First Drive Tacoma SR5 Test Drive

Beninbeta said:
I actually created a whole table for myself on different items with notes for after I drove them.
That all being said, I don't think you can go wrong with any of them. Just be sure to drive them and try to take them on the same drive for at least 20 mins each, even that is scary short for a $40-$60k investment. If anything makes me envious of Tim's job it's that he gets to spend a week with a vehicle. That would be awesome as try before you buy kind of thing.

I hope that helps!
Click to expand...
Excellent points. It is basically the same lines I went down except you are looking for even more "off-road" ability than I am. I need a DD with about 2-3K miles of towing a year. Some off-roading but mostly muddy fire roads, no rock crawling. And if engine longevity was the most important, I'd go Honda Ridgeline.

Frontier- even at 2 yrs old it just seems so dated. Cameras are part of it but other stuff as well. And after owning Nissan before, they always feel dated. Plus, Nissan paint is hard, lots of rock chips. When optioned out, it isn't much cheaper than others. Ride and power was fine though.
GM Twins - Love the AT4 Canyon. Seems like the best combo of both brands I that drove/priced. Except getting in/out was surprisingly awkward. I really did not care for that. Comfort was great, power was awesome, amenities work well. Back seat storage sucks. If you lift the rear seat to throw a box back there (case of beer) you have this very tall odd-shaped base that is in the way. Stupid design. Front camera staying on while driving is nice.
Ranger- Seems like the best value by pricing it out. Looks to come available with everything one could need. Hard to judge anything else since they haven't hit the street, but I do know I dislike the vertical screen. It's the same issue with the RAM. Lousy use of space. They just clutter the bottom of the screen with useless HVAC touch controls that would be better with knob/buttons/switches. Still think they should have a Tremor.
Tacoma- Most expensive for the money but you do get quite a bit compared to others. I think they priced the Sport too high. Loaded, it's within $500 of a Limited yet is not as well equipped. I also like the full-time 4wd option but it's only in the Limited. I hate the subscription requirement and that the cameras shut off when driving forward. From reports, power and ride is great. Still need to drive one.
Ridgeline- Really not bad. Great ride and comfortable. The best backseat of all of them, for cargo or pax. Also seems very dated but all Hondas do. Very generic and simple. Guess that's why they last so long.
 
Dusdaddy said:
Excellent points. It is basically the same lines I went down except you are looking for even more "off-road" ability than I am. I need a DD with about 2-3K miles of towing a year. Some off-roading but mostly muddy fire roads, no rock crawling. And if engine longevity was the most important, I'd go Honda Ridgeline.

Frontier- even at 2 yrs old it just seems so dated. Cameras are part of it but other stuff as well. And after owning Nissan before, they always feel dated. Plus, Nissan paint is hard, lots of rock chips. When optioned out, it isn't much cheaper than others. Ride and power was fine though.
GM Twins - Love the AT4 Canyon. Seems like the best combo of both brands I that drove/priced. Except getting in/out was surprisingly awkward. I really did not care for that. Comfort was great, power was awesome, amenities work well. Back seat storage sucks. If you lift the rear seat to throw a box back there (case of beer) you have this very tall odd-shaped base that is in the way. Stupid design. Front camera staying on while driving is nice.
Ranger- Seems like the best value by pricing it out. Looks to come available with everything one could need. Hard to judge anything else since they haven't hit the street, but I do know I dislike the vertical screen. It's the same issue with the RAM. Lousy use of space. They just clutter the bottom of the screen with useless HVAC touch controls that would be better with knob/buttons/switches. Still think they should have a Tremor.
Tacoma- Most expensive for the money but you do get quite a bit compared to others. I think they priced the Sport too high. Loaded, it's within $500 of a Limited yet is not as well equipped. I also like the full-time 4wd option but it's only in the Limited. I hate the subscription requirement and that the cameras shut off when driving forward. From reports, power and ride is great. Still need to drive one.
Ridgeline- Really not bad. Great ride and comfortable. The best backseat of all of them, for cargo or pax. Also seems very dated but all Hondas do. Very generic and simple. Guess that's why they last so long.
Click to expand...
Nice very well put. I think in the models with the multiterain camera for Tacoma they do stay on up to a certain speed. It might actually be with all of the trucks with the 360 camera option.

The Honda is nice too for sure especially if you need rear space.

I agree having switches and buttons for HVAC and volume control is a great to have.
 
Beninbeta said:
Nice very well put. I think in the models with the multiterain camera for Tacoma they do stay on up to a certain speed. It might actually be with all of the trucks with the 360 camera option.
Click to expand...
Stays on up to 10mph or when in 4L. When watching testers drive them, it seemed more distracting that way. The screen kept changing as they slowed down at intersections then accelerated away. I'd have to turn it off. My son's 2023 Off-Road actually blocks part of the image when the front camera is on at a stop light. Really weird.
 
The cameras staying on is a changing thing with Ford going to NHTSA and arguing they should be allowed to stay on since it is more of a safety risk reaching over and turning them back on all the time. Not all manufacturers have made that change or may make that change depending on how they view it.
 
I like this comment!

""But it strikes a similar chord when talking about MPG and you get the "If you care about MPG you shouldn't have bought a truck" argument which as also always irked me.""


In the next 6-12 months, I was hoping to change my current Jeep Cherokee TH v6 2019, which is rated to 4500 pounds towing capacity. Yes, I do not pull that much, the max I tow is 2500-3000 pounds, and it is nice to know your vehicle is not at its limits, and I must admit, it does a fantastic job.

We only have one vehicle at home, and it needs to do everything, and the fuel price where I am located is currently cheap at +- 5.75$ Canadian per US gallon, as it is usually around 6.50$-6.75$ and even went higher. My Cherokee is pretty good on fuel for long ride, can get over 30mpg (7.5l/100km), and around town, also not bad. I used a RAM 1500 Classic with a V6 for about a month last year, and the fuel it was using made me depressed and not wanting to go that way at all.

So, buying a new vehicle, the mpg is IMPORTANT to me. Now where it hurts, the towing capabilities are all gone in that segment, manufacturers pushing you to mid-side SUVs which are very costly and do not need the space or pickups. I always joke saying that now, SUVs the size of my Jeep can only tow two full trash cans and that’s about it.

Seriously, I am starting to wonder if the best option for me is to stretch my Cherokee. I do not need bigger, I do not want to spend an excessive amount of money, but I need my towing capabilities, and I do not want to spend $$$ on fuel weekly.
 
zonedout said:
Not me. I want a pretty basic truck with heated seats/wheel, some good towing features, and a powerful engine. Basically a cheaper "volume seller" truck with a good motor for towing. But manufacturers are happy to bankrupt you if you want the good engine.

Why can't I get a diesel in a Chevy LT? Why can't I get a 6.2 in an LT? Why couldn't I get an EcoDiesel in a Big Horn? Why can't I get a H/O in a new Big Horn?

And on an on.

(Canadian, availability might be somewhat different in US)




I've made the underpowered comment because compared to the Colorado/Canyon it's significantly down on power while being noisier and more expensive.
Click to expand...
Amen. I wish I could get a Silverado LT with the 6.2, heated seats and not much else.
 
Einstein said:
I like this comment!

""But it strikes a similar chord when talking about MPG and you get the "If you care about MPG you shouldn't have bought a truck" argument which as also always irked me.""


In the next 6-12 months, I was hoping to change my current Jeep Cherokee TH v6 2019, which is rated to 4500 pounds towing capacity. Yes, I do not pull that much, the max I tow is 2500-3000 pounds, and it is nice to know your vehicle is not at its limits, and I must admit, it does a fantastic job.

We only have one vehicle at home, and it needs to do everything, and the fuel price where I am located is currently cheap at +- 5.75$ Canadian per US gallon, as it is usually around 6.50$-6.75$ and even went higher. My Cherokee is pretty good on fuel for long ride, can get over 30mpg (7.5l/100km), and around town, also not bad. I used a RAM 1500 Classic with a V6 for about a month last year, and the fuel it was using made me depressed and not wanting to go that way at all.

So, buying a new vehicle, the mpg is IMPORTANT to me. Now where it hurts, the towing capabilities are all gone in that segment, manufacturers pushing you to mid-side SUVs which are very costly and do not need the space or pickups. I always joke saying that now, SUVs the size of my Jeep can only tow two full trash cans and that’s about it.

Seriously, I am starting to wonder if the best option for me is to stretch my Cherokee. I do not need bigger, I do not want to spend an excessive amount of money, but I need my towing capabilities, and I do not want to spend $$$ on fuel weekly.
Click to expand...

You might be a good candidate for a used 2014 to 2022 GMC Canyon Duramax. Little 4 cylinder diesel, it gets > 30 mpg on the freeway unloaded and has over 6000 pounds towing IIRC. They are a little pricey though.

Jeep Grand Cherokee also has the more powerful V6 Eco Diesel, though you basically roll the dice on that engine; some guys have no issues past 350k miles and some lose their entire bottom end just outside warranty + other emissions issues.
 
C46 said:
Amen. I wish I could get a Silverado LT with the 6.2, heated seats and not much else.
Click to expand...

I'll even take the work truck with the top engine, as long as I can pay for bumper/mirror caps/door handle upgrades so that it doesn't look like it escaped the factory half baked.
 
Here are some direct quotes from Brian and Craig (Texas truck channel) during Tim's newest video about the Tacoma.

These were a direct responses from when Tim asked if they felt it was underpowered:

"Not an inspiring powertrain"
"Sounds rackety, almost like a diesel"
"Turbo dies off at 4500 rpm"
"It could have a little more kill mode"
"It feels de-tuned"
"Ford and GM let It go on boil a little longer"
"It did not feel optimized"
"The Toyota feels like it's holding back the whole time and capable of more"

They didn't provide an overall thought but it seems like Craig feels like the truck is fine where it's at and Brian wishes is it had more.

The quote with the biggest impact to me if I were a potential buyer would be that "it did not feel optimized" and it "sounded rackety."

Those are similar quotes to what you heard about the third gen V6 on release. Toyota was never able to get that drivetrain optimized.

Listening to other 24 Tacoma owners talk I hear similar. Usually it's followed up by comments about Toyota reliability...

I don't know, time will tell. Those aren't inspiring comments put on a new truck priced several thousand dollars more than the competition.
 
Fightnfire said:
Here are some direct quotes from Brian and Craig (Texas truck channel) during Tim's newest video about the Tacoma.

These were a direct responses from when Tim asked if they felt it was underpowered:

"Not an inspiring powertrain"
"Sounds rackety, almost like a diesel"
"Turbo dies off at 4500 rpm"
"It could have a little more kill mode"
"It feels de-tuned"
"Ford and GM let It go on boil a little longer"
"It did not feel optimized"
"The Toyota feels like it's holding back the whole time and capable of more"

They didn't provide an overall thought but it seems like Craig feels like the truck is fine where it's at and Brian wishes is it had more.

The quote with the biggest impact to me if I were a potential buyer would be that "it did not feel optimized" and it "sounded rackety."

Those are similar quotes to what you heard about the third gen V6 on release. Toyota was never able to get that drivetrain optimized.

Listening to other 24 Tacoma owners talk I hear similar. Usually it's followed up by comments about Toyota reliability...

I don't know, time will tell. Those aren't inspiring comments put on a new truck priced several thousand dollars more than the competition.
Click to expand...
Again, having driven it myself I was completely happy with the power. So according to this post half of people will find it fine in terms of power and the other not. Cool, when do we get to stop saying the same thing over and over and over and over...?
 
Last edited:
I think history is creating a situation where Toyota has a credibility issue. The Tacoma always had 4 cylinders engines, with the '95 starting out with a 2.4/2.7 I-4 and the 3.4, 4 cam V6 as the power option. Then came the 4.0 1GR-FE and all was still pretty good in Tacoma world. Then 2016 came and the Tacoma got the 3.5L V6 2GR-FKS, aka the "Highlander engine" to pair with the still serving 2.7L I-4. For nine years this engine and its transmissions has had it benefactors and its detractors, with okay fuel economy, but more than a few people not impressed with its power (Full disclosure, in my almost three year truck search odyssey I tried both I-4 and V6 flavors of 2016 and on Tacoma's; the four was awful, the 3.5 adequate).

Toyota is on the turbo 4 bandwagon now and are sensitive to "another Highlander engine?!?" concern:

https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a45954715/2024-toyota-tacoma-engine-explained/

To me it sounds a lot like Honda detailing all the changes they made to the Passport chassis when it became the Ridgeline.

I think this will be a healthy debate and Ford, if they can ever get their act (and their workers from Dearborn Electric to Wayne Assembly) together, to provide a new V6 competitor to the I-4 trucks (sorry Frontier/Gladiator your precede the new 31XX-2 /TNGA-F models).

​

 
Beninbeta said:
Again, having driven it myself I was completely by the power. So according to this post half of people will find it fine in terms of power and the other not. Cool, when do we get to stop saying the same thing over and over and over and over...?
Click to expand...

My post wasn't actually pointed at you I realize you started this thread but it seems to have become the discussion place for all things 2024 Tacoma and other midsize trucks in comparison.

I would answer you though and say I'm glad you're fine with it but I'm not sure if you being okay with it should stop everybody else from discussing it? Also, it's a truck forum where else do things get discussed over and over and over and over if not on a truck forum?
 
GMT 900 said:
I think history is creating a situation where Toyota has a credibility issue. The Tacoma always had 4 cylinders engines, with the '95 starting out with a 2.4/2.7 I-4 and the 3.4, 4 cam V6 as the power option. Then came the 4.0 1GR-FE and all was still pretty good in Tacoma world. Then 2016 came and the Tacoma got the 3.5L V6 2GR-FKS, aka the "Highlander engine" to pair with the still serving 2.7L I-4. For nine years this engine and its transmissions has had it benefactors and its detractors, with okay fuel economy, but more than a few people not impressed with its power (Full disclosure, in my almost three year truck search odyssey I tried both I-4 and V6 flavors of 2016 and on Tacoma's; the four was awful, the 3.5 adequate).

Toyota is on the turbo 4 bandwagon now and are sensitive to "another Highlander engine?!?" concern:

https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a45954715/2024-toyota-tacoma-engine-explained/

To me it sounds a lot like Honda detailing all the changes they made to the Passport chassis when it became the Ridgeline.

I think this will be a healthy debate and Ford, if they can ever get their act (and their workers from Dearborn Electric to Wayne Assembly) together, to provide a new V6 competitor to the I-4 trucks (sorry Frontier/Gladiator your precede the new 31XX-2 /TNGA-F models).

​

Click to expand...
Time will tell, I did ask Ghosted_trd if he felt is was underd powered. He too delivery last week and has over 600 miles on it. However, if you watch TRD Jon's video on the TRD Pro drive event, you'l find Ghosted in the back seat on that same ride. Jon said he thought the power in the gas model was more than enough from his drives at the event.

Ghosted's reply was short: "Not at all! This new powertrain is great and it’s surprisingly really quick." So again it's all perspective. It's an expensive truck and would it have been great of the hybrid were standard at the price of the gas model, Hell Ya! But I can see where some will find the engine not to their liking, the truck over priced and not for them, and that's great. As you said if only Ford would get their act together they might make up some ground!
 
Fightnfire said:
My post wasn't actually pointed at you I realize you started this thread but it seems to have become the discussion place for all things 2024 Tacoma and other midsize trucks in comparison.

I would answer you though and say I'm glad you're fine with it but I'm not sure if you being okay with it should stop everybody else from discussing it? Also, it's a truck forum where else do things get discussed over and over and over and over if not on a truck forum?
Click to expand...
Fair enough!
 
Fightnfire said:
Here are some direct quotes from Brian and Craig (Texas truck channel) during Tim's newest video about the Tacoma.

These were a direct responses from when Tim asked if they felt it was underpowered:

"Not an inspiring powertrain"
"Sounds rackety, almost like a diesel"
"Turbo dies off at 4500 rpm"
"It could have a little more kill mode"
"It feels de-tuned"
"Ford and GM let It go on boil a little longer"
"It did not feel optimized"
"The Toyota feels like it's holding back the whole time and capable of more"

They didn't provide an overall thought but it seems like Craig feels like the truck is fine where it's at and Brian wishes is it had more.

The quote with the biggest impact to me if I were a potential buyer would be that "it did not feel optimized" and it "sounded rackety."

Those are similar quotes to what you heard about the third gen V6 on release. Toyota was never able to get that drivetrain optimized.

Listening to other 24 Tacoma owners talk I hear similar. Usually it's followed up by comments about Toyota reliability...

I don't know, time will tell. Those aren't inspiring comments put on a new truck priced several thousand dollars more than the competition.
Click to expand...
You did misquote them a bit.
The fall off was 4500 rpm for a Mustang engine and 5k-5700 rpm for the Taco.
"Sound rackety like the GM 4 banger"
"It's objectively better and notably faster"
"It's a better truck tool"
Best quote though:
Craig:
"Ford or GM owner are more in a hot rod mindset and don't care about longevity."
 
Fightnfire said:
The quote with the biggest impact to me if I were a potential buyer would be that "it did not feel optimized" and it "sounded rackety."

Those are similar quotes to what you heard about the third gen V6 on release. Toyota was never able to get that drivetrain optimized.

Listening to other 24 Tacoma owners talk I hear similar. Usually it's followed up by comments about Toyota reliability...

I don't know, time will tell. Those aren't inspiring comments put on a new truck priced several thousand dollars more than the competition.
Click to expand...
This is my thing concerning the Toyota comments about power: when have they ever been the top? When they released the previous Gen, it was one year after GM introduced the new Colorado with over 300hp. The Taco was 270hp? Yet, it didn't seem to affect their sales any. I think that's just one more trait of Toyota which keeps their customers loyal. They ignore the BS. They don't play the "numbers" game with the other brands. I've never owned a Toyota as I always thought everyone else made too big a deal out of them. But now that I am shopping mid-size, I can't deny the sensibility.
 
Dusdaddy said:
This is my thing concerning the Toyota comments about power: when have they ever been the top? When they released the previous Gen, it was one year after GM introduced the new Colorado with over 300hp. The Taco was 270hp? Yet, it didn't seem to affect their sales any. I think that's just one more trait of Toyota which keeps their customers loyal. They ignore the BS. They don't play the "numbers" game with the other brands. I've never owned a Toyota as I always thought everyone else made too big a deal out of them. But now that I am shopping mid-size, I can't deny the sensibility.
Click to expand...

It's definitely not a sales thing I believe Toyota would be number one in sales if they completely shit the bed with this new truck. They've been so good for so long.

I do think some of their loyal customers are getting a little tired of it and changing their tune. I was on a couple different Toyota forums when the third gen Tacoma was announced and then the problems started popping up. You couldn't talk bad about those trucks there. I've joked about it but anything wrong with those trucks was designed that way by the engineer you're just too stupid to see why.

However, those same forums discussing the fourth gen and specifically the price you're paying for what you're getting there's a different tone. It's a little bit of a perfect storm for Toyota and the Tacoma looking both ways. In the past I don't believe there was any true competition to the truck, It was just that much better than everybody else. But now GM has put out a damn good product with the Colorado and the Canyon and the new Ranger looks promising as well and suddenly for a lot of people it's getting harder to look at that price difference, their value proposition.

I don't think it will change necessarily Toyota will still dominate sales in the mid-size market, I don't think GM and Ford care if they dominate sales in the mid-size market.
 
Fightnfire said:
It's definitely not a sales thing I believe Toyota would be number one in sales if they completely shit the bed with this new truck. They've been so good for so long.
Click to expand...
Oh it'll be a sales thing. That's my point. All of these things about power Like Ben said, I just don't think it matters.

Besides, the Pro and Trailhunter haven't even been driven yet. I think that will change the narrative the most.
 
Beninbeta said:
You did misquote them a bit.
The fall off was 4500 rpm for a Mustang engine and 5k-5700 rpm for the Taco.
"Sound rackety like the GM 4 banger"
"It's objectively better and notably faster"
"It's a better truck tool"
Best quote though:
Craig:
"Ford or GM owner are more in a hot rod mindset and don't care about longevity."
Click to expand...
The best part of that discussion was when I asked Brian why he thought it was so underpowered and it was a second faster than the outgoing model. Uh.. LOL

It is all about perspective for sure. I've heard of many people who feel like it is slow like Brian said, then when you point out it is a second quicker, they are shocked. Driving a turbo engine just feels different and, without the rumble, feels like it is slower.

I am curious on how a tune would do for that truck. Would it make Brian happy? Probably. Would it be even faster? Sure. Does that matter to most Tacoma buyers? Nah.

Same conversation happened when the new Tundra came out and the Ford EcoBoost first came out. I saw a FB post just the other day with somebody suggesting the 5.0L V8 is just as quick as the 3.5L EcoBoost and the fuel economy is the same. That tells me they didn't do real testing and they just went on feel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top