Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Toyota Tacoma vs Nissan Frontier

1568101146

Comments

  • coveredicoveredi Posts: 20
    The literature I have from the dealer (The big red '05 Tacoma brochure) lists "Required Fuel"

    Regular Unleaded for Reg Cab 4x2, Prerunner and 4x4.

    Regular Unleaded for Access Cab 4x2, Prerunner and 4x4

    Premium Unleaded for Access Cab X-runner, Double Cab Prerunner and 4x4, both short and long bed.

    Like I said, it makes no sense, since the Access Cab 4x2, Prerunner and 4x4 all have the same V-6 as the others.
  • coveredicoveredi Posts: 20
    Higher octane for higher elevations? I assumed you used lower octane at higher elevations. Where I live (Around St. Louis, approx 500 ft above sea level) minimum octane rating is 87. When I've gone out west, where the elevation is about 2000 to 6000 ft above sea level, the minimum octane level starts dropping to 85.5.

    I always thought that the elevation and the octane rating was linked in this way, but if the manual says otherwise, now I'm really confused!
  • Yeah, that quote from the manual has me scratching my head, too.

    I live at 7350' altitude and buy most of my gasoline at about 1500' to 2000' lower. What the gas stations label Regular here is 85 octane; Midgrade is 87; and Premium is 89 to 91 (varies).

    The widely-cited excuse, errr I mean reason, given for these lowered octane numbers is that lower atmospheric pressure means our 85 is equivalent to 87 at sea level, in terms of preventing knocking/pinging.

    However, my experience with multiple vehicles over 17+ years of living here is that I get better gas mileage using 87 octane instead of 85. And no knocking.

    Perhaps the Tacoma manual is trying to CYA Toyota's @ss by spec'ing higher octane for higher elevations (i.e., make everybody stick to at least 87 octane to avoid knocking/pinging problems). I notice that the higher octane is only for the heavier Double Cab models. If it has to do with the extra 200 lbs of weight (or whatever), then that would mean hauling cargo or towing in the other models would also require the higher octane gas.

    Do the Double Cab models come with taller axle ratios (lower numbers) than the Regular or Access Cabs?

    Or it could simply be a mistake in the manual.
  • I looked in the big red Tacoma brochure.

    X-Runner axle is 3.13 but Double Cab long and short beds have 3.73.

    I wonder if Toyota assumes that the DC trucks will carry 4 to 5 adults in them; more weight to haul (compared with other cabs)---->more strain on engine, so specify Premium gas. ?????????
  • tgrossotgrosso Posts: 4
    I just checked the Toyota Web Site. It calls for regular gas. But for optimum "performance", use premium. Was also at the dealer yesterday. They have a sticker on the dash,"87".
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    My sincerest apologies guys. My previous comment was only a joke that was referenced to a previous comment made by a certain member back towards the beginning of this topic. Sorry for the confusion -- no such thing is said in my manual. I must be more careful.
  • centralcalcentralcal Posts: 215
    I thought it was funny, but also you started an interesting discussion all the same. I wonder what would happen if it rained way up there on Everest:)
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    only tacoma drivers would actually be able to tell you.
  • leob1leob1 Posts: 153
    That comment was hilarious, but its true.
  • This has been interesting about octane and brakes, etc. but what about seats. The Frontier has so many adjustments to get comfortable for every size driver and the Tacoma has no bottom seat adjustment. That's OK if your 5'2", but if your 6'3" and 200 lbs. then your legs have no support..it's like sitting on a baby chair and trying to drive. The Frontier wins in comfort hands down...not sure it doesn't win in most other categories, too. Drove both and found Frontier better off-road in the real hard stuff.
  • reddrigreddrig Posts: 3
    I have not bought either truck yet. But the Toy feels and looks much more refined inside and out. Materials used, fit and finish are better on the Toy in my opinion. Toy has more American truck looks now. Frontier still has the asian truck feel. I'm a converted Chevy guy so I guess the Toy appeals more to me. Don't loose your mind people this is just my opinion.
  • leob1leob1 Posts: 153
    I am well over 6 ft and prefer the TACO's seats by a long shot. Yes, I sat in the Frontier, including the NisMo. I think the Frontier's interior is lacking behind the rest of the truck. Come on Nissan, let your Infinity divsion do some work on it.
  • centralcalcentralcal Posts: 215
    I think if you do some test drives you will find that the Taco looks much more refined, but the Frontier delivers a much quieter, more refined ride. The Taco is a great looking truck (I prefer it a little over the Frontier), but I was very dissappointed with the drive. I agree with the above post about the seats. I am 6'1", I found the Taco sport seats to be fantastic, the SR5 to be ok at best. With the Frontier ajustable seats, you can really find a good spot. Also, the seats are so low with the Taco, you end up having your legs wrapped around the steering wheel. If you get the sport package, you get the stupid hood scoop that decreases your visibility (and it sounds like people do get some sun glare off it). In the end, I went with the Frontier because of the engine and transmission (they are ultra smooth, not just for a truck, but anything). I do think the Taco looks very good though.
  • leob1leob1 Posts: 153
    How about a NisMo Type R Frontier to compete against the X-Runner? I think the Frontier would look great in that form. I would be very inclined to buy one..

    I have a PreRunner and don't like Toyota's hood scoop either. It's good for the X-Runner though.

    I've noticed nearly every vehicle I've owned does not like regular gas for some reason. What kind of mpg does the Frontier get? Haven't measured my TACO yet(4.0L), but people say around 21.5 mostly hwy driving and that varies on our forum. The 2.7L Toy sounds like a great engine, but no mpg reports yet.
  • motownusamotownusa Posts: 836
    Car and Driver mentioned on their test drive that the Tacoma "doesn't like" regular unleaded gas.
  • seminole_kevseminole_kev Posts: 1,722
    I know everyone wants to talk about the V6 models, but there are also 4cyl equipped ones as well. 4cyl Tacoma runs on regular gas just fine.

    (not trying to sound too nitpicky, just that some of these posts aren't qualifing what engine they're talking about which could be confusing to some.)
  • PF_FlyerPF_Flyer Pennsylvania Furnace, PAPosts: 5,871
    I've taken down the last couple of posts here. Try to avoid the trap of letting it get personal please!

    Thanks for your cooperation and participation.

    PF Flyer
    Host
    Pickups & News & Views Message Boards


    The MAZDA MANIA Chat is on tonight. Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule

    MODERATOR
    Need help navigating? pf_flyer@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • Thank you. Should have just ignored him, anyway.
  • leob1leob1 Posts: 153
    In regards to comparing two trucks that are the same, I meant the same model from the same manufacturer. Kind of like buying something off the shelf. Little differences can influence what you buy, even when you know what you want. A little closer attention to details at that point...imperfections in the paint, rattles/sqeeks, the way the truck sits, handles, etc. I would find it interesting reading any differences that people notice on the same brand.
  • steveh427steveh427 Posts: 25
    Has anyone compared the turning radius between the Tacoma Pre-runner DC vs. the Frontier CC 4x2? The Tacoma brochure shows the Tacoma's diameter (curb to curb)to be 40.7 ft. I can't find anything on the Frontier. I will be coming from a car that has an extremely tight radius and would hate to buy a truck where I'd have to make a 6 pt turn just to turn around.
  • leob1leob1 Posts: 153
    FYI; The Tacoma does has rear drums (10inch), but has a large front disc where most of the braking is done. It's a 12.56 or 319 (metric) in size, the Frontier has a 296 front disc. I had to call Toyota to get that front disc size in metric.

    Turning radius on Frontier: 43.3 http://www.automotive.com/2005/43/nissan/frontier/reviews/summary-specifications/
  • leob1leob1 Posts: 153
    I like to counter some opinions just to give the opposing point of view, not to disrespect(tricky process sometimes). I expect people to do the same in response to what I say in this forum and it is quite entertaining sometimes. Don't take anything personally.
  • ironmoironmo Posts: 7
    Yeah, the rear brakes get little use. I've gone 7-8 years without needing to replace them. The front disc is where most of the braking happens, so that larger front disc is good on the TACO. I think the TACO has two pistons or something like that to make it's rear drums quite effective when needed.
  • jsmith5jsmith5 Posts: 12
    I've read that the Tacoma had a better quarter mile time than the Frontier. Does anyone know if that was done with premium gas? I wonder how it would go if they were both running on regular?
  • centralcalcentralcal Posts: 215
    I guess i don't think it matters who has the better 0-60 time, who cares with a truck (get an M3). I sit in my truck for several hours a day and I did not spend the money (can you say Hummer, Range Rover) to get people to look at me, but to enjoy the ride. The Taco is a great looking truck. period. Nothing more, nothing less. The Taco has become the the Range Rover of Trucks. There are two issues: 1. sales are down or 2. They are doing limited production and yet still have a ton of problems, you decide.
  • jsmith5jsmith5 Posts: 12
    I like the look of the taco too, but looks aren't everything. To some I guess it means more than to others. I like to put function over form, especially with a truck, which is why I am having a hard time favoring the taco over the frontier.
    My earlier letter about the acceleration times is a point that taco fanatics like to point to. Based on the recommendations from toyota, max acceleration on regular gas might be something they would want avoid, especially if their egos are attached to their trucks.
    Still haven't heard much wrong with the frontier especially compared to the toyota. Seems there has been enough time by now. Maybe some frontier owners could provide some info. Toyota fanaticism really does no good for those of us who are trying to gain objective info.
  • centralcalcentralcal Posts: 215
    I have Frontier, CC, 4x4. I had the engine rattle, fixed (very quiet now) and my fan blower was replaced (sounded like a small leaf in the blower). Nothing else. I haven't noticed any other problems on other Frontier boards. When I was at the dealer getting repairs, the service guys said they hadn't had any in exept for oil changes (take that with a grain of salt).
  • matt30matt30 Posts: 27
    I took the time to look at both and found some surprising differences.

    First while the Tacoma has a lower stated Min. ground clearance number it's frame sits significantly higher than Frontier. The mesurement as I found out later was form the bottom of the rear differencial to the ground.

    Both tacoma and froniter have traction control systems, stablility systems, and lockers. Only the Tacoma has a mechanical limmited slip diff, however Frontiers come standard with traction control systems

    While under both vehicles things seemed to be tucked under the frame well with the excepetion of Frontiers skid plates esp. on the gas tank which houng a good inch and a half below the frame.

    I didn't get to test drive the vehicles but I did get to look at both of the suspentions very well. The Tacoma and Frontier come with high-pressure blistine shocks and the NISMO/TRD off-road versions add progresive rate springs in front. Frontiers come with larger tires from the factory.

    The Tacoma had more suspention options including the TRD Sport and Non Pre-runner 4x2, which I will assumes offers a more car-like ride.

    The Frontier spits out more horsepower on cheaper fuel, but the drive train looks like it was neglected, on the 3 Frontiers that I had examined the drive train was untreated and suffered from brown rust spots from the transmission to the differencial. All the tacoma were treated with a black power coat layer to prevent rust.

    Both vehicles suffer from crossover pipe vulnerablities, with the frontiers being more of a problem than the tacomas. The tacomas V6 crossover pipe goes right under the transfer case and about 9mm's of the pipe sit under the frame. On frontier the pipe crosses midbody with no frame crossmember to protect it. It too sits about 9mm's from the frame rails.

    Mud guards and fender flares on the Frontiers are more pronounced which is why I belive the tacomas have a paint chipping problem near the running board.

    The tail gate on the forniter LOOKED stronger than Tacomas flimsy inch and a half tailgate. Also frontiers come with a tailgate lock.

    Tacoma has superior approach and departure angles at over 30 deg. in front and around 26 deg at back. The Frontiers gill though looks more massive and tough, much like Titans.

    Both vehicles come with outstanding sound systems and steering wheel mounted controls.

    Frontier's cockpit opted for the tough look with shades of black and brown, Tacoma went for a classy look with two tone silvers and black contrast.

    Feel free to add more.
  • badnessbadness Posts: 242
    pretty good outside discrip. nice impute dude.
1568101146
This discussion has been closed.