Howdy, Stranger!

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





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

1246710

Comments

  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,694
    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
  • tavgradtavgrad Posts: 201
    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).
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,694
    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
  • tavgradtavgrad Posts: 201
    "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?
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,694
    is history. I'd be very surprised if they rob that parts bin.

    Bob
  • 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!
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,694
    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
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,694
    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
  • 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.
  • tavgradtavgrad Posts: 201
    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.
  • Because if SLX and Passport sales were less than ebullient, it might have been that the more discerning buyer knew he could buy the same SUV in the Isuzu Rodeo, with only a little bit less style, but for a lot less money.

    If Honda does use the GM powertrain, history could repeat. Because Honda loyalists are turned off, doesn't mean discerning buyers are turned off to the GM powertrain, since it has already been a hit, to the tune of at least 1/2 million units per year, for the last 3 years, and sales leadership among full size trucks.
  • I like the GM dashboard, square, actually looks like a truck, shure beats the tundra
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,694
    It may well be the best pickup engine out there—it's just not a Honda engine.

    As I've said before, Honda is perhaps best known for their ability to design great engines. Auguably more so than any other car company including the fabled German brands. For them to buy outside seems almost sacrilegious.

    Bob
  • this may just be me looking specifically for this, but anyone else notice the #1 car for burning oil are early 90's civics, for me atleast I have seen more of these cars burning oil than any chevy or ford pickup
  • tavgradtavgrad Posts: 201
    Chevytruckfan, the dashbord shape is not what i'm talking about, the materials!!! The shape reminds me of older BMWs (cool). You need to paste Baby mickey mouse characters on it. Big "touch this" stickers all over it! Kidergarden romper room! The Rams 94-01 and Dakotas 97-01 have truck style, too, but with better quality.

    Bob, Honda engines are race bred. They will develop the truck worthy engine but it's too early for them. I'd rather race with a Honda Accord than with a Chevy Malibu.
  • tavgradtavgrad Posts: 201
    Oh, yeah, the Honda 1.5L, the 2.0L burn oil problem. My brother bought an 86 Prelude as a commuter car. Stinks of burning oil. Quick as a rabbit.
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,694
    I'd rather race with a Subaru WRX... But that's another story. ;)

    I'm sure Honda can develop an excellent "workhorse" V8 from the RL engine platform. Despite all the anti-Tundra sentiment expressed by some folks here, the fact of the matter is, the Tundra DOHC 4.7 is an excellent truck engine. Honda is just as capable as Toyota is converting a car engine into a truck engine.

    Bob
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,694
    ever since 1965. Currently our daughter has a '92 Prelude. Not one of them ever burned any oil.

    Now, if you want to talk about warped brake rotors...

    Bob
  • For starters, I think it's kind of funny you have to use a bigger Chevy engine to make the comparison "fair" with the Toyota. We should really be comparing the Chev 4.8 with the Toyota 4.7, but you guys (and the professional reviewers) won't do that. I can only imagine how you would be crying foul if the tables were turned and we were comparing bigger Toyota engines to smaller Chevy engines.

    What's the advantage, you ask? Well, I don't know the exact specs, but I'm sure the 4.7 is a lot lighter and smaller than the 5.3, making it easier to stuff into smaller vehicles, and the hallmark of a good engine has always been a good hp/torque to weight ratio. In this regard, the Chev is a slug.

    Maybe you shouldn't be so critical of Toyota and the people who drive them. This goes to show how little Chevy guys know about Toyota, and how much Toyota guys know about Chevy. By the way, I believe Ford takes the honors for selling the most trucks, not GM. Maybe that's because even the Ford 4.6 ourperforms your 4.8.

    But hey, go Chevy! Right?
  • the sirens go off

    "Honda is just as capable as Toyota is converting a car engine into a truck engine"

    THE PROBLEM with the japanese, a truck should be a truck not a car. Thats mainly (mainly not only) reason I hate the tundra it isn't a truck, with its camry interior its car engine and ride and styling it makes me sick.

    boy I'm starting to get like Archie Bunkie lol

    P.S. why race those whimpy cars, Id rather race a 70 Chevelle SS 454 aaaaaahhhhhhh yummy
  • Sorry bud GM is kicking Fords butt (ok not by that much) in selling trucks (in both categories, pickups and SUV's) this is of course is Chevy and GMC togather.

    what do you need to put a 4.7 L in that is smaller than a tundra?

    lets see only advantage is weight, yet the silverado accelerates better than the tundra, guess that extra weight really doesn't matter.

    I think the main reason they use the 5.3 because it is the most powerful engine available in the Silverado. and the 4.7 in the tundra.

    please don't tell me what I would do, thanks

    Also ponder this, ever think that maybe Chevy does this as a marketing ploy so they can get more people to buy the 5.3L while still being able to say it has as many conifgurations as Ford.

    I don't know many people that buy the 4.6 or the 4.8 L, why when for a few dollars more you can get the biggest engine?
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,694
    I have purposely tried to avoid a discussion with you because you and I are at opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of automotive tastes.

    I'll take a WRX over your Chevelle any day of the week. (now we are getting way off topic).

    In any event, and with all due respect, the Tundra is a truck, and a good one at that. It may not fit your description as to what a truck "should" be. However, I'm sure if you ask just about any Tundra owner what they think of their truck, they'll give you a positive response.

    Bob
  • ...from the Nissan camp. Perhaps there are no Nissan loyalists. But if there was one Japanese auto manufacturer besides Toyota that has the resources to build a full size truck, without outsourcing, for the U.S. market, it would be Nissan. And if they fail where Honda succeeds (and I think they do), it has to have something to do with terrible styling that not even the U.S. pop culture can appreciate.
  • rshollandrsholland Posts: 19,694
    Quad and I are finally in agreement over something! I do look forward to see what Nissan presents, even if the styling is, uh, bit controversial...

    Bob
  • With all due respect, there are plenty of non-Toyota/non-Japanese trucks out there that are as car-like as the Tundra. All these $40k-$60K GMC/Cadillac trucks/SUVs with leather, fancy-schmancy 4WD systems, etc. make me just as sick (yeah, you're really going to work these and go four-wheeling!). Whatever fault you find with Toyota, I can find with GMC/Cadillac as well. The true work trucks are strippers, and Toyota and GMC BOTH make these.
  • tavgradtavgrad Posts: 201
    Wait, isn't GMC "Professional Grade"? Professional as in white collar Broker and lawyer. They need to change those commercials of some brooks-brothers-suited-down executive stepping out of his Sierra Denali in San Francisco with a briefcase. Only us city boys would consider that, right, chieveytruuuuckfan?

    And for 2001 MY, The ford F series still is #1 in sales, followed by chievy silverado. FOrd Exploder is #3.

    Oh, OK, I'll speak for Nissan.

    Quad, you are right. Nissan has a better chance of building a Full sizer sooner than Honda, without outsourcing. They were the first in the pickup game (for the Japanese in the US), so they do have the know-how. Just not the funds (ouch).

    nissan's styling has been crappy in the past 10 years,modeling after the other two, but now they are finally making styling cues. IMO, the altima is by far the best looking mid sized bread n butter sedan out there, and has the perfomance to boot (finally.)

    The ALpha T will not make it into production. I guarantee that. They're learning from the Chevy Ugulanche.
  • all those Cadillac Escalade SUVs with the gold badging, cup holders, cell phone antennaes, etc. Or as mentioned before, the Denali. How about an Eddie Bauer edition Excursion? I think Chevytruck_fan turns a blind eye to his arguments when they apply to his beloved Chevy and Ford.
  • now you guys are just trying to mess with me, professional grade, I don't know what that is suppose to me personally.

    Toyota-same interior as camry
    Denali-same interior as silverado

    I really don't like luxury trucks, have you ever seen me talk about them...no
    I drive a truck with vinyl floor mats, hubcaps, no a/c, no headliner I don't believe in "luxury" "trucks"
  • >119 You also got to love by plutonious Nov 06, 2001 (09:04 pm)
    all those Cadillac Escalade SUVs with the gold badging, cup holders, cell phone antennaes, etc. Or as mentioned before, the Denali. How about an Eddie Bauer edition Excursion?<

    First Bob agrees with me about Nissan, and now I find myself in agreement with Pluto. LOL!

    Clever marketing, how they give you everthing you need in a base level truck, but tempt you by leaving out a single must-have item. For me, I could do with rubber floor mats, and cloth liners, even hand cranked roll-up windows. But when it came to the factory radio, cassette 2 speakers versus CD 6 speakers, I could not do without! So I paid thousands more I'm sure for the mid level trim, and got a whole bunch of krap I could have done without, carpeted floors, overhead map lights, power windows, cruise etc.

    For a professional grade truck (LOL), for someone else, leather is the upgrade that costs the big bucks because of the useless stuff it's packaged with, OnStar, heated mirrors, compass etc. But for the leather, the sad part is how little of it you actually get. Only the seating surfaces, not the sides or back, and not the back seat either. The imitation, simulated leather they put in the back seat is so realistic, you wonder why they don't just make that an option for the entire car.
  • lol quad you can deal with hand cranked windows, I WONT buy a truck with electric windows or door locks, you can deal with cloth liners, I wish I could get no headliner,

    but the cd player is one that will get you.

    One thing that really pisses me off, I think they changed this year is or was to get the nicest wheels on the 2500 and 3500 you had to order a higher package, I think they changed that though.
This discussion has been closed.