Older 4x4 AND crew cab small/mid size trucks: Colorado/Canyon, Frontier, etc? realistic mpg's/options..

[E.Roy]

Not sure if you bought already, but this may help others reading. I own and have owned many trucks. In my experience, a small pickup with a v6 is dismal on fuel, based on my 2005 4.0v6 6-speed manual getting 13-16 mpg. So you end up being way down on capacity and room with a midsize that gets similar mpg to a fullsize with a v8.

Now I've had a 1996 Tacoma 2.4l 2wd 5speed, which I hypermiled to 29mpg, but was useless for towing and fairly useless for hauling over 500lbs. Also, they are so small and cramped in the interior. Even my 2nd gen 2005 DCSB 4-door, I hate how cramped it is.

I also drove a stock 2011 4x4 Tacoma AC 6' bed 2.7l 4cyl 5speed manual and it was gutless and geared like a sportscar, not a truck, was hard to get moving with it empty, can't imagine hauling or towing.

A great option is a 2000-2006 Tundra to down size to, ok mpg with v8 if you keep tiny highway tires on it, 6' bed (anything less is irritating) and you can breath in the interior, big improvement over my 2005 Tacoma.
The Tundras are generally affordable and very reliable if you do the maintenance, they were also the safest truck you could buy in the early 2000s.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Was your '96 Tacoma a single-cab?

[E.Roy]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Was your '96 Tacoma a single-cab?

Yes it was, the seat couldn't go back far enough for a 6' tall person driving a manual, I wouldn't want to own one again without an extended cab (I'd modify if necessary), but they're also very narrow, also old world crash safety.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Those old-school Japanese compact trucks from late-'80s through the '90s were far from great regarding cabin space, yet I didn't think they were so awful at all.

[Piotrsko]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Those old-school Japanese compact trucks from late-'80s through the '90s were far from great regarding cabin space, yet I didn't think they were so awful at all.

If you are a 6'1" tall 250 lb american like me, getting into any Toyota is an effort in small space squeezable contortionist humans. A upward tilt steering wheel would help emormously, as would bucket seats or an extra 4 " of space.

This pretty much stops me from buying one

[E.Roy]

Originally Posted by Piotrsko

If you are a 6'1" tall 250 lb american like me, getting into any Toyota is an effort in small space squeezable contortionist humans. A upward tilt steering wheel would help emormously, as would bucket seats or an extra 4 " of space.

This pretty much stops me from buying one

I'm 6' and 215, you'd fit in a 2000-2006 Tundra, Sequoia, and with room to spare in 2007 up Tundra.

I have the new 2022+ Tundra, very roomy, without being enormous. I just hate being nannied and controlled by the lane and brake assist. (doesn't get good FE by the way, ~15mpg, but I 34.8" tall 285/75-18 Toyo AT3 on it)

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by Piotrsko

If you are a 6'1" tall 250 lb american like me, getting into any Toyota is an effort in small space squeezable contortionist humans

I'm around the same height, but only around 188lbs. Footwell has been my main complaint about some Japanese compact utility vehicles around that vintage.

[Piotrsko]

Duh forgot about footwell. Hitting gas and brake pedals at the same time is common for me

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by Piotrsko

Duh forgot about footwell. Hitting gas and brake pedals at the same time is common for me

Maybe this explains why it was so convenient for me, with my bum knees, to try the punta-tacco for the first time, while driving a square-body Mitsubishi L200. Even the Opel Corsa B that I was more familiar with at the time seems to have a larger footwell.

[freebeard]

For purposes of comparison:

https://www.thesamba.com/vw/gallery/pix/644728.jpg