1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

2010 Tacoma, 2.7L vs 4.0L

Discussion in '95+ Gen Toyota Trucks' started by Nikon Samurai, Jan 27, 2010.

  1. Nikon Samurai

    Nikon Samurai Regular Member

    Messages:
    187
    Location:
    Boise, ID
    I'm looking at getting a Tacoma, may not be a 2010 but will be the same generation, and I'm still torn on what I want.

    It will be used as a DD as well as an off-road and camping truck, I plan on keeping it for at least ten years, really I'll probably never sell it.

    Looking at it, the 2.7L gets 18-22 MPG, and the 4.0 is only looking at 14mpg in town, which is crazy low. I'm also looking at the torque numbers and peak for each engine, and the 2.7L peaks at 180 ft/lbs (!!!) at 3800 RPM, where the 4.0 peaks at around 100 pounds more but at 4000 RPM, with bigger cylinders and being a V engine. It just seems to be a much less efficient engine for wheeling.
    The 2.7L also has all the other advantages of an I4 in an engine bay meant for a V6, easier to work on, more torquey per RPM than a V engine, etc.

    I think it will come down to if I want a Regular or Access cab, with the added weight of the Access I'd probably have to go with the 4.0... what are y'all's thoughts?

    EDIT: I'll also add that I like to run light; for example I will probably replace both bumpers, but not with any sort of armor like ARB
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2010
  2. Nikon Samurai

    Nikon Samurai Regular Member

    Messages:
    187
    Location:
    Boise, ID
    I'm just going to think out loud here since it seems there's not a lot of interest in this topic, perhaps it will help somebody.

    For me it is going to have to be an Access Cab truck, which still means the 4-cyl as well as the 6-cyl are options.
    There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of accurate information out there; Toyota's web site says 17/22mpg for the 4 cyl regardless of if its in a Regular Cab or Access Cab, and according to their web site the Regular Cab w/ 4-cyl weighs 3665lbs, and the Access with the 4-cyl is 3955lbs, which is a 7.44% difference. About 300lbs. Seems to me that should make somewhat of a difference, no?
    I looked at trucks yesterday, and the 4-cyl does indeed take up less room in the bay, but it is a fairly small difference. I would prefer working on the 4-cyl, but there's a fair bit of space around the 6 as well.
    Another thing that is odd is all the trucks on the dealer's lot that are Access Cab and 4x4 are V6, so I'd have to order the 4-cyl.

    Does anyone have any input or experience?
  3. Hilux

    Hilux New Member

    Messages:
    2,163
    Location:
    Nashville Tn.
    Man, you got it rough

    Power, MPG and size? You're not really bringing up anything physics hasn't already...

    I prefer 4cyl's myself. You can always get lower MPG, but it beats always HAVING IT, IMO.

    I don't know how we 22RE guys have been doing it so long...:rolleyes:

    And if you think 14 city is bad, take that thing out and wheel with it for a day...

    I guess I have too much of a survivalists mentality. IH8 payments. I can't afford to fill up big tanks and drive low MPG trucks. I can't afford to have my truck fixed, so I drive a heavily reliable one. Non of these are traits consumers look for today... And "used cars always breakdown".


    Consumers are funny.
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2010
  4. Duane

    Duane IH8MUD Wookie

    Messages:
    700
    Location:
    Medicine Hat
    I hear you on the mileage but as I have not driven the current generation I4 engine with VVT, I assume it has that now, maybe it is enough for you.
    For me and my 3rd gen 4runners I really love the I4 but having the extra pep of the V6 i think is more of a pro than the little bit worse gas mileage. If I run oversize tires, speed a little bit and/or try pushing a head wind at highway speeds then the I4 will use as much or even more gas than the 3.4 L V6.
    I have a friend with an 2004 4.0L 4runner and they are pretty decent on fuel but I have heard a tacoma is harder on it..not sure if that is a gear ratio thing or what or even accurate.
    I assume the I4 with a standard behind it will be better then an automatic depending on which way you are going with transmission options.
    I would drive them both and try the hills, passing people etc and see if the I4 is ok for you, if not maybe even rent or borrow a 4L truck for a day trip to see how bad it is on fuel for the driving you will be doing. If you are keeping it for 10 years be happy with your choice.
    my 2 cents
  5. Nikon Samurai

    Nikon Samurai Regular Member

    Messages:
    187
    Location:
    Boise, ID
    Hilux, believe me, I agree with you. My first Toyota has a 22R and I loved it and will wheel it once I've got it rebuilt. Like I said, if I could get an FZJ-80 I would, but one of the terms of the loan is the vehicle has to be newer than 5 years. I can't argue it because it is a loan from my father. TBH if I had the option I'd probably get a Standard Cab with the 4 cyl but apparently those are 'useless.' Oh, and gas mileage is the last thing I think about when I'm wheeling :p

    I guess what I'm looking at is if there is a difference in reliability in 20 years between the 6 and the 4. I think that's probably a nod to the 4... I guess I just need to drive one.

    Was mostly wondering if anyone had any relevant input or experience, because this is going to be a really, really big purchase for me.

    Duane, that is a good point about the larger tires and higher speeds. I will be commuting 60 miles a day with it, but I always drive the speed limit anyway and am usually in no hurry on roads, so perhaps the 4 is a good way to go. One other thing too is I'm probably buying a 40 this summer so I may need to pull that.....
  6. Hilux

    Hilux New Member

    Messages:
    2,163
    Location:
    Nashville Tn.
    In countries where off-roading is prevalent, there is no MPG. They call it Range. Just how much off roading will you do? That's not a q for me, that a self realization question for you.

    Like I said, I'm too survivalist... I guarantee you a 4 will have more range than a 6... But this is america. All you have to do is come out and hit the next gas station up.


    And 22RE's hit the highways all day and keep up with traffic. Any misconceptions about more powerful 4's not doing as good as WAY more powerful 6's are only a matter of preference and availability... Not reality or practicality.
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2010
  7. Hilux

    Hilux New Member

    Messages:
    2,163
    Location:
    Nashville Tn.

    Then I'd get the one with one head gasket, one exhaust manifold and gasket... And the one with one intake manifold gasket.


    Oh, and if you ever have to rebuild it, one head to take to the machine shop.
  8. ken_79-fj40

    ken_79-fj40 New Member

    Messages:
    1,202
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    My DD for the winter months is an 05 4x4 access cab with the 2.7. My brother in law has the same truck but a 4.0. Besides Bilsteins, some hella 500 fogs, and 265/70/16 General at2's the truck is stock and now has 91k on it. It's not fast, but it's surprisingly quick if you rev it to the moon. Kind of like a 22r. I get a very consistent 22mpg on the highway and I typically drive 70-75. My brother in law's truck is kind of ridiculously quick for a truck. When you really get on it it's a lot like driving my 5.0 mustang. But it's never got over 19mpg. I don't think the 4 cylinder would like tires much bigger than stock without regearing, just like 22r trucks. But if you plan on leaving it stock and don't mind revving the thing at times the 2.7 is great.
  9. Jukelemon

    Jukelemon New Member

    Messages:
    2,393
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    For what it is worth, I just traded in my 92 PU with 22re that I have owned for 8 years.

    I loved the truck and engine and the mpg. I had never had an issue with HWY travelling minus the mountains and down shifting-which was fine.

    I now own an 08 DC Tacoma TRD Sport. The 4 was not an option or I would have seriously looked at it.

    I get around 18-19 hwy and I am OK with that since my 22re was getting 19-20 BUT with no room (STD Cab).

    The 4.0 is a beast. I dont care what the spec sheet states, it is very torquey (sp?). Starting off in 1st gear is almost too much. I often just start in 2nd.

    I didnt like the Access cab because I didnt feel like it gave you much of anything. Of course, I would feel differently if I did not have children. But then again, if i didnt, I would have stayed with my 92 22re ( :
  10. hman913

    hman913 New Member

    Messages:
    295
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    I'd personally go with the 2.7L. I had an '07 V6 Tacoma and now an FJC with the same 6 cylinder engine. If I got another Tacoma it would definitely be the 4 cylinder. I test drove the 2.7 and didn't think that it was short on power or torque. After all it's going to be used as for trails and camping, not a race truck. The only real difference I noticed between the two was that the 2.7 seemed to have less sound insulation versus the 4.0. Last I knew, the 4.0s had a 3.73 diff and the 2.7s have a 4.10 diff. If you're concerned about gas mileage, go with the 2.7, and either way you'll be ending up with a great truck.
  11. Blue77FJ40

    Blue77FJ40 SILVER Star

    Messages:
    2,119
    Location:
    MD
    Slight hijack: at what point did the "extra cab" become the "access cab"? Both my '85 mini and my '04 Taco are extra cabs.

  12. ken_79-fj40

    ken_79-fj40 New Member

    Messages:
    1,202
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    I think it was on 05 when they added the opening rear doors. Which are a complete pain if you are in a parking lot. If I could have bought a crew cab with the 2.7 I would have. Although not as bad as the older xtracabs it's kind of a pain getting my daughter into her car seat.
  13. MOfj40

    MOfj40 New Member

    Messages:
    577
    Location:
    Brevard, NC
    2.7 all the way unless you're going to be hauling a lot. I had a first gen taco with the 2.7 and loved it. It didn't matter city, highway, or mixed - it always got 21-22mpg. Plenty of power if you're not trying to haul a heavy load.

    Simpler to maintain, and a proven reliable motor.
  14. Nikon Samurai

    Nikon Samurai Regular Member

    Messages:
    187
    Location:
    Boise, ID
    I was fairly well sold on the V6 after talking to my father (who isn't a mechanic) about it and looking at some other things. I posted a thread in Chat here about something semi-related and the guys there said something that really made me think.

    They suggested I look at a newer Land Cruiser or even a Super Duty/whatever pickup! Then it hit me, what is the advantage of going with a smaller pickup truck with a V6 that eats gas while trying to act like a V8 with its aluminum parts? It can't tow a 40, which is the primary thing I'd want to tow, it has a much different torque curve than the 2.7L with its lighter engine components requiring higher RPMs to make the same kind of power. I may as well be driving a V8 pickup.

    The one redeeming quality about my Buick with its 3.8L V6 is that it has a lot of low end torque, which in turn means it has given me consistently 20 mpg city and 30 mpg on the highway, even though it weighs 4,500lbs.

    I don't need to zip up hills or race anybody, I want to be able to go farther, have more capability, and keep the engine happy while doing it. The 2.7L seems to have the torque where I want it, and that may be key....

    I'm getting closer to purchasing the vehicle, so I need to go test drive an Access Cab with the 4, but I have a feeling now that I will love it.

    By the way, is there any way I could get a locker in the rear without voiding the warranty? One thing I really don't like is that you can't get the TRD packages with the 4 cylinder.
  15. alkarich

    alkarich New Member

    Messages:
    1,401
    Location:
    Duluth, Minnesota
    Looks like if you get either of the double cabs or access 4x4 with the V6, the maximum towing capacity is 6500lbs.

    Wouldn't that be enough to tow your 40?

    I'm also thinking of getting a Taco. Don't plan on towing the 40 a lot but it would be a option to have.

    Alan
  16. Nikon Samurai

    Nikon Samurai Regular Member

    Messages:
    187
    Location:
    Boise, ID
    In the other thread Yooper said it would probably be a bad idea. I can see why due to the lightness of the truck, but to be honest with you I don't really know if it would work out.
  17. alkarich

    alkarich New Member

    Messages:
    1,401
    Location:
    Duluth, Minnesota
    Which thread are you referring to?

    Alan
  18. Jomama

    Jomama New Member

    Messages:
    541
    Location:
    Anchorage AK
    FWIW, while the mileage is not that great in-town driving with my 2008 V6 DC-LB (13-15mpg-ish) it improves at highway speeds (even when I'm pulling my trailer and raft) to (18-20mpg-ish) and I bet you could squeeze a bit more out of it...
  19. Nikon Samurai

    Nikon Samurai Regular Member

    Messages:
    187
    Location:
    Boise, ID
  20. fireflyr

    fireflyr New Member

    Messages:
    809
    Location:
    Keene, Ca.
    My brother has the 4 cyl. extracab and a 4wheel popup camper. He loves it and gets 17 to 20 mpg.

Share This Page