Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Midsize Pickup Comparo
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
One minor point I noticed in the Yota listing: "Because of the cab roof shape I can not get a moon roof."--did you check out an aftermarket moon roof? I have an '05 Taco with a Webasco (sp?)made in Holland and it works like a charm. I don't know why Yota didn't offer the moon roof in '05. And just to add to the fray I don't offroad at all so I use my truck to commute and haul mulch, dirt, and my dog. I like it so far and think it is a vast improvement over the '03 I owned previously.
I have always heard that a vehicle with a 6500 pound towing capacity loses 1 pound for every pound of weight in the bed/cab. So if you have 500 pounds in the bed, you can only tow 6K. Maybe the rules changed.
It doesn't matter whether the vehicle has a payload rating of 5,000 lbs or 1,000 lbs. You load it with 500 lbs of cargo and the towing capacity will drop the same.
The Ridgeline's towing capacity is 5,000 lbs plus 2 passengers, plus 200 lbs of gear.
The Ridgeline's max payload is 1,550, give or take 5 lbs. That max weight rating includes weight which must be placed in the cab to distribute it correctly. THAT IS EXACTLY THE SAME SITUATION WITH EVERY OTHER VEHICLE IN THE CLASS. ANY WEIGHT YOU PLACE IN THE CAB WILL REDUCE THEIR MAX PAYLOAD IN THE SAME MANNER. The only difference is the fact that Honda is up front about it.
It's always on for whatever set of wheels are powered. When a 4x4 is in 2wd mode, then it works on the rear wheels, just like you describe for a 2wd truck. When you switch into 4wd, then it works on the front as well.
"On 4WD models the ABLS system operates in both 4H and 4LO modes. On 2WD vehicles, the ABLS system operates on the drive axle only."
I interpret that as indicated in my original post, though I could be wrong.
I do know I can easily make one wheel spin on wet or icy pavement without any ABLS intervention.
"On 4WD models the ABLS system operates in both 4H and 4LO modes. On 2WD vehicles, the ABLS system operates on the drive axle only."
I interpret that as indicated in my original post, though I could be wrong.
I do know I can easily make one wheel spin on wet or icy pavement without any ABLS intervention."
With my 4x4 NISMO, if I turn the VDC off while in 2wd, I can get one rear wheel to spin. With the VDC on like it normally is, the ABLS kicks in and prevents either rear wheel from spinning through brake application and/or power reduction. In 4-lo with the rear diff locked, VDC turns off but the ABLS on the front axle still works.
It could be that you are correct and it's the VDC that is preventing the rears from spinning in 2wd. The important thing for me when I test drove the vehicle was that I could do a full-throttle turning start on slick pavement and not spin a rear tire.
Nissan has a better system on the Pathfinder that not only stops the rear from spinning but also sends traction to the front, but for whatever reason they don't offer the "Auto" 4wd mode on the Frontier.
On the Frontier there are tonneau covers that do not interfere with the Utilitrack. Undercover is one of several.
Of the vehicles included in this forum topic the Dakota is the most unpretentiously truck-like vehicle being considered, the closest thing to a real truck if one defines that in the conventional terms of a full-size, light duty pick-up. In my area Dakotas are commonly found in service with Time-Warner, Rochester Telephone, Rochester Gas & Electric Corp., Monroe County, Niagara Mohawk, NYS Department of Conservation, Rochester Truck Rental, and a host of commercial entities. Even in Quad Cab configuration, these are primarily used as a work vehicle. I don't see either the Ridgeline or the SportTrack fullfilling that kind of role to the same degree of a Dakota.
Just for the record, pluses you didn't mention for the Dakota include:
*fully boxed frame and as of 2006, the stiffest in the industry.
*The Dakota Quad Cab has the largest cargo box area.
*Dakota has the highest rated maximum towing capability at 7150 pounds, properly equiped.
You don't define why you judge the Dakota engine to be "the worst," but in my experience both the 3.7 V6 and the 4.7 V8 are among the most solid engines in the entire industry. They have been extremely reliable, very smooth, very quiet, and supply excellent torque in the range expected of a work truck. In my mind this one comment stands out, especially since your preferred choice utilizes an engine family that's been the least reliable of the candidates under discussion.
Regards,
Dusty
Frontier w/4.0 V6:
265 HP
173 lb. ft. torque @ 4400rpm
vehicle weight 3675 lbs.
Dakota w/4.7 V8:
235 HP
240 lb. ft. torque @ 4000rpm
vehicle weight 4261 lbs.
The standard 4.7 V8 in the Dakota makes more torque and slightly more horsepower at lower rpms. While a dealer test drive will undoubtedly produce a greater sensation of acceleration and speed in the Frontier, at load or towing the torque limitations of the otherwise excellent little Nissan motor will be much more clearly evident.
This was the point in my earlier post. Dodge has concentrated on satisfying the mid-size market segment with a truck that will be used more frequently for work. I'm aware (and I'm sure Dodge is, too) that this often works against them when the Dakota is compared to smaller trucks or crossover vehicles like the Ridgeline. Dodge is answering a market demand for actual commercial work trucks.
With the exception of the Ridgeline and SportTrack, in my opinion this attempt at comparison of each of the aforementioned vehicles is an apples and oranges conversation. None of the other vehicles under discussion can do what the Dakota can do, and likewise the Dakota cannot give you what some of the others can provide. By size alone the Dakota outclasses the Frontier and the Tacoma. The Ridgeline and SportTrack cannot do what the Frontier, Tacoma, or the Dakota can do.
By the way, for 2006 Dodge does have a high output 4.7 rated at 260 horsepower. Unfortunately, it requires higher octane fuel.
Regards,
Dusty
A Frontier with a V-6 is rated at 265 H.P. and 284 lbs.ft of torque at 4000 r.p.m.
The V-6 King Cab averages out to approx. 4300 lbs. curb weight.
And I agree, comparisons are fine and dandy, but, they can only go so far. All these trucks have their attributes, their pluses and minuses, and they are all decent trucks in their own way. The rest is subjective.
Which engine group are you refering to, and what are your sources of information.
Kip
Thanks!
kirstie_h
Roving Host
Host, Future Vehicles & Smart Shopper discussions
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
Of course, that only makes the Frontier even more powerful.
My apologies.
Best regards,
Dusty
I was employed in the management of my company's fleet vehicles for a number of years. Begining in '99 we began purchasing F150s for our light pick ups, replacing our then current GM truck fleet. We phased in just under 100 by 2004 nationally. Currently we are down to 54 F150 nation wide.
Problems we have seen on the 4.6 Triton modular motor are:
*coil pack failures
*exhaust gasket failures leading to cylinder head or exhaust manifold replacement
*intake manifold cracks
*freeze plug failures
*head gasket leaks (coolant)
*spark plug spitting
*rear crankshaft oil seal failures
There are a collection of other problems, such as O2 and other sensor failures. These problems affected a certain population of vehicles, none of these problems affected all vehicles. But compared to our Chevys and Dodges the Triton motors have required a higher level of maintenance and or repair. In most other respects the pre-2005 F150s were pretty good vehicles. Our small purchase of six 2006s have revealed a drastic increase in total vehicle repair rates, unfortunately.
Our experience seems to match other fleet operators that I've talked to.
Regards,
Dusty
Cheers,
Mick
How did the transmissions of the various vehicles hold up as the miles got high?
Did y'all have any Japanese vehicles in the fleet? If so, how did they do?
Thanks,
Kip
We've had and do have some Asian nameplate cars and minivans (no trucks) in our fleet, but the number is very small. These vehicles are used by our service force when they are singularly assigned territories at automobile manufacturing sites. For instance, our service reps that visit Honda in Marysville, Ohio, are assigned Honda vehicles. Since the numbers are very small our results would be statistically invalid.
We've had Asian truck samples given to us for evaluation from time-to-time. Last year, for instance, Nissan gave us a couple of Titans to use for six months.
Our experience with transmissions on various vehicles has varied over time. If you are inquiring specifically about trucks, it depends on the model and year. The 4LE60 used in smaller engined GM trucks have been the most unreliable. The 4LE80 used in the larger engined or heavier models is the most overrated transmission I can think of. Not as bad as the 4LE60, but nowhere near the reliability that many people claim it is, at least by our experience.
The 45REs in our Dodges would be next, however we have selected Dodge as our only 4x4 supplier and we typically use them for plowing and other heavier work. So this may not be a fair comparison. The 46RE found in later RAMs was better. Our '03 and up RAMs all have the 545RFE. We have not had one single issue with any of these transmissions.
The 4R70s behind the 4.6 motor used in the F150 have been very good. The 4R100s in F250s have not.
The one thing you didn't ask me about was long term body condition. I remember how Fords rusted prematurely and very badly years ago. Our F-series trucks since '99 have been exceptional in this regard. Our Dodges have been just as good. Our GMs, however, have not. We have had perforation on GMs as early as five years. Rocker panels, rear wheel well lips, lower cab corners, and floor pans are typical weak spots. This really affects resale value when we turn them over. (Factor in piston slap and you can take a bath on a GM LD pickup!) And we're having the same issues on our Venture fleet.
Hopefully our newer GMs are better.
Regards,
Dusty
If you're serious about using a vehicle for off-road use, there are a number of other measurements you'd want to consider.
They have been "STUCK" in that mold while others have been changing in size as well as engineering.
Kip
Bob
Ok, I actually did see a wrecked one the other day. Actually fared well (cosmetically) against the Impala it had creamed.
.
.
.
"Mark one vote on the tally for the Tacoma, fellas!"
4.0L 265 HP 284 lb/ft torque (VQ Wards 10 BEST for 12 Years!) Far superior to the wimpy Tacoma engine.
Frontier better engine.
Frontier better value.
Frontier better audio.
Frontier better seats.
Frontier better off road.
Frontier better on road.
....Tacoma is an also ran. Just as well buy a Rideline and stay on pavement.
Ridgeline is best handling.
Frontier is best off road.
Is Tacoma best at anything?
also has the best reliabilty rating.
In case you think I am a Tacoma driver you are wrong. I drive a Frontier, but we all have to face the truth when discussing these trucks.
Most of us make our selections based on person-al preferences. For me it was the price difference, the convenience of the dealer and the looks of the Frontier.
I could have been just as happy driving a Tacoma, but I just felt for me the choice was Frontier. I don't think the Tacoma would be a bad choice for any of us. In fact if they quit making the Nissans where else could we go?
OkieScot
4.0L 265 HP 284 lb/ft torque (VQ Wards 10 BEST for 12 Years!) Far superior to the wimpy Tacoma engine.
Frontier better engine.
Frontier better value.
Frontier better audio.
Frontier better seats.
Frontier better off road.
Frontier better on road.
....Tacoma is an also ran. Just as well buy a Rideline and stay on pavement.
Ridgeline is best handling.
Frontier is best off road.
Is Tacoma best at anything?
Last time I checked, Tacoma was selling more than Fronty and Ridgeline combined. Guess what they do best is convince the majority of buyers of these three vehicles that it does what the consumer needs most, best. It may not be the fastest or the largest or the best looking in some people's eyes, but it is the best all around package for the majority in this group.
I must admit with the rising gas prices that the shine that I had for the Taco and the Fronty has died down a tad.
Both these trucks get poor mileage (the Tacoma is marginally better) and at nearing $5.50 a gallon for 87 octane here in Canada the m.p.g. ratings play an important consideration. And we haven't entered the summer driving season yet.
600,000 miles in Toyota trucks. WOW! That is 40 years of driving at the average rate of 15,000 miles a year.
I was not even born 40 years ago.
In Edmunds testing the results were.
Frontier 16.10 mpg
Tacoma 15.4 mpg
Colorado 13.54 mpg
Dakota 14.87 mpg
Ranger 13.62 mpg
Frontier obtained the best mpg. No surprise.
Some Fronty owners are only averaging 11-13mpg,s that rots while my Taco gets 21.45mpg US all around thats the real deal, In your dreams sugarboy!
mpg at 75 mph, 23.1 mpg at 70 mph, 25.6 mpg at
55 mph and for a 5 mile stretch of 45 mph speed limit I got 26.4 mpg.
So that stacks up pretty well against a Tacoma
in my books. By the way I was using the a/c on
this trip too.
I keep trying to tell you that these trucks are very comparable. There is just not much difference in any catagory that I am aware of.
Can't we be friends? You know, live and let live.
OkieScot
kcram - Pickups Host
The person I was replying to mentioned the Fronty, Ridge and taco only. Of those three, the Taco outsells, making it the best of the 3. Include the Ranger and it is best for the majority. I'll take the word of how many people buy a vehicle and how well it sells down the road as my gauge for determining what is the best vehicle. Ford is certainly the best cheap disposable truck on the market. It has a lower price (and considerably lower resale value) and an American name. It also has the advantage of being introduced when Toyota and Nissan were still making a real name for themselves, while the F series had already established Ford as the truck king. Just like the Toyota haters that say the reason they sell is repeat customers, the Ford owners are more likely to a Ford than a new customer.
Here is the data.
An objectively comparable test.