg in the City and about 16.6 on the Hwy (just 500 miles on the odometer so far). Its rated at 15 and 19. Realize that it should get better over time, but still scared enough to maybe run right back to the dealer and get a V-6 Taco 4x2 Pre-Runner. Would lose a bundle in trade. Pretty much can just kiss my original down payment good-bye. Love the Tundra room and power. Very well built truck; solid; stong. But this is the worse gas mileage I've ever seen. Can't afford to keep driving it with this kind of mpg. Neighbor's F-150 Ford V-8 gets 19. Can't figure out what Toyota is thinking. Don't they realize how high gas prices are right now? Any feedback before I make take a big financial tumble and scale down into a Tacoma would be appreciated.
  • rlafaverrlafaver Member Posts: 70
    My son had a 2002 V6 Pre-Runner, and he did not get a lot more mileage than you are getting in your Tundra. I have worked diligently with my Tacoma, and here is what I've done to improve mileage. After you get a couple of thousand miles on it switch to synthetic oil, like Mobil 1 or Syntec. Use 89 octane gasoline. This helps tremendously on the highway but doesn't do much for city driving. At present I am getting a little over 19mpg in the city, which really sucks (sticker is 22). However, I am getting 26.5mpg on the highway, which is 1.5 better than the sticker number of 25. My next move will be a K&N air filter, which should help as much in the city as on the highway. Of course, all of this costs money. You get a good return on 89 octane gas on the highway. On a recent 800 mile trip I actually saved money by using the 89 octane. The air filter costs about $50, but this is a one time expense and might pay for itself.
  • rlafaverrlafaver Member Posts: 70
    Let me add that I test drove a Tundra, and I would have bought that or a Silverado, had they cost less. Both are much more comfortable than any model of Tacoma, and both have a much larger payload/towing capability, if that matters.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    I have a 2002 4x4 V6 Tacoma, and I've gone through the same worries about gas milage as you. In fact, I figure out the milage every time I fill up.
    You're still in break-in period, so don't worry. My milage went up by about 1-2mpg after it. I do run synthetic Amsoil oil, Amsoil air, but given the lead foot I have, I get very good milage (19sh on highway, 17.5-18 in the city).

    Another thing to consider is this: you got a V8. Don't expect it to use same gas as a V6 Tacoma. 16-17 you get is fairly good for a V8.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Member Posts: 566
    18 is probably as good as the Tundra will get; maybe towards 20. However, I thought 16-18 city/hiway was good for v8s. Ummm, I like Toyotas, but I too have been curious as to why the smaller v8 in the tundra gets comparable to worse mileage than larger competition. My v6 prerunner now gets 20+ easily after a K&N filter. But I struggled to break 18 for the longest. Ultimately its up to you, I would trade my little taco for your tundra with mileage woes in a hot second, if thats any consolation. Good luck and keep us posted
  • rlafaverrlafaver Member Posts: 70
    You will never get the mileage a small Ford V8 gets, and you can only dream about the 21mpg for a GM small V8. Your back seat is smaller than the Ford and FAR smaller than the extended cab Chevy. However, you have a Toyota, which is supposed to mean you will be good for the long haul. They are made for people who expect to exceed 200k miles on a vehicle, not that a Ford or Chevy won't. They also handle better, partly because they are smaller but mostly because of suspension design. Finally, the Tundra is hands down safer than any other pickup. The Tacoma 2WD is an excellent 2-seat car that you can haul stuff in, and not a lot of it. It does not handle crash tests very well, particularly side impact, and the Pre-Runner is too top heavy for good handling. The standard extended cab Tacoma (lower to the ground) can be equiped with a V6 only if you take a manual 5 speed transmission. So I suggest you think long and hard about giving up a Tundra for a Tacoma. You are going to spend $200 or $300 more for gasoline each year, but you can haul a lot more sand or bricks in yours than I can. Having said all that, I like my Tacoma, and it fits my budget.
  • lagitanelagitane Member Posts: 25
    From listening to you all, I think I'll keep the Tundra and just bite the bullet on the gas. I should have stuck with the original Tundra V-6 I had. I got 21 mpg on a 285 mile trip in April with it. It was a nice truck. Should have never test driven a V-8. Bad mistake. If you drive one, you'll want it! The difference was amazing, just had to have it. Just NOT a good financial decision. I'm a counselor; don't make tons of money, but do appreciate a good engine and power like everyone else. This puppy hauls [non-permissible content removed] and feels really grounded and strong (It's a TRD). After break in, I will try some of your suggestions about synthetic oil and the K&N filter. Can switch to 89 octane for long Hiway trips. Really scarey thing, though, is when you turn on the A/C & just watch the gas gage slowly but steadily drop. Ouch! I live in AZ, so not much chance of running this puppy w/o A/C. Gonna be a long, expensive summer. I gues, if worse comes to worse, I can always buy a fully-equiped camper and live in it. LOL Thanks again. Love this board. You people are much more helpful and SANE than those idiots on the Tundra board. They just argue and try to one up each other. It's annoying and juvenile. Wish Edmunds would do something to stop all the BS. Thanks again. You are appreciated. I'll visit here again to see what's up with Tacomas. I do like that new crew cab Tacoma they came out with this year; way cool. Dealers aren't dealing on it, however. Too popular. Have to wait.
  • dieselbreathdieselbreath Member Posts: 243
    So far I've read:
    - you're driving really easy, shifting under 2000 revs
    - your 4-cyl truck has a 4-valve-per-cyl. engine
    - you're not getting suitable mileage in town, but doing good on the highway.
    This is perfectly logical. You're only mistake is thinking that mileage is inversely proportional to REVS when it is proportional to EFFICIENCY.
    Small displacement engine designers increase power by reving the engine faster (to draw in more air & fuel). To increase efficiency at high revs, they've added more valves to let the engine breath. And they've likely optimized the engine timing, cams, etc. for a tradeoff between peak HP (good for marketing) and peak torque (good for acceleration).
    Now shifting at 2000 revs is fine if you're driving a V8, but your engine is just starting to wake up. Its almost the equivalent of shifting a V8 at 1000 revs when you shift your 4-banger at 2000 revs.
    On March 11th you wrote that the engine is turning 2200 RPM on the highway. And you're exceeding the rated MPG. Bingo! Try this:
    - keep your engine OVER 2000 revs for one tank of gas. I'll bet your mileage is almost the same, maybe even slightly better.
    - on the following tank, keep it over 2000 when accelerating (shift around 2500), but let it run below 2000 when decelerating before you downshift.
    - eventually, with experimentation you'll find engine speeds that work.
    But remember that with 4 valves, low RPMs will cause some fuel/air to blow right out the exhaust valve during the intake/exhaust overlap because the engine is designed to rev.
    Let it run in the range the engineers designed it for and it will:
    - run smoother
    - be less stressed (lower torque required)
    - last longer
    - get better mileage.
    If you really want good mileage at low REVs you'll need to change cams. Get an "RV cam" designed for torque instead of high-rev power and then its OK to drive like you do now. (that cam will have much less overlap) But I'd advise against it because you won't recoup your expenses and you may void your warantee. Your engine if begging to spin faster. Make it happy!
    That's just one engineer's opinion.
    What do the rest of you think?
    (PS: My favourite truck was my Landcruiser Diesel Wagon...great MPG and built like a tank!
    If you're serious about economy go to your VW dealer and ask for a Transporter Van with Diesel and 5-spd ... expect 34+ MPG in the city. My brother's friend just bought a used one with over 300,000 on the odometer and it gets over 30 MPG still. Just be careful on the highway because they are s-l-o-w :)
  • rlafaverrlafaver Member Posts: 70
    Thanks for the input. I got sort of the same advice earlier. I have since tried using 2200 as a rule for accelerating from a dead stop and I have tried 2500, which feels a bit much like a race. You are correct that the mileage was about the same. 2100 to 2200 seems to get something less than .5 mpg improvement. Keep in mind that I am usually driving without hinderance of traffic, so I can try these things for city driving. I feel for those folks who face "real" city traffic.
    Changing cams is drastic, but synthetic oil is something most people can afford and seems to generate improved mileage in all driving situations.
    89 octane gasoline boosts highway mileage enough to actually save money, but it does nothing for city mileage. Along with the oil, however, it does render the valves completely silent, which seems to me should decrease engine wear. Someone out there might have a more scientific opinion on the 89 octane stuff.
    I have decided to change to a K&N air filter in an attempt to get more benefit from the higher octane in the city. It seems logical that boosting air intake has to help, and the K&N should help combustion even when idling.
  • rlafaverrlafaver Member Posts: 70
    Everyone in my family considers me lead-footed. I only tried the low-rev thing as an experiment, knowing I would never stick to it, even if it improved mileage. It did not, so I am happily driving as I always have. Ordinary accelleration is usually under 2500 when unhindered, but I now allow the engine to exceed 3000 when turning onto a major highway in traffic. I have even pushed 4000 just to see how the engine reacts. It is good.
  • dieselbreathdieselbreath Member Posts: 243
    I think that if you're an "average" driver you normally won't get the rated MPG, unless you live somewhere rural where you drive a lot on secondary roads with 50 MPH limits. Keeping up on the freeway demands performance outside of the scope of the EPA fantasy-world.
    And the lead-foot tendencies play a huge factor, of course. That's one of the reasons I really like diesels ... they are built to drive foot-to-the-floor and still return good MPG. (and its harder to get into trouble with the law!)
  • lagitanelagitane Member Posts: 25
    So what deisel do you drive, and what would you recommend for someone on a very moderate budget. My step Father drives a big honking Ford Deisel and loves it, but price is way over my head. Any decent moderate priced ones out there you'd recommend? Toyota doesn't even make one that I'm aware of.
  • dieselbreathdieselbreath Member Posts: 243
    Well, you're almost out-of-luck in the US for a couple more years. Once the lower-sulphur diesel fuel is available (in 2006 ? I think) there should be more choices. I drive a VW New Beetle TDI, mostly because I'm 6'5" and it has more headroom than any other car on the market, but also because I was driving between Vancouver BC and Seattle WA at least 4 times a month when I bought it. (it has over 150,000 on the odometer now) ... 50+ MPG at 80+ MPH is hard to beat! (none of the hybrids can do that) I also have a big Chevy 5-ton truck with a CAT V8 diesel, and I had a Toyota Landcruiser Diesel in the past. The Landcruiser is a phenomenal rig ... but I don't think they've sold the diesel ones for several years now.
    But the Jeep Liberty is avail. in a diesel (for 2004) and the VW Passat (sedan and wagon) also for 2004. But I haven't heard of any small pickups yet. Your current rig is probably almost as good as it gets!
  • eharri3eharri3 Member Posts: 640
    IF Toyota owners have nothing better to do than post about 2-3 mpg gas mileage discrepancies, maybe they dont realize how lucky they are.
  • moparbadmoparbad Member Posts: 3,870
    I have 2003 Tacoma V6 4WD Xcab and my last tank of fuel provided 21 mpg. As I get more miles on the truck the mileage has improved. Strange is the fact that this truck gets better mpg when it is driven a little hard.

    re #65 the Liberty will not be available until 05 model year and as of last week VW is stating Passat TDI in sedan only initially and even then not until Feb. 04 at earliest. What is Toyota doing to improve MPG on it's trucks? I see no plans for hybrids and Toyota has no plans on bringing a diesel for it's Tacoma or Tundra. Even though Toyota already offers multiple excellent diesels for the Tacoma outside of North America.

    Until something better shows up the Tacoma is the best option available in compact light truck and Tundra is a competitive choice in full size.
  • rlafaverrlafaver Member Posts: 70
    Toyota might have spoiled some body, but they haven't spoiled me. This is my first. When I buy a new vehicle, any new vehicle, I expect the truth on the sticker mileage. I paid for it, and I want every dime's worth. As far as all the other smoke is concerned, the only reasons so far that I can say the truck is worth the cost is the handling, the quietness, and the power (considering it is a 4 cylinder). The handling is the best I've experienced on a pickup. However, the mileage sucks, the seats suck, the paint flakes off like it was painted with moisture on the truck, the paint is orange peeled as badly as I have ever seen a new vehicle, and on and on. I bought the thing, and I will live with it, but I just got back from a business trip tonight, and my back hurts too badly to get in bed. Guess I will have to drop another $700 for after-market seats. Where is the spoiling, eharri3?
  • rlafaverrlafaver Member Posts: 70
    I got Recaro seats for this Tacoma, and they look and feel like they were made for it. What an amazing seat. Firm, comfortable, and absolutely silent (NO SQUEAKS). The down side - $1770 for driver and passenger, and that is the low side on pricing for Recaro Trend seats. There should be a law that Toyota refund the money for the crappy seats they stick in Tacomas. I would ship them back in a heartbeat.
This discussion has been closed.