![]() 10/16/2015 at 13:51 • Filed to: 5 minute photoshop | ![]() | ![]() |
I was reading up on the “Trail Boss” package for the Colorado Z71 and came across the little gem: 8.4 inches of ground clearance.
For reference, the current Forester has 8.9.
No, I know that its not apples to apples and that’s lowest point at the diff vs average low and all the other stuff that make it better for the trail, etc...but 8.4 inches in not an appropriate number for something called “Trail Boss”, IMO.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 13:56 |
|
I want to see this without the air dam and running boards.
No I don't mean that would make it higher, I just want to see it.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 13:56 |
|
Current Jeep Wrangler has 10 inches of ground clearance for comparison.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:01 |
|
Yeah, sans air damn and “rock steps” (ha!) the truck would be a lot more “trail bossy”. Toyota was wise enough to not even bother with the air damn on the TRD models.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:02 |
|
The reigning trail boss.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:03 |
|
The Tacoma TRD has 9.3, TRD pro about 9.8.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:04 |
|
It didnt’ say if it was rubicon or not, I think rubicon tires are a bit taller, maybe an inch
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:05 |
|
yeah, 8.4 is...kinda pathetic for an off road truck, let alone one called “Trail Boss”
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:06 |
|
I do like the lights and roll bar though.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:08 |
|
It’s their version of the Ram Rebel or F-150 FX4, that being said, I’d still take one with that new diesel in a heart beat
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:09 |
|
XD
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:10 |
|
yes, those are keepers.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:12 |
|
Roughly 3 or 4 or these will actually be used on a trail though. More like “Marketing Boss”
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:31 |
|
I still like it. And a Trail Boss Duramax? /drooool
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:33 |
|
Yeah, that’s called called 26/27 mpg highway.
If you don’t care about that mpg number you can rip that off and lift it up quite easily, there’s already great kits available.
I know what you’re saying though, not being that guy here.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:35 |
|
Its an impressive number, but in the latest print issue of C&D they took a Z71 Colorado and a 2016 Tacoma TRD from Tacoma to Colorado (i know, i know) and they both averaged the exact same 19 mpg and the TRD didn’t even have an air damn.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:49 |
|
Really?!
That’s painful to hear.
Though giving the start location, I say the test is rig ged
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:52 |
|
Actually, the Toyota lost...which bothered me some because of the way it lost some of its points.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:53 |
|
I haven’t seen it and they always wait a month or so to put it out on the public site (understandably, gotta make that money).
Toyota should lost points right away for drum brakes.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 14:57 |
|
It was little stuff, like dinging the Toyota 5 points for not having the tow package installed in the press vehicle when they didn’t do any towing.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 15:11 |
|
oh that’s stupid.
(just like drum brakes on a vehicle in 2016...HIYOOOOOOO)
![]() 10/16/2015 at 15:16 |
|
I want one. Maybe just a v6 4x4 with 4 doors, but that is all I need.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 15:43 |
|
Yeah, would love to pick up one of these used a few years down the road. That air dam would be gone soon as I got it home.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 16:43 |
|
How helpful do you think the lights would be? They look sweet, but with them all the way behind the cab I’d imagine they won’t light up where you’re driving very well. I suppose they’re for showing what’s in the distance?
![]() 10/16/2015 at 16:47 |
|
Floods, they are meant to give a high and wide perspective. it means that objects in the foreground and about out to standard low beam distance have less harsh shadows for better depth of field.
![]() 10/16/2015 at 17:03 |
|
After replacing them on my 4Runner, fuck drum brakes. I still would buy a Taco over the Coloyon.
![]() 10/18/2015 at 11:22 |
|
Oh good to know. I don’t get a chance to do much off-roading, but it’s something I hope to get into in the future.
![]() 10/19/2015 at 09:50 |
|
No thanks Taco, no thanks.
![]() 10/19/2015 at 14:32 |
|
Currently driving a 267k mile Taco right now and I love it. It’s so much better than our GMT900's with 100k less miles.
![]() 10/19/2015 at 14:33 |
|
That’s not a proper comparison really, but what’s wrong with the GMT?
![]() 10/19/2015 at 17:55 |
|
I’m farther away from the wheel in the Taco, which is very odd. The GMT is really uncomfortable to me on long drives(which I’ve averaged 250 miles a day at work). Compared to my Dad’s Ram 1500 of the same year, it feels two classes smaller on the inside.
![]() 10/20/2015 at 10:07 |
|
Wow that’s pretty insane to me.
What one do you have? Is it like a base Silverado Work Truck or...?
If you tell me it’s a Denali Sierra I’m going to raise an eyebrow or 2
![]() 10/20/2015 at 13:25 |
|
Yeah, basic WT.
![]() 10/20/2015 at 13:27 |
|
But that is compared to my Dad's regular cab Ram.
![]() 10/20/2015 at 14:28 |
|
WT’s aren’t designed for long drives, the seats aren’t upgraded and the interior is no where near on par with their normal trucks.
That being said, the size issue I’ve got nothing on, Ram’s do tend to be large though.
![]() 10/20/2015 at 15:53 |
|
Yeah quality isn’t my main issue, the seats are relatively comfortable, but the room is kind of ridiculous.