Tacoma manual versus auto tranny economy, real world

upcruiser

Perpetual Transient
Sounds like a reality show right? Ok, I have been obsessing lately over a 4x4 platform that is modern, durable, and flexible enough to meet my needs while also wanting to bump my avg mpg way up from my current daily driver and traveller (Disco I, 13mpg). So, perusing over stats and figures in my freetime lately I am seeing the trend of Toyota's auto trannies having a slight advantage in MPG's than the stick. I know on the bigger engined domestics the fuel economy has been better on the autos but I always was in the school of thinking for smaller displacement stuff with less torque an auto would negatively effect fuel consumption.

So, in the real world what are your experiences with the modern breed of auto's in today's Tacomas? I know the plusses and minuses of each tranny from other perspectives and I personally much enjoy driving a manual over an auto for most driving but just purely from a fuel economy and possibly from a "how much of a dog am I going to have with an auto 4 cylinder Tacoma loaded for a trip" perspective, what do you guys see from your experiences.

Thanks!
 

4x4mike

Adventurer
I don't have a Tacoma but I do have a '99 4wd 4Runner with a manual. Most of my driving is mixed and for a given tank it's 70% city and 30% highway and I get around or just over 300 miles or 17-18.5 mpg. While on the freeway I can get 20 mph all day long. On a recent trip from Sacramento to Bakersfield (300 miles) I got 23.5 mpg which is the best I've ever gotten. The drive didn't seem to have any wind, I had the CC set at 65mph and the AC was on for about half the drive. Once I got onto the city street mileage went down considerably. I have the 3.4 liter engine, a few after market skid plates, 265/75/16's and rock sliders. Other than those plus a Yakima bike rack I'm near stock.

I've got friends with 3rd gen autos and they have to baby the throttle to get what I get but most of the time they fall short.
 

hansonian

Observer
I've got a 2007 Tacoma with a auto trans. When I had the stock street tires I would average 315-320 miles per a tank of gas. I've gone to a beefier tire and my mileage has dropped to 290-300 miles per tank. This is a mixture of city and highway mileage driving the speed limit. If I load it up to go camping the mileage drops a bit. My last vehicle was a '07 Wrangler with a manual trans and the best mileage I got out of that was 285 on a tank which was all highway speeds.

I think no matter which way you go it'll be better than a Disco mileage wise.
 

djsixbillion

Adventurer
I had a 2006 Tacoma with the V6 and 6-speed manual. It was a blast to drive, but I never averaged more than 17-18 mpg, even all highway. I know that the current-gen 5-speed auto transmissions have a higher overdrive ratio than the 6-speed manual, which helps them achieve better economy in sustained highway cruising. My friend's 2005 with the auto tranny would routinely average 22-23 mpg on the highway.
 

TangoBlue

American Adventurist
I have a 3RZ with AT. I didn't buy it for it's "pocket-rocket" reputation. It just goes and goes and I don't have to "row" all the time. It's great off-road, especially when in 4Lo and in difficult terrain.

But it's all about gearing. If you build it up like I have mine you have to re-gear to maintain any fuel economy or power. Now, I get between 17 and 19 mpg; before the SAC I maintained about 20 mpg.
 

Martinjmpr

Wiffleball Batter
I had an 04 (1st gen) Taco with the 3.4 and the 5 speed manual and my current 99 4runner with the 3.4 and automatic. Despite the same engine and similar weights the manual Taco got noticeably better MPG. I can barely break 300 miles/tank on my 4runner, on the Taco, 350 was easy and 400 possible on the highway. I blame that difference squarely on the mushy slushbox.

My 4runner is the first 4x4 I've ever owned with an automatic and I've already decided that it's also my last. My next vehicle will most likely be an Xterra with a 6m.
 

upcruiser

Perpetual Transient
Interesting feedback so far. I wonder if the gen II auto tranny with its final drive is the key to the newfound fuel economy edge? How much of a dog is a Taco 2.7 with an auto in the gen II? My dream rig I am conceptualizing would be to run a small lift, a 235/85 AT with the stock 4.10's (or would it need regearing?) with a FWC type shell on the back. The regular cab Taco rocks a 110" wheelbase, an inch shorter than my 80 series so was thinking this tire size could offer a similar breakover angle to my 33's on the cruiser. I want to emphasize light weight all around and maximum offroad performance with the least amount of onroad compromise for handling and economy. I would like to keep the vehicle as mechanically stock as possible other than an OME lift.
 
Last edited:

SOAZ

Tim and Kelsey get lost..
I had an 04 (1st gen) Taco with the 3.4 and the 5 speed manual and my current 99 4runner with the 3.4 and automatic. Despite the same engine and similar weights the manual Taco got noticeably better MPG. I can barely break 300 miles/tank on my 4runner, on the Taco, 350 was easy and 400 possible on the highway. I blame that difference squarely on the mushy slushbox.

My 4runner is the first 4x4 I've ever owned with an automatic and I've already decided that it's also my last. My next vehicle will most likely be an Xterra with a 6m.

Just to throw something out there that might make you feel better about the slush box. I had a tacoma and now I have a 4runner. Both auto's though. The tacoma was significantly faster and better MPG. Having all of that extra metal and glass on the 4runner sure makes it more of a pig.
Now, that's all anecdotal, but take it for what it's worth. :elkgrin:

that being said, I'd get a manual if I could. They're fun!
 

RR1

Explorer
A couple miles per gallons either way you're splitting hairs. Driving enjoyment/control trumps fuel economy every time for me...and that is having a manual transmission.:smiley_drive: I average 18 mixed driving. V6

For going light as possible a FWC wouldn't be my first choice. A Flip Pac would be or a regular topper.
 
Last edited:

upcruiser

Perpetual Transient
A couple miles per gallons either way you're splitting hairs. Driving enjoyment/control trumps fuel economy every time for me...and that is having a manual transmission.:smiley_drive:

For going light as possible a FWC wouldn't be my first choice. A Flip Pac would be or a regular topper.

Yeah, I hear you on the manual fun to drive factor. A FWC shell is only 150lbs or so more than a Flippac and for 4 season use I think the FWC will suit my needs better than the Flippac. Plus I haul canoes and kayaks which makes the Flippac a no go for me anyway really. I need a secure space that is free of dust, water, and bugs. I had a cap with a bed setup in my Tundra which worked great for some stuff but I am more setting this up for multiple month trips with every conceivable weather condition. Overland Hadley made some great points in his thread in the pop ups section regarding some key differences between the two designs. I had thought the weight difference would have been much more with the FWC but he pointed out it isn't, especially when you set either of them up for living out of.
 

RR1

Explorer
Yeah, I hear you on the manual fun to drive factor. A FWC shell is only 150lbs or so more than a Flippac and for 4 season use I think the FWC will suit my needs better than the Flippac. Plus I haul canoes and kayaks which makes the Flippac a no go for me anyway really. I need a secure space that is free of dust, water, and bugs. I had a cap with a bed setup in my Tundra which worked great for some stuff but I am more setting this up for multiple month trips with every conceivable weather condition. Overland Hadley made some great points in his thread in the pop ups section regarding some key differences between the two designs. I had thought the weight difference would have been much more with the FWC but he pointed out it isn't, especially when you set either of them up for living out of.

Ahh...didn't know it was the shell model, my bad. Definitely a better choice.

I think your canoe is going to effect gas mileage more so than a transmission style.

Now not as "aero" as a canoe, my gas mileage goes way down hauling a couple mountain bikes on the roof, even with fork mount type rack....for long mileage days, I would take wheels off and haul them in the bed/topper.
 
Last edited:

Plannerman

Wandering Explorer
I had a 2009 DC 4x4 Tacoma with the V6 and manual and now have a 2010 DC 4x4 Tacoma V6 with automatic. Aside from transmission, the trucks were identically equipped. The auto runs about 8 to 15% more efficient than the manual. After 17000 miles, my overall average is 18.7 miles per gallon.

By the way, the 2009 was lemon lawed for a bad clutch pedal assembly that Toyota could not fix and a close friend is now having the exact same clutch problem.

I am a die hard manual lover, but the auto is definitely the way to go.
 

upcruiser

Perpetual Transient
Ahh...didn't know it was the shell model, my bad. Definitely a better choice.

I think your canoe is going to effect gas mileage more so than a transmission style.

Now not as "aero" as a canoe, my gas mileage goes way down hauling a couple mountain bikes on the roof, even with fork mount type rack....for long mileage days, I would take wheels off and haul them in the bed/topper.

Yeah, a canoe won't help things but I would likely only be hauling the canoe or kayaks for more local trips. The longer trips I wouldn't bring them, probably have my mountain bike, but would like to keep it inside whenever possible, maybe put it on the back or on the roof when driving short distances locally. I don't like having it out in the weather 24/7 if I can avoid it.
 

RR1

Explorer
Flip Pac VS FWC...

You could do an external rack with the Flip Pac, just hinge the top rails, heck it could build it to slide a canvas shade over the rails when the rails are in the "open" position.

Wouldn't be that hard to build, save yourself 150 pounds.

vanguard-high-low-shell-cap-truck-rack.jpg


Could use a poly bushing as a hinge, that way it wouldn't rattle.

Square4-LinkBungwithPolyBushings.jpg
 
Last edited:

Splat

New member
I've been lucky, 5spd with 4.30gear and 265/75/16 tires I average about 23mpg. This is a 2001 reg cab 4x4. The truck is stock except for bedliner, battery, lift and rims.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
185,535
Messages
2,875,631
Members
224,922
Latest member
Randy Towles
Top