Toyota trucks

[Jeffy]

If I didn't have a Jeep, I'd consider one of these. 2.7L Short Cab built as an Expo rig. http://www.tacomaworld.com/forum/2nd...nd-taco-9.html

[STROMVADER]

Originally Posted by svs

I had a 1985 4-wheel drive. Last year made with the solid axel.

That has and always will be one of my favorite trucks. I marveled at them as a kid. Gotta love the days of old lifted Yotas!

[chazbird]

Did they 4 cyl ones ever have a timing chain? (Think so...)If so, what year did they change to a belt?

[Jeffy]

Originally Posted by chazbird

Did they 4 cyl ones ever have a timing chain? (Think so...)If so, what year did they change to a belt?

I seem to remember the 2.2L, 2.4L and 2.7L all having timing chains. I think only the V6's have timing belts.

[Tinfish]

Originally Posted by hilandfrog

Very nice

WOW the difference in 4 cylinder performance

2006= a 159 horsepower, 2.7 liter, 4-cylinder engine.

1994= 2.4L 117 hp I4 engine

I like the MPG too

Repo

I got curious and did the math a couple of days ago. I can't find the scrap of paper, but the weight/power ratio (for both hp and torque) is almost exactly identical for an early 1990s 22re truck and a 2011 4 cylinder. (And so is the mpg, for that matter.)

But the raw numbers are only part of the answer. I have a 2010 4x4 with the 4 cylinder, and it feels WAY less underpowered than the old 22re I used to own. Maybe the torque curve is broader, or maybe it's just that it is new instead of old and beat to shit.

And the brakes are so much better than the old ones that it isn't even funny.

[hilandfrog]

Originally Posted by Tinfish

I got curious and did the math a couple of days ago. I can't find the scrap of paper, but the weight/power ratio (for both hp and torque) is almost exactly identical for an early 1990s 22re truck and a 2011 4 cylinder. (And so is the mpg, for that matter.)

But the raw numbers are only part of the answer. I have a 2010 4x4 with the 4 cylinder, and it feels WAY less underpowered than the old 22re I used to own. Maybe the torque curve is broader, or maybe it's just that it is new instead of old and beat to shit.

And the brakes are so much better than the old ones that it isn't even funny.

My wife has an 07 Rav4, I4..... it gets up and goes

I'm not sure of the weight difference but the thing is way more zippy than even our last 01 tundra, w/ v-8

The brakes, well ya they suck

After seeing those #'s I'm wondering

Repo

[tattewell]

Ive got a couple Toyota's now, and have had many in the past, from a 79 4x4 with a 20R up to my current 07 Taco 4dr v6 4x4 sr5. Have had a few cruisers as well from 40's, a 55, a 60 and now a 73. Love em all, but they arent without their gremlins... but with that said, I would do it all again.

The new Tacoma may be larger, but even over here in Europe its fine on the roads, which are much smaller than most of you are probably used to.

[hugemoth]

Spring 1993 I bought a new base model 2wd 5spd 22re pickup for $6999.00. Now it has 247,000 miles and is running great. It's been by far the most reliable vehicle I've ever owned. I've replaced front brakes, U joints, timing chain, water pump, ECU, and normal wear stuff like tires and batteries. It'll probably go another 18 years.

[G.Gordon]

Major Yota love here.

Buddy had a taco with the 22re back in the early 80's. That truck was flat bullet proof.

I've had two 2003 tacos with double cab. One with 4cyl. that got totalled in a T-bone accident. Replaced it with the 3.4 6 cyl. double cab. Neither was 4x4.

I notice very little difference between the two other than fuel economy where the 4cyl won. The six does win pulling a heavier boat than my aluminum rig.

We also have a 2001 rav-4 with 238k miles. Peppy lil rig still, runs quiet and strong. Going for 300k.

Between the wife and I we have almost 700k yota miles under us with less than $1500 in "repairs".

[Tinfish]

Here are the numbers, both for regular cabs, 2wd.

2011: 159hp, 180 lb/ft, 3250 lb
1990: 112hp, 142 lb/ft, 2560 lb

Divide them out, and you'll see that they are almost identical. Now, those numbers may not be totally accurate -- this is as reported by Wikipedia, and the way they were calculated in 1990 and now may have changed in important ways. Like I said, the new truck feels a lot more powerful than the old one, and struggles less on uphills or when loaded.

Strikingly, the mpg has dramatically improved. The mpg figures from fueleconomy.gov (in other words, using the new standards for both 1990 and 2011 vehicles, for an apples to apples comparison) shows the 1990 as 18/21, and the 2011 as 21/25. More mpg from a larger, safer, and cleaner vehicle is impressive engineering.

[HardCase]

Originally Posted by Tinfish

Here are the numbers, both for regular cabs, 2wd.

2011: 159hp, 180 lb/ft, 3250 lb
1990: 112hp, 142 lb/ft, 2560 lb

Divide them out, and you'll see that they are almost identical. Now, those numbers may not be totally accurate -- this is as reported by Wikipedia, and the way they were calculated in 1990 and now may have changed in important ways. Like I said, the new truck feels a lot more powerful than the old one, and struggles less on uphills or when loaded.

Strikingly, the mpg has dramatically improved. The mpg figures from fueleconomy.gov (in other words, using the new standards for both 1990 and 2011 vehicles, for an apples to apples comparison) shows the 1990 as 18/21, and the 2011 as 21/25. More mpg from a larger, safer, and cleaner vehicle is impressive engineering.

I know that my '08 has quite a bit more zip than the '89 did, and both were/are 4cyl. As for mileage, I have not found the '08 to be significantly better. I'm getting 20mpg on the highway, maybe 21 if I really go easy. Perhaps those mileage figures are for a 4x2 instead of a 4x4.

[nskitts]

I will take mine in 2004 back and with a four cylinder/5 speed and steel wheels please.

[Tinfish]

Originally Posted by HardCase

I know that my '08 has quite a bit more zip than the '89 did, and both were/are 4cyl. As for mileage, I have not found the '08 to be significantly better. I'm getting 20mpg on the highway, maybe 21 if I really go easy. Perhaps those mileage figures are for a 4x2 instead of a 4x4.

The mpg numbers I gave were for regular cab, 2wd (just because that's what I used to compare power/weight ratios). My 2010 4x4 regular cab gets around 20mpg in mostly around town driving; the 1985 4Runner I used to have, with the 22re engine, got a bit less than that as I recall.

[HardCase]

Originally Posted by Tinfish

The mpg numbers I gave were for regular cab, 2wd (just because that's what I used to compare power/weight ratios). My 2010 4x4 regular cab gets around 20mpg in mostly around town driving; the 1985 4Runner I used to have, with the 22re engine, got a bit less than that as I recall.

That's what I figured. Mine is a regular cab, 4cyl., 5speed. I find that I get under 20 driving around town, more in the 17 range. I do a lot of short trips, though, plus I live in a cold climate, and those factors are hell on mileage.

[Buffalo Bill]

My guess on the Location is:

Looking east on main street just up the street from Mickey D's with the Judith Mountains in the distance, 4,231 feet above sea level. One of my favorite places on Earth..Great Steaks at the Mint Bar in Lewistown..

Sorry about your girlfriend........

Many Toyota in my garage over the years..88 4x4 5spd std cab 22r, 93 xcab 3.0 5spd 4x4, 70 fj40, 86 fj 60w/tpi v8, (2) Forerunners 94-95 3.0 5spds, (4) t100s w/3.4 by far the best truck for me, 2001 Tundra v8..All I have left is a 78 fj40 in baby shit brown color. I expect thats the one they'll endup burying me in..

Always like the rugged dependability of Toyota.

"Long Live the Great Plains"

Originally Posted by HardCase

I had an '89 Toyota 4x4, regular cab, put a pile of miles on it before I sold it, and loved the thing. No digital pics of that one, got rid of it (a decision I regretted for years) before digital cameras were around.

I got an '08 Regular Cab, 4x4, 4cyl. Tacoma, very basic, no intermittent wipers, no cruise-control. It does have AC, but you have to roll up the windows manually, which I discovered some younger kids these days find extremely perplexing and challenging. Anyway, it is quite a bit bigger than the '89, but I'm really pleased with it, haven't had any issues with it. I will say that I drove it on a 2800 mile round-trip shortly after buying it and it was fine, but the lack of cruise control was tiresome. And the mileage isn't great, 20mpg highway is pretty standard. Here it is:



While I was looking for a pic of the Taco to post I found this one.....was on the aforementioned trip, spending some great time with my girlfriend Lynn. That was the summer of '08, when the truck was fairly new. Sadly, she passed away (of natural causes) almost exactly a year after this pic was taken at the ripe old age of 52. I think of her every time I get into the truck. Can anyone from Montana (or elsewhere, I guess) tell where the pic was taken?