A good friend is looking at pickup up a used pickup. They were a two-car house that went to a one-car house and discovered that it was occasionally awkward.
He's mostly whittled it down to a 1998-2004 Toyota Tacoma; I meant to ask here earlier than this and get a breakdown of major changes between generations and for recommendations.
He's amenable to 2WD or 4WD; The latter might be useful, but only very rarely. However, if there's a reason that 4WD might be preferable (e.g. they make up 85% of production so you can't find anything else), that's fine. Easier oil changes on the tall truck notwithstanding, how different is the load-in height between 2WD and 4WD on these things?
He'll use it for general running around, infrequent commuting (usually takes the train), and miscellaneous project-stuff-fetching. So, fuel economy is definitely part of the decision matrix, but it doesn't have to be astonishing.
So the question for you guys is: Is the whittling to a '98-'04 Tacoma the right call? Counter-suggestions? Anything to look out for in particular on these trucks? Engines or transmissions to either require or avoid?
I had a 2002 4Runner which is basically the same truck. I loved mine, it had the 3.4 v6 and an auto tranny. It had plenty enough grunt and the auto was fine, wish it was a 5 speed, I would probably still have it if it did. Mine was up there in mileage, 230xxx when is sold it and it gave me some small problems and a lower ball joint broke but other then that it was a stellar vehicle, i would love to have another some day.
ransom wrote:
Anything to look out for in particular on these trucks?
You know about the frame issue, right?
In reply to Woody:
Aw, dang. I never paid much attention. Are these the ones that rust in half?
Okay, that's a good one to know to look for. Is a visual inspection sufficient, or are they all boxed/hidden/waiting to spring their awful trap? We're mercifully in a pretty low-rust part of the world, though who knows where the car's lived in the last decade...
Ook, quick Google confirms that...
Anybody have a link for a good central summary of the issue and what's to be done about it?
I've got references to extended warranties, Toyota buybacks... A lot of Internet mumbling.
http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/learn-me-1st-gen-tacomas/59186/page1/
I ended up fixing the Trooper, selling the E30, and buying a 350Z, fwiw.
Despite the frame issue. Damn good trucks. I still maintain that the domestics rust at the same rate, they just are expected to. But that's my opinion.
In reply to Tom Suddard:
Thanks! That covers a lot of ground...
guy I work with had one.. toyota bought it back
ransom wrote:
In reply to Woody:
Aw, dang. I never paid much attention. Are these the ones that rust in half?
Okay, that's a good one to know to look for. Is a visual inspection sufficient, or are they all boxed/hidden/waiting to spring their awful trap? We're mercifully in a pretty low-rust part of the world, though who knows where the car's lived in the last decade...
I can tell you live in a low-rust part of the world because someone says "Toyota truck" to you and the first word you think of isn't "rust." 
In reply to ShadowSix:
It's true. It's wet here, but we don't salt the roads. Rust mostly only happens when a car gets built up dirt or moss in some random location 
EDIT: The reminds me, the 2002 hasn't been rolling, so it's been gathering moss. Time to go weed my project car... Man I'm looking forward to finishing the garage.
Considering that the domestics produce the best full size trucks by far, there is no reason to settle for a Toyota. Now, if you were referring small trucks, the Toyota woulod be hard to fault.
In reply to forzav12:
I thought Tacomas counted as small trucks at this point?
In any case, while a "pickup" makes sense as their second vehicle, I believe we should really talking about it as transportation first, and a truck second.
I thought Toyota bought them all back?
Tacoma is a small truck, equivalent of a Ranger. Best seller in the class. Like any Toyota, there's always a lot of excitement any time there's a problem.
Around here, they're worth their weight in gold.
The rust issue is very serious. Dana, who made the frames, did not coat them correctly.
The test is just as scary. Hit with a ball pen hammer and if it goes through, it's bad.
Helped a buddy at work find a replacement after his hammer test. It went through nicely.
didn't believe till I saw it with my own eyes. The Yota is a good truck, but it is something you should check for.
This was a truck that spent a majority of it's life in Tennessee. That's not in the rust belt.
As usual I'm the guy that posts this classic:
Flight Service wrote:
The test is just as scary. Hit with a ball pen hammer and if it goes through, it's bad.
Is it seriously not visible? I mean, it's very hard to imagine a frame rusted 'til you can put a hammer through it but looks fine...
A couple notes:
Unless it snows where you are, I wouldn't pay the 4x4 premium.
Also, unless the friend has a size issue (abudumtsh), I'd still recommend a domestic 1/2 ton. It will do everything better AND get the same/better mpg. Plus, most of the domestics circa 2006 or earlier are smaller than the newer trucks (and even smaller if you go pre millenium).
They all rust in half. Just for some reason Toyota would cover the repairs of a small segment.
The height difference between 2wd and 4wd is substantial, especially when hefting heavy things up into the beds. I've long lamented the high heights of 4x4s. That said, if you work the truck in an area where you need 4wd, nothing else will do.
Substantial differences in engines over the years. The only one to actively avoid is the 3.0 V6. Weak and blows head gaskets chronically. The much better 3.4 V6 wasn't available in the time window he's looking.
And all that said, the later Ford F150's are selling for a lot less than Toyota's, and they are a whole lot more truck.
If you're friend is in the Maryland area, and wants to take my 97 T100 4x4 and let me get an F150 instead, I'd gladly talk to him.
In reply to ransom:
It looked like surface rust like all of them get but a little mor flakey.
I think an F150 is a better value but if you want a Yota just be sure to check thd frame. I am sure you can find te TSB on the proper test method online
foxtrapper wrote:
Substantial differences in engines over the years. The only one to actively avoid is the 3.0 V6. Weak and blows head gaskets chronically. The much better 3.4 V6 wasn't available in the time window he's looking.
EDIT FOR CLARITY: Foxtrapper is right, the Toyota truck 3.0 V6 is a loser, but I think he misread the years your friend is looking at, because ALL the Tacomas from '98-'04 will have the 3.4 V6 (if they have a V6.) The 3.4, as foxtrapper said, is much better and a good choice if there is going to be some hauling or towing involved.
the 3.0 V6 (3VZE) is definitely a motor to avoid, not much power, lots of thirst for dino juice, and yes, they all seem to blow a head gasket between 170k and 190k miles.
BUT, that motor NEVER came in a Tacoma, nor did it sell in anything after about 1995, OP is looking at '98-'04 trucks, so he's not going to see any 3.0's. The 3.4 V6 is much better, plenty of power for a small truck, and will probably be in most of the 4x4 trucks you see, but still burns a lot of petrol IMHO.
The rust thing seems pretty hit-or-miss, I have personally worked on older Tacos that led hard lives in salt-obsessed Ohio that had solid frames, but I have also been to the local Toyota dealer and seen the ones they are buying back with holes in the frame where the cab meets the bed. [BTW, if you own a dealership and are buying back a buuuuunch of cars for a major flaw, maybe you shouldn't park them all out front.
]
The 3.0 did kinda suck, I had one. The first one got pulled out due to piston contamination of the oil pan and I made the mistake of putting in another. If I'd swapped in a 3.4, I would have kept it a lot longer. And yeah, never came in anything with a Tacoma name on it.
As for the "hit it with a hammer" test, that's the same one you use for a Land Rover. Due to their Birmabrite bodies, they don't show body rust as the frame disappears underneath.
I love this forum...
I should go look up curb weights and all, I guess... I'm a bit puzzled by the F150 as a cross-shopping option just because of my impression that the Tacoma is a smaller truck, the Tacoma's range of engines being smaller than those available on the Ford... I ran over to fuelly.com and just checked the 2000 model year for each. While the 3.4L Tacoma only gets about 1 more mpg than the 6-cyl F150 (~16 vs ~17), the Tacoma with a 4-cyl gets nearly 23 (at least for the hundreds or thousands sampled on fuelly.com).
Are these two trucks really not apples and oranges, or at least tangerines and grapefruits?
The thing about domestic trucks is that parts are everywhere and cheap and should you be in a pinch, everyone knows how to fix them.
