Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Toyota Tacoma vs Nissan Frontier
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=104774
This is what I thought (pro vs con):
2005 Front
Pros: sweet engine, regular gas, 4-disc brakes, 350Z gearbox, boxed frame, steel bed, 4 leaf springs, price$$$.
Cons: bland interior, no rear leg room, departure angle for off-roading.
2005 Taco
Pros: good looks, sweet interior, rear leg room, 400W outlet, departure angle, headlights, payload, body height, front-seat ergonomics.
Cons: engine ticks on driver side, premium gas, 3 leaf springs, plastic bed, clunky shifting to reverse, price$$$.
Both trucks are worthy vehichles. The Front has a better frame, engine, brakes, and gearbox. The Taco has better looks, interior, and seats. Since the engine and frame make the truck, the Front has the mechanical advantage.
I will wait until the 2006 models come out before I lay my money down. Nissan and especially Toyota need some time to iron out the problems.
1. They cool much more quickly due to their open design.
2. They are much less susceptible to dirt and crud getting into them (especially good for off roading).
3.They have fewer moving parts.
Drum brakes are fine, but I prefer disk brakes. Toyota makes fine trucks too, for the money, I think I got more value with the Nissan.
Do a search on the Internet comparing the braking system.
Scott M
I made my truck choice based upon driving both, and finding that while they were both great trucks, one of them was considerable less expensive for the options I wanted...
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.
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!
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.
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. ?????????
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.
(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.)
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
Turning radius on Frontier: 43.3 http://www.automotive.com/2005/43/nissan/frontier/reviews/summary-specifications/
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.
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.
Seems you have done a pretty through check of both trucks. (on the lot) I have looked at and test driven both trucks back to back more than once. I feel the Frontier is by far the better truck. It feels and sounds more solid. The option packages are similar for both trucks, ie: basic mid and upper grade. Both offer a off road package(TRD/NISMO)but here are some difference's that I noticed, Frontier offers a oil pressure gauge/sunroof/low air pressure warning for the tires/leather,heated, power seats(LE model,more car like). None of which the Toyota offers. I don't think not having big fender flares or splash guard's is an excuse to have chipping paint along the runningboard's. Seems the tacos are having several problems(leak's,rattles,paint problems) compared to the Frontiers for a first year vehicle.
The big difference is the Frontier dose not come in a long bed.(big mistake on NISSAN'S part)
If it come's down to 9mm's here and there the bigger picture is weather you are a Nissan or a Toyota person. If you look hard enough you will find what you want.
Best of luck choosing your truck.
They've always been labeled as "generic" and "the Tacoma doesn't have that". Still the best small/midsize truck out there.
Maybe a few problems with the new design. That will be handled. Meanwhile I'm havin' FUN!!
Toyota gets the "power to the wheel" better anyway so bring on your Frontier!!
The notion of "Nissan person" or "Toyota person" only applies to some people. Based on past ownership, I (and evidently many others here) would be "Toyota persons" but when we compared with open minds, we chose Nissan. In the future, it could be another Toyota, or a truck from one of the other manufacturers. NO brand loyalty is worth forsaking critical examination and independent thinking! (And thorough test driving.)
The frontiers frame is boxed up front and in back, while tacoma is only boxed in front. The difference in stiffness is marginal.
everyone likes the looks(unlike nissan)
inside looks like a high class sedan( nissan looks like old f150)
tacoma rides nicer and is faster(according to magazines)
and now it is safer... nissan release a new frontier next year maybe this one will be on par.. and not oogly .. it may be a nice truk but the shoulda saved there money and not painted them or added nething extra.. itll still look as bad
sites for crash test are
http://www.nhtsa.gov/NCAP/Cars/3273.html
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ncap/cars/3396.html
Very good for 2wd Tacoma, better than Frontier.
http://www.safercars.gov/NCAP/Cars/3148.html
One of the things I noticed about the Frontier that I don't find very appealing is what appears to be a lack of quality underneath the truck. I've noticed that both drive shafts, all the U-joints, the exhaust and a couple of other components are rusted. Is it possible this was intentional? I've heard that some steals are designed to form a thin layer of rust for protection. Does anyone think that's the situation or just a lack in quality? The Tac does not have this problem.
The exhaust could be an issue - the steel exhausts on my '69 C20 and '69 Econoline rust up pretty good within 5 -7 years, but the stainless exhaust on my '96 Subaru is still perfect after 180K miles and 10 years (well, 9.5). It does have some very mild surface rust, but it is strictly on the surface.
http://autos.msn.com/advice/article.aspx?contentid=4020964&src=Home&pos=Edit2
Many people don't realize that the previous style Frontier had better crash ratings than the Tacoma. I know because I had one. Seems like Toyota did some homework after noticing that. Safety ratings affect insurance rates. FYI, I just called my agent and the Tacoma is approximately $30 cheaper every 6 months on insurance. I know, big deal, but $30 less might matter to some people.