My '99 4 cylinder 4X4 Tacoma got about the same gas mileage as a 6 cylinder Tacoma 4x4 of the same vintage..... around 20 mpg..... less if I beat on it. The 4 cyl did everything I needed it to, but the 6 cyl would have probably been a tad smoother and had a bit more power for passing all while getting the same mileage.

Tim,

Good point. Size of the new Tacoma still remains an issue. Smaller and lighter will give you better fuel economy. Also, a smaller truck will go better off road and clear brush better in the woods. You want the full size guys to beat back the bushes, so you can clear it without scratches in the compact truck. ;)

George

Looking at the pictures, maybe spraying the entire underside, box sections and seams with a wax-type anti-corrosion treatment might help?

Wurth make some for internal box-section, inner doors etc. and one for external frame, suspenion use.

Toyota Investigation Underway For 2000-01 Tundra Rust Issues - Auto News - Truck Trend

From Tim's thread on his Tacoma replacement:
This was pulled from a Toyota Blog:
March 07, 2008

Living Up to Our Committment

Rust, as they say, never sleeps. It certainly never sleeps in the states where road salt is in heavy use, and we’ve recently become aware of additional evidence of that fact.

We’ve received reports that on a small number of model-year 1995 to 2000 Tacomas, excessive corrosion of the frame has caused perforation of the metal. The reason for this, it appears, is that the frames of some of the 813,000 vehicles built during this time-frame may not have adequate corrosion protection.

As a result, when they’re exposed to severe environmental conditions, especially in states where salt is used for the de-icing of roads, these frames may develop corrosion that goes beyond the normal surface rust that’s commonly found on metal after years of exposure – and in this case, these trucks are from eight to 13 years old.

Because of our oft-stated commitment to standing behind our products, we’re extending the rust-perforation warranty covering these trucks for a period of 15 years from each vehicle’s original date of purchase, with no mileage limitation, for corrosion damage that results in perforation of the vehicle’s frame material. Owners of these Tacomas need not be the original owners. Even if you bought your Tacoma second- or third-hand, it’s covered by this extended warranty.

Here’s how this will work: Starting in the middle of March and continuing over a period of time, owners of 1995-2000 Tacomas will be sent letters informing them about this issue. If you find rust perforation on your vehicle, have your truck inspected by a Toyota dealer.

If frame corrosion damage is confirmed by an inspection at a Toyota dealership, at Toyota's option, we will either repair the vehicle or repurchase it. No matter the vehicle’s actual condition, it will be valued as a vehicle in excellent condition. If the inspection reveals no rust perforation, the 15-year warranty will remain in force.

This is worth underscoring: This is not a recall. Rather, it’s an example of our commitment to the durability of our products and to our owners. These are older trucks and rust is a fact of life, especially where road salt is used, but that’s not what’s important. What’s important is that we take care of our owners. We just thought you should know that.


- Mike Michels, Corporate Communications


There's a few more out there if you Google. The only frames being replaced were Dana built frames on the Tundra and Tacoma. The 4Runner, which is made in Japan, was not recalled.

Built by Dana. But sounds like the problem is failed ecoat? Ecoat (even within the manufacturing plant) is rarely operated by the plant owner, they are contracted out to the paint companies now.

GM now ecoats and then wax dips their truck frames.

GM has been wax dipping their full-size truck frames for several years, about a decade. It's pretty thick, can't scrape it off with your fingernail.

So, Matt, you're saying that this isn't Toyota's fault, but Dana's fault. I didn't gather that from Toyota's official PR statement you quoted. But you've researched it.

Toyota doesn't make mistakes, rather, when someone else screws up their product they humbly apologize without placing blame, and then make things right. Correct?

did my first pig hunt a few days ago in my new truck...the crossbow guys cleaned house..i was "hiking" again. i did make multiple stalks. truck did great.

to the OP. how is the frame working out? any new rattles and squeaks? truck looks great! i would rhino line the wheel wells...

I have done my share of armed hiking in A-31 / D-11 archery already. Just this morning again ... ;)

I have no doubt the new Tacoma is a great vehicle. I'll be happy to ride shotgun on your next insider pigorama. ;)

George

165k miles on my '02 silverado

20k+ towing a 22'x8'7' trailer from Los Angeles to Vegas, Los Angeles to Butt'n willo'

I burnt the paint off of the diff' housing pulling it up the grapevine 80 mph with the trailer!

Things that have failed. Parking brake release cable, The tailgate relase housing, the tailgate limit straps (made in china, covered under recall)
Radio knob fell off, And the fuel pump at 147k miles.

I towed a load so heavy once that the bed was loaded down to the bump stops plus it was towing a trailer that was bowing under the weight of the load. I drove it from LAX area to the orange county line. I was so concerned about the weight of the load that I made sure not to drive over any of the freeway overpasses thinking that I couldn't stop at the bottom!

The truck still has it's oe brake pads and rotors!

And my 1999 Explorer needed extensive transmission work after 80,000 miles without any towing while my first Toyota, a 1980 SR5 ran for 200,000 miles without any failures while being used to haul firewood. I think the point here is that Toyota is making good after a serious screw up somewhere along their manufacturing chain. Ford never offered me any good faith repairs.

I'm reading between the lines of the published information. It appears they still buy frames from Dana, perhaps they resisted the temptation to throw them under the bus?

As an engineer in a manufacturing environment that utilizes outsourcing, it's nearly a daily event. A supplier provides us with a disclosure stating that they failed to meet our specs in some way. It keeps our QA department very busy. It appears that the rustproofing was not up to Toyota standards, as other Toyota body-on-frame products do not have these issues. I'd be willing to bet that the rust treatment is Dana applied prior to leaving their factory, I doubt they ship raw steel frames to Toyota.

My bias my be showing, but yours is as well. In this case we know that someone made a mistake contributing to issues with a Toyota product. They are 100% making it right. I seriously doubt if you would get that kind of coverage from an out of warranty 8 year old domestic truck. My experience is that the domestics poorly support their products when they nearly new and under warranty.

So for FIVE years their QA department must have been sleeping.....

I have anti-bias. It is a pet peeve of mine when people think Toyota can do no wrong, but the Americans are all crap.

Toyota produced their highest quality cars from 1986-1996. Since then they have been spotty (for Toyota).

As long as we're quoting Toyota PR, here is what Toyota's CEO said October 2, 2009:

“We are grasping for salvation,” Toyoda said, “Toyota has become too big and distant from its customers.”

I believe they started with the GMT-800 hydro-formed frames.

Fair enough. But there's very good reason why one company is doing well, while the other was just saved by the government. Our 2004 4Runner was the best car I've ever owned, with absolutely zero mechanical issues over 65k. The Pelican that bought it is well past 100k with zero issues. I sold our 2004 SRX at 65k after multiple problems, as well as other growing issues such as leaks. Each company has earned a reputation for a perfectly good reason.

As for the QA issue, if there was a process breakdown at the supplier Toyota very well may have not had any idea. With an established supplier, after establishing processes and working through first article inspections, most of the QA inspection is done at the supplier. This is how we do it in the aerospace industry, where we are required by the FAA to maintain a high degree of control over our parts and suppliers. I'm sure the auto industry has much lighter requirements. So yes, it's very possible that Toyota had no idea until they started seeing rusty frames.

I used to buy american made, actually still have a few, but in 95 i bought a 4-runner (best rig i've ever owned) and ever since it's been Toyota's for me. I've had 2 4-runners (still have the 95) and a Tacoma. All i've ever done is change the oil and grease,gas and air filters, none of them have ever been back to the dealer for anything.

Yes, it's called currency manipulation

But seriously, Toyota is not doing so well right now. They've asked for help here and in Japan. They started with a bigger pile of cash, and without the albatross of UAW legacy.

And I will be the first to admit that the early/mid-nineties engineered Toyotas have world-class quality and deserve their reputation.

nope. so far so good. i've driven it maybe 300 miles so far. no rattles at all. no squeaks at all, which i am very happy about. the only difference i notice is the sound i mentioned earlier. i hear a little more engine noise, and it appears to be coming from the area where the shifter is. i'm not talking a great deal of noise. if i put the radio on, i wouldn't notice it at all. i don't know why it's different, but it is. my wife drove the truck one day to work and I asked her about it, and she agreed, it did seem a little louder.
toyota asked that I bring it back for another quick inspection after a few hundred miles just to make sure everything still looks good. i need to make that appointment now... i'll be sure to pick their brains on the increased engine noise and see what they think about it. it's not a big deal at all...i'm just curious.

They did the same thing in the 90s. The 3.0L V6 truck engines had an issue with the head gaskets. The 1988 (first year) were fine, but somewhere in 1989 the company that supplied the gaskets changed formulas, without telling Toyota. Those gaskets failed at an alarmingly high rate after about 60K miles. So, years later, suddenly, Toyota ha a rash of blown engines coming in, all from head gasket failure (the engines were otherwise bulletproof). They proceeded to contact every owner they could find, and tell them to come in. They then did whatever it took to give those owners working trucks, going so far as to completely replace the engine. FREE.
Even to this day, you can call them with your vin to see if the work was done, and in some extreme cases, they will still do the engine replacement.