The new 3.5L 6/sp out pull the Canyon Diesel.

[Antman]

That's not really how that works unless you are comparing drivelines that are very similar.:behindsofa:
The ECU will pick the best gear to keep the trucks in (hopefully), so they won't be in that 1:1 transmission gear at the same point in the powerband/wheel speed even if they had identical axle ratios. Highest available torque multiplier is the lowest gear for the speed at the time, this is a product of total drive ratio at the time and unless you are in first or final gear either engine can adjust it's the drive ratio as necessary to maximize speed or power.

e.g. if both the Tacoma and the colorado were in 4th (1:1 and 1.16:1 transmission ratio respectively) the drive ratio in 4th gear would be ~3.91 and ~3.96 respectively. In almost every gear the Colorado is at almost exactly the same drive ratio as the Tacoma Colorado/tacoma comparison.

Even this doesn't matter because the diesel Colorado makes it's power and maxes out at 2/3 the revs of the tacoma so they are never in the same gear at the same time respective to speed and acceleration. In order to go the same speed at max revs the Colorado would have had to be around 2 gears higher than the Tacoma at a 30% higher gear ratio. The Diesel Colorado is not meant for speed, I'd be surprised if you can even get it over ~90 MPH. :bored: But it pulls significantly more weight and gets better mileage.:yo:

Axle ratio is really only meaningful for performance in very similar powerband and driveline combos. e.g Jeep unlimited to 4runner. Or if you are figuring out whether a wheel jam will snap an axle or driveshaft first.
:sobbing:

OK- I agree with everything you say here and that there are many variables to consider.

But just for arguments sake, let's put the 3.42 axle into the Tacoma and take a run up that hill. The difference would be dramatic- time, fuel and speed would all suffer because the tranny would need to be in a gear (or two) lower the entire time.

Barring reliability, I would take the Chevy all day to tow that load. The test is just a small snapshot of it's towing ability. I would venture to say it's more capable in this area in every respect.

 

[Jetboy]

Part of towing is fuel economy under load. Getting 6 MPG vs 15 MPG makes a large cost difference. That's important to a lot of folks.

A diesel will never beak even on the increase in cost of purchase for a retail customer. It's an easy calculation in excel. I've done it many times. At today's fuel prices, the math doesn't work. There will be a cost difference but the gasoline engine is cheaper.

For example let's say you pay the $4k increase for the Canyon diesel. And you always - for the entire life of the Canyon - have a trailer hooked up. Of course this is nonsense, but let's use it. You get 18mpg.

Compare this to a gasoline model that gets 13mpg doing the same thing. (I used the fuel ratios, although reality suggests that the Tacoma if it slowed down to as slow as the Canyon would probably pick up a few mpg.)

If we do a simple calculation using the current cost of fuel in my area 1.61 for gasoline, 1.81 for diesel. It'll take 178,000 miles to break even. BUT>>> that's ignoring the time value of money. If you factor even a very low rate of 3% and drive 15k miles a year, the cost never matches up. The diesel will never be cheaper.

There might be a reason to own a diesel. Low cost of ownership or use is not one of them. Not empty. Not towing a trailer.

 

[Jetboy]

OK- I agree with everything you say here and that there are many variables to consider.

But just for arguments sake, let's put the 3.42 axle into the Tacoma and take a run up that hill. The difference would be dramatic- time, fuel and speed would all suffer because the tranny would need to be in a gear (or two) lower the entire time.

Barring reliability, I would take the Chevy all day to tow that load. The test is just a small snapshot of it's towing ability. I would venture to say it's more capable in this area in every respect.

Both vehicles have the choice of what final ratio is best for the engine's output. With the 3.42 in a tacoma it would just drop a gear and probably run almost exactly the same. If the final drive is the same in 4th gear instead of 3rd gear it's immaterial. The result is the same. The only change that happens in the middle of the gearset is a lower ratio diff will effectively narrow the gears final drive ratios. The GM has 8 speeds vs the Tacomas 6. The GM has every advantage in gearing regardless of the axle ratio difference.

To be specific for this instance if the GM was presumably in 4th gear? a drop to 3rd would go from 1.67 to 2.10. The final drive would be exactly the same as the Canyon having a 4.31 rear axle ratio in 4th gear. When we had 3 speed automatics it mattered. Now it's really just a question of matching transmission/engine/axle, but the ratio of the axle doesn't really matter if the transmission can function properly.

The disadvantage is that the GM 8 speed is just a crappy 8 speed. It's already getting a reputation for being a problem child. Getting confused when to shift. failing to engage, etc. Not a big surprise there. My last GM Allison 1000 didn't make it to 80k before it had the magic glitter in the oil and shredded the gears. And they are $$$ to replace. It had two sensor failures before that that cause shift problems. Just kinda par for the course on this issue. I like to complain that we still have a 5 speed, but if the alternative is rush to market I'll take 5 working gears over 8 potential gears that only work some of the time.

 

[Antman]

Both vehicles have the choice of what final ratio is best for the engine's output. With the 3.42 in a tacoma it would just drop a gear and probably run almost exactly the same. If the final drive is the same in 4th gear instead of 3rd gear it's immaterial. The result is the same. The only change that happens in the middle of the gearset is a lower ratio diff will effectively narrow the gears final drive ratios. The GM has 8 speeds vs the Tacomas 6. The GM has every advantage in gearing regardless of the axle ratio difference.

To be specific for this instance if the GM was presumably in 4th gear? a drop to 3rd would go from 1.67 to 2.10. The final drive would be exactly the same as the Canyon having a 4.31 rear axle ratio in 4th gear. When we had 3 speed automatics it mattered. Now it's really just a question of matching transmission/engine/axle, but the ratio of the axle doesn't really matter if the transmission can function properly.

The disadvantage is that the GM 8 speed is just a crappy 8 speed. It's already getting a reputation for being a problem child. Getting confused when to shift. failing to engage, etc. Not a big surprise there. My last GM Allison 1000 didn't make it to 80k before it had the magic glitter in the oil and shredded the gears. And they are $$$ to replace. It had two sensor failures before that that cause shift problems. Just kinda par for the course on this issue. I like to complain that we still have a 5 speed, but if the alternative is rush to market I'll take 5 working gears over 8 potential gears that only work some of the time.

So...you are saying if the Tacoma had a higher rear end ratio the test results would be basically the same because the overall gear ratio would be similar or the same, right?

The results would not be the same. The overall speed would be slower- especially since the Tacoma was running at or near redline the entire time. The fuel mileage would suffer too. Like I said, the difference would be dramatic. :doh:

 

[Jetboy]

So...you are saying if the Tacoma had a higher rear end ratio the test results would be basically the same because the overall gear ratio would be similar or the same, right?

The results would not be the same. The overall speed would be slower- especially since the Tacoma was running at or near redline the entire time. The fuel mileage would suffer too. Like I said, the difference would be dramatic. :doh:

Yes. The only place there would be a difference is 1st and 6th gear. As long as there are enough gears in the transmission, it makes no difference at all whether the axle is higher or lower. It might matter whether it is well matched, but that could mean higher or lower by a slight amount in any given gear. It's not something that's really debatable. It's just simple math.

For the Tacoma to make peak power it would be at 6,000rpms. How you get there is immaterial. By axle ratio or transmission doesn't matter.

For the Duramax peak power is at 3500rpms. Same thing. How you get the engine to 3,500rpms doesn't matter. In this case the engine at peak power could not produce enough power to overcome gravity and friction and maintain the speed limit. 150hp just wasn't enough no matter how you slice it. Just because it makes more black smoke doesn't make 150 diesel hp any more useful than 150 gasoline hp.

 

[JeremyB]

Yes. The only place there would be a difference is 1st and 6th gear. As long as there are enough gears in the transmission, it makes no difference at all whether the axle is higher or lower. It might matter whether it is well matched, but that could mean higher or lower by a slight amount in any given gear. It's not something that's really debatable. It's just simple math.

If only I had time to chart out wheel force vs speed for the two vehicles, your point would be very obvious.

 

[Swarty]

Definitely

OK- I agree with everything you say here and that there are many variables to consider.

But just for arguments sake, let's put the 3.42 axle into the Tacoma and take a run up that hill. The difference would be dramatic- time, fuel and speed would all suffer because the tranny would need to be in a gear (or two) lower the entire time.

Barring reliability, I would take the Chevy all day to tow that load. The test is just a small snapshot of it's towing ability. I would venture to say it's more capable in this area in every respect.

Absolutely, that diesel is a beast and would pull loads that the Tacoma would crack under, but it'll never do it fast, this was a weird test.

 

[Jetboy]

Absolutely, that diesel is a beast and would pull loads that the Tacoma would crack under, but it'll never do it fast, this was a weird test.

Not sure if this is a joke. Otherwise it's just not true. Unless the laws of physics changed and no one told me, the Tacoma will produce about 60% more power than the Canyon. In an absolute measurement, the tacoma will pull 60% more. It may do so at high rpms and suck down fuel, but there's really no question in terms of pure pulling ability the tacoma will out pull the canyon all day every day.

Does that make a better overall tow vehicle? Probably not. Rear drum brakes are just one reason. Soft suspension and high ride height are others. Shitty seats and cheap interior make it less comfortable as well. None of that changes the fact that the tacoma will always out pull the diesel canyon.

 

[Dalko43]

The only way this topic is relevant to the 5th gen forum is the fact that the engine might wind up in a 4Runner some day. It can't be tangential based on that fact.

The title of, and arguably intent, of the thread was about the Tacoma "out-pulling" the Canyon....doesn't at all seem relevant to the 5th gen.

That the 3.5L Tacoma engine might end up in the next gen 4runner is not a fact, but rather an implication by the OP, and it certainly seemed less emphasized than the Canyon vs Tacoma performance, but we're getting subjective at this point. And anyhow, any discussion about potential engines for the 6th gen 4runner should probably go in a 6th gen sub-section. We've had enough "What will the 6th gen look like" threads as it is.

A diesel will never beak even on the increase in cost of purchase for a retail customer. It's an easy calculation in excel. I've done it many times. At today's fuel prices, the math doesn't work. There will be a cost difference but the gasoline engine is cheaper.

For example let's say you pay the $4k increase for the Canyon diesel. And you always - for the entire life of the Canyon - have a trailer hooked up. Of course this is nonsense, but let's use it. You get 18mpg.

Compare this to a gasoline model that gets 13mpg doing the same thing. (I used the fuel ratios, although reality suggests that the Tacoma if it slowed down to as slow as the Canyon would probably pick up a few mpg.)

If we do a simple calculation using the current cost of fuel in my area 1.61 for gasoline, 1.81 for diesel. It'll take 178,000 miles to break even. BUT>>> that's ignoring the time value of money. If you factor even a very low rate of 3% and drive 15k miles a year, the cost never matches up. The diesel will never be cheaper.

There might be a reason to own a diesel. Low cost of ownership or use is not one of them. Not empty. Not towing a trailer.

178k miles is barely scratching the surface for the lifespan of a diesel...so it's entirely plausible that an owner (especially one inclined to tow) would keep such a truck for that long and perhaps longer and thus be able to validate his extra $ spent on the diesel option. After all, engine longevity is one of the big reasons why commercial and private tow rigs prefer diesel engines over gasoline ones.

178k miles on gasoline engine, even a Toyota one = a well-worn engine. The average gasoline engine is lucky to survive much past 250k miles without a significant rework...yeah I know some survive well beyond that; key word there is some.

Also, you're correct that it takes quite a bit of miles and/or years for a brand new diesel purchase to win the financial argument over gasoline. But you're entirely excluding from your analysis the massive advantage in resale value that diesel engines have over gasoline ones.

Go compare a 2005-2007 gasoline Ram 2500 to a diesel variant of similar condition and mileage. The diesel variant, on average, fetches a resale price of 2x (sometimes higher) what the gasoline one fetches.

Am i saying that a used diesel Colorado will have a similar price advantage over a used Tacoma in 5 years time...not necessarily, especially given Toyota's reputation. But it's not unreasonable at all to expect the Chevy diesel truck to fetch a premium over Toyota's gas truck, barring any major recalls or issues with the Chevy.

The diesel Chevy costs more up front, but you'll likely get more of your money back when it comes time to sell it. Combine that with fuel savings and it's a little more apparent why a person looking for a mid-sized tow rig might prefer the diesel engine for financial reasons. Obviously there are other factors that need to be taken into account: annual running costs; reliability/repair issues; ect. In a few years' time, we should have enough real-world data to fill in the gaps.

Edit: BTW, would you mind explaining exactly how the annual rate of inflation (which has fluctuated between 3% and -.34% over the last 7 years) would affect the cost analysis between buying a diesel vs a gasoline engine? Perhaps show us a little math.

 

[1engineer]

The title of, and arguably intent, of the thread was about the Tacoma "out-pulling" the Canyon....doesn't at all seem relevant to the 5th gen.

That the 3.5L Tacoma engine might end up in the next gen 4runner is not a fact, but rather an implication by the OP, and it certainly seemed less emphasized than the Canyon vs Tacoma performance, but we're getting subjective at this point. And anyhow, any discussion about potential engines for the 6th gen 4runner should probably go in a 6th gen sub-section. We've had enough "What will the 6th gen look like" threads as it is.



178k miles is barely scratching the surface for the lifespan of a diesel...so it's entirely plausible that an owner (especially one inclined to tow) would keep such a truck for that long and perhaps longer and thus be able to validate his extra $ spent on the diesel option. After all, engine longevity is one of the big reasons why commercial and private tow rigs prefer diesel engines over gasoline ones.

178k miles on gasoline engine, even a Toyota one = a well-worn engine. The average gasoline engine is lucky to survive much past 250k miles without a significant rework...yeah I know some survive well beyond that; key word there is some.

Also, you're correct that it takes quite a bit of miles and/or years for a brand new diesel purchase to win the financial argument over gasoline. But you're entirely excluding from your analysis the massive advantage in resale value that diesel engines have over gasoline ones.

Go compare a 2005-2007 gasoline Ram 2500 to a diesel variant of similar condition and mileage. The diesel variant, on average, fetches a resale price of 2x (sometimes higher) what the gasoline one fetches.

Am i saying that a used diesel Colorado will have a similar price advantage over a used Tacoma in 5 years time...not necessarily, especially given Toyota's reputation. But it's not unreasonable at all to expect the Chevy diesel truck to fetch a premium over Toyota's gas truck, barring any major recalls or issues with the Chevy.

The diesel Chevy costs more up front, but you'll likely get more of your money back when it comes time to sell it. Combine that with fuel savings and it's a little more apparent why a person looking for a mid-sized tow rig might prefer the diesel engine for financial reasons. Obviously there are other factors that need to be taken into account: annual running costs; reliability/repair issues; ect. In a few years' time, we should have enough real-world data to fill in the gaps.

Edit: BTW, would you mind explaining exactly how the annual rate of inflation (which has fluctuated between 3% and -.34% over the last 7 years) would affect the cost analysis between buying a diesel vs a gasoline engine? Perhaps show us a little math.

Give us a break man. What, did you go buy a GMC diesel or something?
[MENTION=118321]Jetboy[/MENTION] I totally agree with one exception: If I were doing a drawbar pull test on a dead load (sled with 5K or something) the GM would own the Tacoma. In retrospect though the tractive effort of both vehicles will be close because of tire adhesion to ground, which would render the extra torque of the GM useless. But, unless I am pulling stumps the winner is the Tacoma because that all important dimension, time, is factored in.

Bottom line: If you have enough torque to break traction then that is the maximum amount of torque you can use.

 

[Dalko43]

Give us a break man. What, did you go buy a GMC diesel or something?

Do you have a problem with what I said? I think my post was fairly accurate, but if you disagree, please explain.

I don't own a GMC, I own a Toyota 4runner, hence why I visit this forum. But it's quite ridiculous how some on this forum get their panties in a bunch by even the slightest hint of appreciation for vehicles made by other companies...and I've been pretty frank about the fact that there are a lot of unknowns with the Chevy/GMC diesel, so I don't think I've been overly appreciative at that.

 

[1engineer]

Do you have a problem with what I said? I think my post was fairly accurate, but if you disagree, please explain.

I don't own a GMC, I own a Toyota 4runner, hence why I visit this forum. But it's quite ridiculous how some on this forum get their panties in a bunch by even the slightest hint of appreciation for vehicles made by other companies...and I've been pretty frank about the fact that there are a lot of unknowns with the Chevy/GMC diesel, so I don't think I've been that appreciative at that.

1. The title of this thread is absolutely correct. In the specific test that was linked, the Toyota did in fact out-pull the GMC diesel. It was a simple timed (key word "timed") test, hence the reason for the Toyota victory.
2. I am leaving this thread in the 5th Gen section because of the high probability of the next 4Runner getting a version of this same engine. We do not have a 6th gen section yet. I could put it in general but many 5th gen owners will be 6th gen owners, so for now I am leaving it.
3. This is an enthusiast's forum, not a non biased jury. Of course people get offended when you talk trash about the product they came here to discuss.
4. Many different company's products have been appreciated on this forum. ICON vehicles for instance, makes a better vehicle than Toyota. Please name me a vehicle that has a higher residual value to list price ratio than Toyota and specifically 4Runners. That is the ultimate measuring stick because demand sets that price.

I could go on...

 

[Dalko43]

1. The title of this thread is absolutely correct. In the specific test that was linked, the Toyota did in fact out-pull the GMC diesel. It was a simple timed (key word "timed") test, hence the reason for the Toyota victory.
2. I am leaving this thread in the 5th Gen section because of the high probability of the next 4Runner getting a version of this same engine. We do not have a 6th gen section yet. I could put it in general but many 5th gen owners will be 6th gen owners, so for now I am leaving it.
3. This is an enthusiast's forum, not a non biased jury. Of course people get offended when you talk trash about the product they came here to discuss.
4. Many different company's products have been appreciated on this forum. ICON vehicles for instance, makes a better vehicle than Toyota. Please name me a vehicle that has a higher residual value to list price ratio than Toyota and specifically 4Runners. That is the ultimate measuring stick because demand sets that price.

I could go on...

1&2) The disagreement over the title/intent of the thread was a trivial argument to begin with, so I'll leave it at that.

3) Who has been talking trash about the Tacoma? I recall the OP referring to all Chevy trucks as "rolling pieces of shit" but I don't recall anyone trashing the Tacoma.

4) What do custom-built Icon Vehicles have to do with this? The OP and I were discussing the cost analysis of buying/owning a brand new diesel Chevy vs a gasoline Tacoma.

FWIW, you seem a lot more keen on defending the OP's point of view than you do on promoting a balanced conversation. I don't know if that's because you don't like me, or if you don't want to talk too much about non-Toyota products, or both...just my 2 cents.

 

[MSRP.]

A diesel will never beak even on the increase in cost of purchase for a retail customer. It's an easy calculation in excel. I've done it many times. At today's fuel prices, the math doesn't work. There will be a cost difference but the gasoline engine is cheaper.

For example let's say you pay the $4k increase for the Canyon diesel. And you always - for the entire life of the Canyon - have a trailer hooked up. Of course this is nonsense, but let's use it. You get 18mpg.

Compare this to a gasoline model that gets 13mpg doing the same thing. (I used the fuel ratios, although reality suggests that the Tacoma if it slowed down to as slow as the Canyon would probably pick up a few mpg.)

If we do a simple calculation using the current cost of fuel in my area 1.61 for gasoline, 1.81 for diesel. It'll take 178,000 miles to break even. BUT>>> that's ignoring the time value of money. If you factor even a very low rate of 3% and drive 15k miles a year, the cost never matches up. The diesel will never be cheaper.

There might be a reason to own a diesel. Low cost of ownership or use is not one of them. Not empty. Not towing a trailer.

Come and move to Canada.
Along with Trump,
and our diesel costing a cent or two cheaper than gas (don't forget you're probably paying the same for about a 1/3 of a gallon)

Wait what?
Bagged milk.

Is it assumed that TFL-trucks used an obd scanner for their MPG readings?--haven't watched all their videos but it "looks" like they just went off the dash readings..

 

[Jetboy]

1&2) The disagreement over the title/intent of the thread was a trivial argument to begin with, so I'll leave it at that.

3) Who has been talking trash about the Tacoma? I recall the OP referring to all Chevy trucks as "rolling pieces of shit" but I don't recall anyone trashing the Tacoma.

4) What do custom-built Icon Vehicles have to do with this? The OP and I were discussing the cost analysis of buying/owning a brand new diesel Chevy vs a gasoline Tacoma.

FWIW, you seem a lot more keen on defending the OP's point of view than you do on promoting a balanced conversation. I don't know if that's because you don't like me, or if you don't want to talk too much about non-Toyota products, or both...just my 2 cents.

It's not a question of balance. All gm tricks are rolling pieces of shit. I've driven then for 20 years with an occasional super duty in the mix. Quality is not a high priority at gm. 6 sigma is probably a completely foreign concept to a gm factory.

Diesel owners do all they can to obfuscate when it's pointed out that is not cheaper to own a diesel even if you tow a lot. In this market the Tacoma will pull more in every possible circumstance. And do it cheaper. That's just a fact. (Cost of capital is not inflation by the way. In reality is about 6% for most Aaa businesses. I was being as nice to the diesel as I could. )


I don't like the Tacoma. I think it's cheap inside and over priced. Is better than a Colorado. But that's not a tall hurdle.

The main point is that the 3.5 is a lot better performer than its given credit for. And it's well matched with the 6 speed. Destroying a competing diesel up a hill with a trailer is a good demonstration of that. And it's what should be expected with so much more power.

 

[Dalko43]

It's not a question of balance. All gm tricks are rolling pieces of shit. I've driven then for 20 years with an occasional super duty in the mix. Quality is not a high priority at gm. 6 sigma is probably a completely foreign concept to a gm factory.

Diesel owners do all they can to obfuscate when it's pointed out that is not cheaper to own a diesel even if you tow a lot. In this market the Tacoma will pull more in every possible circumstance. And do it cheaper. That's just a fact. (Cost of capital is not inflation by the way. In reality is about 6% for most Aaa businesses. I was being as nice to the diesel as I could. )


I don't like the Tacoma. I think it's cheap inside and over priced. Is better than a Colorado. But that's not a tall hurdle.

The main point is that the 3.5 is a lot better performer than its given credit for. And it's well matched with the 6 speed. Destroying a competing diesel up a hill with a trailer is a good demonstration of that. And it's what should be expected with so much more power.

I'm absolutely stunned that I'm the one getting heat from a Mod for being too biased and one-sided when you're going around posting subjective junk like this above.

And quite frankly, I don't even know where to begin with this:
1) Are you implying that GM factories don't use any sort of quality control for their manufacturing process?

2) You haven't definitively proven that owning a diesel costs more than owning a gasoline over the long term. You made references to some vague math without showing any of your work and you neglected to take into account how resale value factors into the overall cost of ownership for a vehicle.

3) I'm familiar with the term capital cost, but I'm not sure how it is relevant in this situation or how it might increase by 3% or 6% every year, unless we are taking into account inflation. I'm not 100% certain that you even understand what capital cost is. Again, some further explanation and some math might help your cause here.

4) No no one was saying that Toyota's 3.5L is a bad engine. Some people were saying that they'd prefer GM's diesel over a gasoline Tacoma for purposes of towing and mpg.

5) People don't buy a diesel engine for speed and time trials, so I'm not sure why you keep belaboring that point. The gasoline engine was faster up the towing course than GM's diesel; no one disputes that, and I don't know how many towing drivers would necessarily care about the time delta. I think towing aficionados would care far more about the fact that the diesel GM gets better mpg and has a higher tow rating than the gasoline Tacoma.

6) Which engine "destroyed" the other is entirely based on each driver's individual and subjective vehicle priorities.

 

[wfo9]

This thread is hilarious.

The TFTruck guys ranked the Canyon the best truck of the year overall. Gave it the highest score so far ~80 (Tacoma was ~50). The Tacoma was not even close overall. Yes, it wined up to 6k and screamed along at 60mph (who cares). Would anyone ever feel good driving it like that? The Canyon is a 10x better tow rig no matter how you slice or dice it. Even the full size trucks destroy the Tacoma when it comes to towing MPG. Go take a look at the 100mi tests they did.

I've owned many trucks. This is my second 4 runner and I've owned 4 or 5 GM trucks. My current tow rig is a 2014 GMC sierra 1500. It is by far the best truck I have ever owned (so far) it has about 60k on the OD with 0 issues. The 4runners have also been good to me, but to call GM garbage is just ignorant and close minded. Yes, they have had some failures in the past... but get over it. Times have changed and Toyota is having serious trouble keeping up with the competition these days....

 

[paddlenbike]

I would love to see how a supercharged 3.4 would compare in the same test. The torque curve is as flat as a table top.

 

[Jetboy]

This thread is hilarious.

The TFTruck guys ranked the Canyon the best truck of the year overall. Gave it the highest score so far ~80 (Tacoma was ~50). The Tacoma was not even close overall. Yes, it wined up to 6k and screamed along at 60mph (who cares). Would anyone ever feel good driving it like that? The Canyon is a 10x better tow rig no matter how you slice or dice it. Even the full size trucks destroy the Tacoma when it comes to towing MPG. Go take a look at the 100mi tests they did.

I've owned many trucks. This is my second 4 runner and I've owned 4 or 5 GM trucks. My current tow rig is a 2014 GMC sierra 1500. It is by far the best truck I have ever owned (so far) it has about 60k on the OD with 0 issues. The 4runners have also been good to me, but to call GM garbage is just ignorant and close minded. Yes, they have had some failures in the past... but get over it. Times have changed and Toyota is having serious trouble keeping up with the competition these days....

I've owned 5 new GM trucks and/or suburbans. Not one. NOT ONE has had an a/c compressor make it to 100k miles. I don't think I've ever seen a GM truck with 2 working DRLs. I can't recall if any of them made it to 100k on the original fuel pump. I don't think so. You must have found a unicorn. Good for you!

If 150hp is what you want, the Canyon is for you! The FACT is that the Canyon cannot pull as hard as the Tacoma. Period. That is indisputable. You can argue that it's going to get better mpg (but we both know it'll never break even on dollars overall). It may stop better? It may be more comfortable. But it will not pull harder any time under any circumstance. That is a fact.

 

[Dalko43]

Jetboy, my conscience is urging me to let it be, but out of morbid curiosity I must ask, have you even driven the diesel GM (either the Colorado or the Canyon)?

Have you even driven the new Tacoma?

Or are you basing all of your "expertise" regarding the two platforms on the TFL videos you watched?