On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 22:57:43 -0500, Alex wrote:

Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 20:05:47 -0500, Alex wrote:

Mr. Luddite wrote:
I've been doing some research on smaller trucks to replace the F-250 I
have now. The main criteria is something that Mrs.E will feel
comfortable driving (meaning smaller) yet still has the tow capacity
to handle the little camper she bought last summer. Ideal would be a
tow capacity of 5K to 6K lbs to tow the little 4K lb. camper.

I happened to be looking at the Tacoma and recalled you posting that
yours is rated to tow 6,400 lbs. You also have said you have the four
cylinder, 4x4 with a manual transmission.

You might want to verify your tow rating for that configuration.
According to Toyota, it is only rated to tow 3,500 lbs. (2016 model
specs).
It also has lousy reviews.

No, it has a great review! Funnier than ****:

"For all of Toyota’s claims that this is an all-new truck, key features seem as though Toyota slept
through the past decade’s advances in truck technology and interior design.

Today’s modern full-sized trucks feature a quiet cabin, a semblance of handling responsiveness, and
a tolerable ride. But the compact Tacoma has none of that.

Unlike other V6-powered Toyota models, our tested Tacoma never feels quick from a standing start or
when passing—despite the robust acceleration figures as measured on our track. Fuel economy with the
not-so-smooth six-speed automatic transmission is 19 mpg overall on regular gas, quite good for a
truck and a clear improvement over its predecessor.

Out on the road, the Tacoma’s handling is ponderous, and its slow and numb steering never connects
the driver to the front wheels. Clearly clumsy around corners, it never felt unsafe. The chassis’s
propensity to jiggle and shudder delivers a Metallica snare-drum beat to your spine. Wind and engine
noise drown out any chance of conversation, even at modest speeds. Braking performance is subpar.

Inside, it still has a too-high step-in, a too-low driver’s seat, and a ceiling that scrapes scalps
of those entering the cabin.

The front seats are flat and uncomfortable, have limited support, and offer only the most basic
adjustments. The rear seat in our crew cab is no better, with hard padding, cramped leg and foot
room, and short cushions—although it flips up to reveal useful storage bins. Outward visibility is
decent, but the narrow, shallow windows make it less commanding.

Controls are basic and easy to read—essential when reaching for some of the faraway knobs and
buttons."

Excerpted from the June 2016 issue of Consumer Reports magazine.

That's the same review I read. It was uncharacteristic of CR so it must
be really that bad. I'm sure this is what convinced Harry to buy it:
"Controls are basic and easy to read"



Very uncharacteristic. I've never seen a humorous review in CR.