Anybody have any thoughts on the upcoming Nissan and Honda pickups???

tavgrad

Actually, the tundra was introduced with the 32V V8 as well. The T100 was introduced only with the old 3.0L 150hp V6 that was shared with the 4Runner and the Land Cruiser. It was later given the 3.4L 190hp V6 two years later.

I thought the tundra is a North American product only. It's built here and sold only here.

The ones the watch out for is Nissan. They see Toyota and will raise it higher with their full size pickup.

eharri3

Then they spoke to the dealers who would have to try to sell a V6-only full sized pickup to American buyers while trying to keep a straight face, and those dealers basically told them to either come up with a V8 or dont bother introducing the truck at all.

Doesnt matter if the Tundra is North American only. Asian manufacturers are just now getting over the hump in learning what it takes to succeed in American markets now that the reliability gap is closing, and they have difficulty thinking from an American point of view even for vehicles specifically designed for our market.

The Odyssey is an example where Honda finally came to realize that American minivan buyers would sacrafice some compactness and fuel economy for space and power.

I have trouble on the other hand believing Nissan can compete in the full sized market yet, mainly because they seem unable to put a strong naturally aspirated engine in their compact pickup. Their supercharged Frontier barely keeps up with the naturally aspirated competition. What's the point of a supercharger for an engine that wasn't competetive to begin with? It's that type of thinking, that made them resort to forced induction first before more displacement, that makes me doubt them.

In general I think the biggest obstacle to success for import full-sized trucks will be to get over this fear of cubic inches.

tavgrad

you have gotta be kidding. what was toyota trying to do proposing tundra with that V6 only?

The Infiniti V8 will be in the Nissan fullsize. Just like Toyota did with the 4.3, increase cubic inches to 4.7, Nissan will most likely do the same with Infiniti's 4.5. I'm not saying it will alter the rotation of the earth like the Big 3's top engines, but it will be enough to play in the lightduty game.

This V8 will also play a huge part in Nissan and infiniti's new SUV's to come.

I agree that that 3.3L in the Frontier and Xterra is way out of its league, supercharged or not.

quadrunner500

The situation is reversed if you compare the engines in the compacts, the camry engine completely outclassed by altima.

tavgrad

I agree, Quad. That 3.5 is a smooth engine.

Toyota's 3.0 I6 , IMO, better than their V6. most HP at low RPMs. I wonder why they don't use that more?

Nissan is catching up quick. While toyota takes their time on evolving their trucks, Nissan has been cranking them out. The 3.3L engine most likely will be yanked out and placed with the 3.5L from the Pathfinder/QX4, probably when the PAthfinder/Qx4 gets their redesign soon.

rsholland

a very vocal critic of Nissan in the past; however, I have to admit, they've done an amazing turn around. I think the new Altima is really going to surprise some people. I think their new full-size pickup will too, when it debuts.

And, should Honda enter the pickup fray too (which is strongly rumored), I think they too will surprise some people.

I'm all for it... the more the merrier!

Bob

lspangler

The 2001 pathfinder/QX4 has the 3.5 L engine now. Mine has about 14,000 miles on it and it is a very nice engine, especially with the 5-speed.

While I haven't seen the new Nissan pickup, I do know some of the specs that will be included and I think you will be shocked when you see what they are coming out with. Trust me, it's no Toyota, they are definetely thinking big.

tavgrad

Ispangler, read again what I said in post 56.

I think Nissan will deliver. Although some of their cars do not have that great of quality materials compared to the media darling toyotas, their engines have always been nothing short of outstanding. That's where Nissan outshines Toyota in. Everytime they debut, the press has done nothing but praise them.

richcolo

I think we need to take a closer look at the Odyssey, to see what Honda is thinking about products for North America. The Odyssey is not just the most powerful minivan, only the Astro/Safari 4.3 and Dodge/Chys 3.8 have more torque, and then only 3 ft-lbs. Also the Odyssey is larger (interior space)than all but the Astro/Safari and VW Eurovan (are these really minivans?) and heavier than any of the rest (including Astro and Eurovan). Despite that it gets best in class fuel economy and cost less that the others (except Kia) when comparably equipped. All in a van that hasn't been redesigned since 1999.

If Honda does the same thing relative to the pickup market that it did in the minivan market in 1999, pickup buyers will sit up and take notice.

I'll admit my bias: I own a 1999 Odyssey--my first Honda. I also own a 1991 GMC Sierra 1500 pickup and am waiting for a 2002 GMC 2500 HD.

I won't need another pickup for at least 10 years, but if Honda is in the game I will consider them, as well as the "domestics".

(Which is more domestic, a van built in Alabama by a Japanese company (Honda) or a pickup built in Mexico by a German company (Dodge))?

eharri3

Honda figured out that Americans want size, power, and OK fuel economy rather than a fuel miser that is not so comfortable and difficult to get into. I think its gonna be hard for any imports to take the full-sized truck market though because they dont have lots of experience building V8's for our markets. Their powerplants will be refined I'm sure, as is the Tundra's, but they'll probably be on the small side when first introduced and will grow a little every few years.

tavgrad

IMO, it will be a while for Honda to enter in full full size. They still do not have a 8 cyl. offering here. Unless they cheat while developing one (i.e. Honda/Isuzu Passport)
I read somewhere that GM supposed to be partnering with honda on developing some engines for their GM cars. SOmeone correct me if I'm wrong.

Taking on the Toyota Tacoma/Nissan Frontier should not be much of a challenge, however.

rsholland

and IMO, it's the worst thing Honda could do.

Honda is often referred to as "an engine company that happens to make cars." If they buy an engine from an outside source (I don't care who), it will be an insult to their engineers, not to mention all the bad press they will receive.

Bob

tavgrad

Well, bob, like that example I just mentioned.

For nearly a decade, they have used Isuzu for their 4x4's in both divisions. That bought them enough time to work it in and create a homegrown SUV that is
1. receiving critical appraise and
2. still on the hard to get list.

I would not be surprised if they do the same with GM.

rsholland

I hope Honda learned it's lesson "buying" an outside product, and then re-badging it as one of their own. The Honda Passport and Acura SLX were poorly accepted by the public, and IMO, did nothing but tarnish the Honda/Acura image. Everybody knew they weren't "true" Hondas or Acuras, and customers stayed away in droves.

The next Acura RL will have a "true" Honda/Acura V8 engine. I hope to God that it will be the basis for the Honda pickup engine. It's rumored that V8 will also make its way into the MDX, which...

I believe will also be the basis for the Honda pickup. The MDX is also strongly rumored to be the basis of a "Tahoe-sized" SUV to replace the Passport. So it would also seem to be a natural to spin off a full-size pickup from that platform too.

Bob

tavgrad

I agree. Honda hasn't exactly been in the lead lately. Accords and civics and CRX's are doing fine...while SUV's are still popular, Honda needs to crank that SUV out NOW.
The contract b/w Honda and Isuzu is over in 2002.
The plant in Alabama should be running strong of which, will be building the Honda Mid/full size replacements and the MDX-Oddysey Minivans.

I don't think that platform will be for the pickup. The engine, yes.
A full size unibody truck will not be received well here. True truck lovers are very critical, you know that.

rsholland

<< A full size unibody truck will not be received well here. True truck lovers are very critical, you know that. >>

True, but Honda has never been known to do things in the traditional manner. I think Odyssey/MPV/Tahoe-like SUV platform will work for Honda. Why? Because like Toyota, they're not going to target the "traditional" Ford/Dodge/GM truck customer. They're going to go after existing Honda (and other Japanese car owners) customers who want a full-size pickup, but who are turned off by domestic brands.

I personally think the pickup truck market is "wide open" for new ideas, and perhaps a reinforced unibody is one of them... The Pathfinder, Grand Cherokee, Cherokee, and Liberty use such set ups. So perhaps(?) it could also work on a pickup.

Bob

chevytruck_fan

a unibody, yep you are a perfect fit for the japanese trucks, compelety useless for what trucks are made for.

only pickup I know of that had unibody was 1961 Fords and because trucks are so long and twist so much if you parked with one tire in a hole you couldn't open the door.

rsholland

<< a unibody, yep you are a perfect fit for the japanese trucks >>

No need to get personal here. All opinions are welcome, even if you don't agree with them.

Bob

tavgrad

See Bob?
"a unibody, yep you are a perfect fit for the japanese trucks, compelety useless for what trucks are made for."

You die hard chevy truckers crack me up. Everything else is inferior compared to a chevy.

1. The only advantage GM has over all of the pickups brands is the engine choices. You guys boast about so much power and towing capability...I bet only 20% of you guys only use that power to its full extent. And the survey shows that only 10% acutally bought heavy duties. AUtotrac? Who needs full time 4WD on a pickup?
2. All of those truck trend and motor trend magazine comparasion tests...the ones with the chevy vs toyota tundra. when those comparison starts, the chevy is fitted with the 5.3 vs. toyota's 4.7. Why? Because GM's smaller size engine (the 4.8) would not be a match for the toyota. Toyota's 4.7 delivers 315 lb ft. of torque at lower RPM's. GM has only 290 I believe at the same level with peak HP. And we all know torque is the strength of the engine...
3. That Duramax engine Chevy boasts about is a newer design.... DOHC, 32V, not a pushrod. It was designed and engineered by ISUZU, which happens to be Japanese. And speaking of Isuzu, the upcoming S-10 (now Colorado) and GMC Sonoma replacements are designed and engineered by Isuzu.
4. And as for it's "intended purpose", I hardly see Chevies being used in construction sites, park recreation/ranger city dept of power and water, and the list goes on. I see mostly fords and dodges and yes, even toyota. I see most chevies here in Los ANgeles with those fiberglass kits, car tires, and dropped to the ground.

Don't get me wrong, I think GM's make excellent trucks, but they do not meet the needs of all truck buyers.

plutonious

Probably your typical Chevy truck guy. Mini-man mini-tasking a mega-truck with a mega-ego.

jim4444

Displacement is one thing, 4.7 vs 4.8 but you also have to consider that Toyota uses DOHC on their engine.

Everyone knows that if you take two engines that are similiar in size a DOHC engine will make more power because it breathes better, great for racing but not for trucks.

If it was, why havent the big 3, who sell most of the full size trucks, gone with a DOHC setup for truck engines?

And Isuzu is a company that GM owns a good portion of, something like 50%?

You dont see Chevys on the job site? I do all the time. Maybe its just where you live but I see em all the time and alot of Fords as well.

quadrunner500

>3. That Duramax engine Chevy boasts about is a newer design.... DOHC, 32V, not a pushrod. It was designed and engineered by ISUZU, which happens to be Japanese. And speaking of Isuzu, the upcoming S-10 (now Colorado) and GMC Sonoma replacements are designed and engineered by Isuzu.<

Duramax is 32 valve, yes...also turbocharged, intercooled, gear driven cam, but NOT DOHC, still pushrod. The little overhead cammies and unibody chipmunks for most full size truck buyers are the root cause for stampede away from trendy pocket designs.

tavgrad

"You dont see Chevys on the job site? I do all the time. Maybe its just where you live but I see em all the time and alot of Fords as well."
Mostly Fords here. Parks and Recs use Dodge. OLD GMC trucks are OCCASIONALLY used. The Only chevrolet trucks I see are Beverly Hills Police Department police Tahoes.

GM owns 45% interest of Isuzu. Still Japanese company. Isuzu is a proven truck specialist for more than what, 60 years? Globaly? Why else would the largest automaker use them? If Chevy can build the perfect truck, why use Isuzu?

"Everyone knows that if you take two engines that are similiar in size a DOHC engine will make more power because it breathes better, great for racing but not for trucks."
The Lincoln Navigator uses a DOHC 32V V8 which has the capacitity to pull 8800# in 2WD. The Chevy Trailblazer (and GMC Envoy) is only a 4.2L DOHC 24V inline 6, but it can haul up to 6500#.
The multivalve and OHC engine designs led into SUV's and now trucks because they can deliver as much power as an old cast iron dinosaur but offer better fuel economy. It basically means alienation to true truckers, but things must change. Trucks have become more cilivized to increase sales. Independent suspensions replacing Live axles was just the beginning.
I know the Toyota uses a 32V DOHC 4.7, and so far it's proven to handle the tasks of what MOST people need, even you Chevy truckers who do not use the chevy truck's full power.

And Quad, I got the Duramax engine configuration information from from Truck Trend. Tell them.

What happens when Chevy trucks has nothing but DOHC engines in your trucks?

tavgrad

Here you go, Quadrunner. Now I can say I know this too.
RPO LB7
Displacement (cu. in./cc) 403/6599
Bore x Stroke (in.) 4.0 x 3.90
(mm) 103.0 x 99.0
Compression ratio 17.5:1
Cylinder block material cast-iron
Cylinder head material cast-aluminum
Valvetrain configuration OHV
Valves per cylinder 4
Induction system Direct injection w/high-pressure common rail
Ignition Direct compression
Lifters Mechanical roller
Cam drive Gear
Coolant capacity
— manual transmission (quarts/liters)
20.7/19.6
— automatic transmission (quarts/liters)
20.3/19.2
Oil capacity (quarts/liters) 6.0/5.7
Alternator (amps) 105
Battery (SAE rating, cca) 600
Maximum engine speed (RPM)
3250 (governed)
Horsepower/kW (@ RPM) 300/254 @ 3000
Torque/N-m (lb.-ft. @ RPM) 520/705 @ 1800
I think the this is one impressive engine, I admit it.

quadrunner500

Oil capacity is 10 quarts, and (2) batteries.

tavgrad

Ooops. I meant ten.

Back on subject-Bob, still there?
Hondas making light duty compact pickups need a frame. And with this, the small engine/large HP will not cut it with the heavier architecture. How are you going match- putting a Honda motorcycle in your honda pickup when the pickup will not handle the weight?

What size will the engine be in the new RL?

soggydog

I sure hope nissan wakes up before they make the full size truck. That picture of the alpha-T looks worse than the chevy falling rocks thing.

In my opinion they would be much better off staying away from the futuristic design. I think a retro design would go over much better in the America. Just look at the VW Beetle and the PT Cruiser.

Japanese motor cycle manufactures have had no problems copying American cycles, why not a cross between a 56 chevy and a 66 studebaker.

tavgrad

I seriously doubt that the Alpha T will make it into production...Making a larger scale Frontier, I don't think people would take it seriously.

chevytruck_fan

Its funny how the pro japanese anti GM folks always say how GM doens't get barely any regular sales but when it fits their agenda GM doesn't have any fleet vehciles.

Now this is pure hear say, but I have not seen one toyota with a company logo on it, here only Chevy Ford Dodge, more Chevy's and Ford purely for the fact they sell a lot more. Around here, for Farm trucks GM trucks are the favorite, Ford for city vehicles, and dodge for towing horses. I live in a rural area. Of course you are in LA so you wouldn't really have a great idea about work trucks and who uses what. I have yet to see a toyota with a load of hay/feed/ whatever here.

AS far as the izusu deal, I have no idea why the would use izusu, but since the company looses so much money maybe it is a way for izusu too look like it has some revenue coming in so the stock price goes higher?

IF you can find a torque curve on a toyota it would be interesting to compare, what RPM does toyota claim their max RPM at?
GM you idle at about 250 ft lbs at 2,000 your at about 300 and at 3,000 your at 315 or so and then 325@4200 is peak.

Let me ask you a question, you obviously don't have much experience in trucks, torque is the most important thing, but a flat torque curve is very important, On my truck the torque tops out at 1,800 rpm's with like 210 ft lbs (its an 81) when you are on the freeway with a load or without and have to go up a big hill you loose all your speed because the torque topped out at 1,800 rpm.

As far as live axle debate compared to the early 90's there are more trucks now with live axles. Now there is some debate on which actually is tougher if one is tougher, I own both haven't been able to tell a differnce strength wise.

where are you getting this izusu designing S10 info I would be interested in seeing it.

And yes unibody is inferior to a Chevy cold hard facts unibodys can't take a beating.

rsholland

I'm not saying Honda should go with a unibody, just that that is another engineering option to consider. BTW, when I say unibody, I'm talking about a "reinforced unibody" like that found on a Jeep Grand Cherokee, etc.; with frame rails welded to the body, not like the typical unibody found on a car.

Bob

plutonious

Chew on this.

Chevy 4.8L V8: 270hp@5200rpm / 285lbs torque@4000rpm

Toyota 4.7L V8: 245hp@4800rpm / 315lbs torque@3400rpm

You already said torque is what matters (especially in low rpms) with trucks. That being the case, which engine would you prefer?

chevytruck_fan

Id prefer the 5.3L

plutonious

The 5.3L Chevy is rated at 325lbs/ft torque at 4000rpms. A measly gain of 10lb/ft of torque at a whopping 600rpms higher? How often do you drive your truck at 4000rpms? Probably never. How practical is that?

Maybe you still need to compare a larger Chevy engine to the Toyota.

tavgrad

Thank you plutonious, for the further verification. That's why motor trend used the 5.3 in the comparison tests.

Chevytruckfan, it's apparent you only see and hear what you want to see and hear. Please read the entire post and stop picking bits and pieces to start an argument. I think you are repeating what I said in earlier posts. Yes, I'm no guru in trucks on how they work in the heartland. I grew up in big cities and only see pickups in the constuction and the city jobs. I've used my trucks only for play.

and btw, I am not pro japanese anti-gm. I actually considered a GMC Sierra w/ styleside and an Avalanche (until I found out that that grey cladding can be body colored up for an additional $6K).

http://www.motortrend.com/future/index.html

They are usually on the money(snip):

2003 Chevrolet S-10: Engineered by Isuzu, the all-new S-10 will be offered in standard cab, four-door extended cab, and four-door crew cab models. Power will come from four- and five-cylinder versions of the inline Atlas engine used by the TrailBlazer.

2003 GMC Sonoma: Engineered by Isuzu, the all-new Sonoma will be offered in standard cab, four-door extended cab, and four-door crew cab models. Power will come from four- and five-cylinder versions of the inline Atlas engine used by the Envoy. Expect the Sonoma to move upscale, distancing itself from the Chevrolet S-10 in price and content.

Chevy is also assisting on the redesigned versions of the Isuzu Rodeo and Trooper.

2003 Isuzu Hombre: Isuzu is playing a lead role in the development of the next-generation Chevrolet S-10 and GMC Sonoma, and it will naturally offers its own Hombre variant.

And here's a snip for you, bob.

2003 Honda Pickup: Yes, pickup. Following Toyota's lead, Honda will compete in the pickup arena with a truck reported to be larger than the Tundra. Given the recent announcement that Honda will be supplying V-6 engines to GM, it would seem natural for the General to reciprocate with V-8s for this U.S.-built pickup.

Bob, I know what you were referring to...The acura MDX i believe has frame rails welded to the body. That thing weighs nearly 4500#..

rsholland

I've seen several reports on what Honda may do as far as a future pickup is concerned, the MT article being one of them. I still think for Honda to use anything other than a "home-grown unit" will be a huge mistake. Honda certainly has the know-how and capability to build their own engine; I just hope they do.

People buy Hondas and Toyotas because they are different from the domestic brands. If they use a GM unit, as suggested by MT, they will lose a good deal of their potential customers to Toyota or Nissan.

Also, regarding Isuzu, don't forget that the new 6.6L DuraMax diesel is an Isuzu unit too.

As far as the GM 4.8L, I've seen very little reported on it. It seems all the 1/2 ton Chevys being tested have the 5.3L engine. That's clearly the powerplant GM is pushing. I do agree, however, that if Toyota decides to make a larger V8, the 5.3L GM V8 will be really outclassed. And... it may happen. There are rumors of a HD Tundra Crew Cab. I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see a larger engine in it when it debuts in about a year from now.

The reinforced unibody clearly works on SUVs. Jeep introduced this feature on the much-loved Cherokee way back in '84. It was also used on the Commanche pickup too. Whether it will work on a larger full-size pickup remains to be seen. I wouldn't right it off, however.

Bob

quadrunner500

>If they use a GM unit, as suggested by MT, they will lose a good deal of their potential customers to Toyota or Nissan.<

When Honda introduces their new pickup truck, there will be a defacto stampede of buyers rushing to buy one. And these buyers will come from the fringes of the domestic market, and the mainstream of the import market. The new truck will not displace, or render obsolete proven, hard working truck platforms, but will instead represent another choice in the burgeoning market for sport utility and light duty specialty vehicles marketed to younger, urban buyers who keep their vehicles less than 4.5 years.

tavgrad

Bob, It's only the GM engine they MIGHT be using, not the platform (like isuzu).

Personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with outsourcing supplies. That's what keeps other companies in business. GM has been outsourcing for decades, because there are other companies that can improve on their own products (i.e. Allison, Isuzu, Toyota, Suzuki, AM General, Lotus, OPEL, etc). No one has said anything about them "cheating"...others are learning from GM.

Hey, Quad, let's just say Mercedes decides to finally make one for US. What do you and/or all of the other Chievie truuuuckers say to that? Is it just the japanese?

PF_Flyer

Stop by the chat room tonight to talk about your favorite 2002 model trucks!

Just a reminder that the News & Views chat is on tonight (5-6pm Pacific/8-9 pm Eastern). Hope to see you there!

Tonight's topic is 2002 Models: Which are your favorites?

http://www.edmunds.com/townhall/chat/newsviews.html

PF Flyer

Host

Pickups & News & Views Message Boards

rsholland

The next Acura RL, due out next year will have V8. That's the engine Honda should base their truck engine off of. That's what Toyota did. The Tundra engine is derived from the Lexus LS 400/430 V8.

The engine is the "heart & soul" of any vehicle. For Honda to out-source that unit is, for me, unthinkable. I am 100% against that idea.

Bob

quadrunner500

Because not only will you be trampled in the onslaught of buyers rushing with cash in fist to dump their previous trend setter for the next, Honda would also have to base the rest of the truck off the RL, including front wheel drive transaxle, since they don't have a...(guess what)? Then again, they could be just like every other manufacturer and go to the parts bin, take something off the Passport. Afterall, transfer case and differential on Tundra...straight off the V6 Tacoma!

The Lexus LS400-430 is a rear wheel drive car.

Might as well face the music Bob. You don't need a truck. You need another Honda! Good luck on this one!

rsholland

You need to read up on the next RL. It's going to be RWD, not FWD. That's old news. It's been reported in several auto rags.

Bob

tavgrad

The "heart and soul"...Although I strongly agree with you, I don't think that they will develop an engine for a truck in time for a 2003 model, especially when the RL and the V8 is not out yet. Do you know if the V8 is in Japan's markets?
Honda has been known to crank out high HP from smaller displaced engines with the torque at higher RPMs (prelude, s2000, NSX).
The Lexus derived Toyota V8 has been under development for a couple of years before the introduction. They enlarged the displacement for the Tundra/LandCruiser/LX400, and just enlarged it to 4.3Ls for the newer lexus cars. From a "meager" 4.0 cranking out "only" 250 hp in 1988-1993, to 290 hp from 1993-2000, took some time. (of course, in 1997, the 4.7 was developed for the trucks).

rsholland

is about a year away. If they use that engine as basis for a truck engine, that's probably at least another year later.

Here's the MT link on the RL. Click on "2002" at the bottom of the page.

http://www.motortrend.com/future/index.html

According to MT, Honda's pickup will follow one year later. So, that would mean a RL-based V8 is possible.

Bob

tavgrad

"Then again, they could be just like every other manufacturer and go to the parts bin, take something off the Passport."
As if GM,ford and chrysler doesn't dig through their junk piles?
Honda has had experience in RWD for years. Quad, do you know what Japan markets are getting from Honda?

rsholland

is history. I'd be very surprised if they rob that parts bin.

Bob

quadrunner500

Because the Wall St. Journal reported that GM and Honda had entered into an agreement for Honda to supply GM with 100,000 engines and transaxles for a front wheel drive compact, and GM to supply engine and transmission for an upcoming full size pickup from Honda.

Looks like they are not going to be able to count you among their target audience on Grand Opening night! Not that they will care if it has the expected Honda colors and styling, it will be an instant pop hit among the 30 something culture. Still, an RL based V8, as I perceive Honda to envision, would have smaller displacement, high specific output, i.e. not the kind of torque you need to tow 9,000 lbs or go head to head in the full size market. Be serious!

rsholland

I could be wrong. Honda may well use a GM V8. I don't think they will; but they could...

If it does come with a GM V8, the "stampede" that Quad predicts will be more like the stampede Honda saw with the Passport and SLX. If it has a real Honda engine, then yes, there will indeed be a real stampede.

Bob

rsholland

if it comes with the GM engine, then yes, I will pass... until a "real" Honda engine becomes available.

Actually, I'm not now in the market for a pickup anyway. Just "bench racing" with everyone else here.

Bob

chevytruck_fan

about the 5.3 vs 4.7, first look at the 5.3 torque curve at GM Powertrain, at 3400 it provides about the same torque as the 4.7L, now you poeple like to complain that it requires 60 more cubic inches, well I have a question, does it matter if the 5.3L gets better milege than the 4.7L, why would it be better to have a smaller engine with similiar power numbers if it gets less MPG, there is no advantage.

As far as the Honda thing, I think most people don't really care who is making the parts if it says Honda on it, there is always a few fanatics (Like me with the Duramax) who do care who supplies the parts, but the GM engine is a proven design. The passport was a crappy car to begin with, that didn't sell well as an izusu. Where as GM trucks are the #1 selling trucks.

tavgrad

chevytruckfan, I'm just saying that the GM's engine configuration is not a major increase over the toyota's. When it comes to REAL life in city driving, both engines suck gas and can tow that 5k# boat. It's obvious that if you need for heavy duty work, like uprooting trees, yes, get the HD with the Allison 5sp auto, and that duramax (of which, I am a big fan of, too.)

Bob, The passport is over for 2003. The "Tahoe based" MDX SUV with the honda badge will be for 2003. Unlike the passport, the honda suv will not be a boulder basher...AWD, no transfer case...sigh.
What parts bin will honda rob from, Bob? Arent those are Isuzu parts they're robbing?

Even with a GM engine, I'm sure the quality and durability will be as best as ever, bob. At least it not stated that GM will build it entirely, unlike the isuzu passport which was entirely built by isuzu.