Nissan Frontier Crew Cab VS Ford Explorer Sport Trac

scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
edited March 2014 in Nissan
The Ford Explorer Sport Trac is due to arrive
early. Debut is now January 2000. It will sport a
206hp 245ft/lbs of torque single-overhead-cam V6.
Have some standard features found to be optional on
some vehicles in this class. Give your opinion,
how do you think it will sell?


  • tschoepetschoepe Member Posts: 1
    I've wanted a vehicle in this class ever since I took a trip to Indonesia and saw them everywhere. I currently have a '98 Ranger with the 4.0/5sp drive train and love the towing capacity. To me, an SUV seems brain dead since all the smelly stuff (gas cans, etc) is in the vehicle with you. The four door short bed is great for those of us that tow our toys. I'd probably already have a Nissan except I can't accept the downgrade from my current 7,000lb tow rating, hopefully the Sport Trac will keep or increase that with the horsepower bump.
  • beiljbeilj Member Posts: 1
    I had heard January 2001 for the sport trak. the dakota quad cab is bigger than both of those, offers a v8 and will easily tow 6500 pounds...
    i can pretty much guarantee an v6 ford cant tow 7000 pounds...
    I dont think the sport trak will sell very well cuz its arriving too late to the crew cab/hybrid SUV party
  • petramanpetraman Member Posts: 1
    Yeah get a DODGE they have great options!!

    You get wonderful Transmission problems!
    Equally impressive and very sluggish ride!
    Wind Noise to keep you company on them long drives!
    Bearings that don't bear up to regular driving!
    Air Conditioning that keeps you Lukewarm!

    BUT you'll have PLENTY of time to catch up on your reading and or work in the Service Center Lobby of your Local 5 STAR DODGE!

    The New Dodge they are DIFFERENT!
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    The Ford Sport Trac will be available in January 2000.
  • jc9799jc9799 Member Posts: 70
    On paper, it sounds like a winner, at least powerwise, when compared to the Frontier. How will they compare pricewise?
  • bekkabekka Member Posts: 1
    Has anyone seen any price projections for the Ford Sport Trac?
  • BrutusBrutus Member Posts: 1,113
    Ford will not likely have trouble selling as many Ford Sport Traks as they build. Unfortunately, the price will likely reflect that. The quote from the previous post sounds about right.

    Based on the 1999 tow ratings, the highest tow rating for the Explorer with the V-6 is 5,900 pounds in the 2wd 4 door model. Opt for the V-8 instead and the tow rating increases to 6,740.
  • freezedfreezed Member Posts: 14
    $35K seems a bit pricey for a truck. I guess that calling it a Sport Utility something means that they believe that the market will bear that price. Can't wait to see if it does. Think I'd stick with a crew cab in the $22K range.
  • BrutusBrutus Member Posts: 1,113
    SUVs are more expensive than pickups. They have the highest profit margin. Any wonder why the manufacturers are trying to build a larger variety of them to appeal to a broader sector of the market?
  • kroosekroose Member Posts: 1
    has anyone seen a website for the new ford explorer sport trak 4-door truck? is there factual info about this vehicle's specs/prices/etc?
  • motoxmotox Member Posts: 2
    I'm looking at the new Frontier Crew Cab with the
    new 3.3 L V6 motor and automatic trans. In my test
    drive, the truck seemed to get off the line fairly
    easily, but ran out of steam shortly. At 65 mph
    with the OD on the engine rpm seemed high, at
    somewhere around 2,800 rpm, and slightly noisy. I
    can live with the slight noise, and the lack of
    spunk, but I'm concerned about the high rpms. Is
    this an engine that I can easily get 150,000 mostly
    highway miles out of, assuming excellent
    maintenance ?. I would be towing 1,200 # max., and
    very few times. If I understand, this engine has
    been around for quite a while, in other Nissanmodels.
    Also, who can tell me anything about the camshaft
    belt drive ?. I hate rubberbands, but the Tacoma
    and Tundra use one, and Toyota buyers seem to be in
    love with their vehicles. Dealer tells me service
    life is 100,000 miles. Kind of scares me since
    premature failure of the belt leads to major engine
    damage since it is an interference engine. I find
    Nissan's 2000 Frontier brochure ironic in that
    they brag about how the 4-cylinder engine uses a
    durable timing chain, and conveniently make no
    comment about the belt used with the V6.Is this a reliable powertrain ?
  • ccooper1ccooper1 Member Posts: 1
    Try, and the latest edition of Open Road magazine has a full story on the truck. I love it. I'm considering getting a second job just to pay off most of my current loan to buy a Sport Trac when they arrive in January.
  • tgr1tgr1 Member Posts: 92
    The Frontier and Sport Trac look very comparable-but can't see paying the extra money for the Ford, assuming it will be considerably more expensive than the Frontier. Plus, the new Ford styling, with all the plastic, looks even uglier than Nissans. My opinion of course, so, whatever turns you on. The Ford will probably still be a big seller. They're really good at marketing. As for "ford outfitters"-what's that? Seems like a lot of Madison Avenue hype to me, to make a lot more money off of people who want to spend money for image. Lets face it, the typical buyers are more likely to take their trucks to central park, or the local mall. I like the Dakota 4dr for about the same money as the Frontier-much bigger bed, much larger rear seating area, and serious V8 performance. I just ordered one- 4x2, 4.7L V8, loaded for $21,672, plus tax & tag. As for the reliability of Dodge, I've owned four, including a Dakota for the past three years, and the only problems have been minor.
  • lebeau69lebeau69 Member Posts: 13
    i ordered a se cc, won't arrive until feb/mar timeframe. in the meantime i pick up the lastest open road mag. i was impress with the sport trac. enough to reconsider my purchase of the nissan se cc. larger engine 4.0 sohc 206 hp/238 torque. this motor on the explorer gets about 17/23mpg. the back seat has a 60/40split and folds down for added storage. the length of the sport trac is 205.9 this added length goes to the back seat for legroom. the estimated cost is about 24-27k. 20.9 gal tank. 80watt stereo only 4 speakers. super stereo will not be available until 4q 2000. should be in showrooms by jan. 15th. my reason for possibly canceling my order is my concerns about the low mpg for the size engine. i was hoping that nissan would put in the 3.5L engine like they are for the pathfinder this summer. nissan said no plans as of now. i wish nissan would have put in fold down seats so the back maybe used as storage. i notice the back speakers are right against the seat. not a good location for speakers. although the 100 watt system does sound good. parking brake and cruise control buttons are in a arkward location. just keeping my options open for now.
  • tfuego68tfuego68 Member Posts: 1
    as much as i like the look and engines of the american products, there is one problem, they're
    american. after you've owned an american car/truck fora long time, they do feel "solid"
    anymore. i have owned 3 nissans so far, and i have been nothing but impressed with their reliabilty. my friends seeing this have also bought nissans. so far 9. i also have friend with american cars which rattle and make misc. noises all over the place. this is why in the long run the nissan cc make more sense. if you get new cars often, who cares, get american, good prices nice options. thats my two cents worth.
  • DTKWOKDTKWOK Member Posts: 131

    I currently have a Nissan Pathfinder ('91 XE), it comes with the 3.0 V-6. I think it's the same block as the 3.3's. So far I have 105K with no problems, still running smoothly (except of course for the manifold studs breaking - bad batch of studs from a Korean supplier). Japanese engines are meant to be revved high, they can take it! I've personally seen some old 'Finders with 250K - original engine and tranny, no rebuild/overhaul. Hope this helps.
  • wrwhittewrwhitte Member Posts: 5
    I've been searching the 'net for several months now - finding everything I can about small 4+ door pickups. (I'm still not abandoning the thought of a SUV - but the $$$$!). The Sport Trac, the SUT and the Dakota are the only ones available to date. As for a level playing field, here's a list of what my "perfect" vehicle would have: small bed pick-up that seats at least 4 comfortably, good sized engine with decent hp and low-speed torque, and best-of-breed 4WD system. I know, I want world peace too, but hey, it's what I need.
    I just got back from the Washington D.C. auto show (12/26) and saw all of them.

    The SUT was impressive looking, but very tiny...nothing brawny about it. I'm sure the engine is good, but too small for my needs. I also found one interior design flaw that could prove to be a headache: the door handle gets in the way of the back seat as it folds down. The floor model already had one handle missing because of it. Not a major problem, but a problem none-the-less.

    The Sport Trac was a bit bigger, though, couldn't get into it because it was on one of those darn platforms. The Ford rep told me that the 4WD is not yet a definite. Didn't really believe him. They also didn't have any literature to take home. Compared to it's nearest sibling - the has an open bed - making it a pick-up. The rep said I'd probably be better off getting the SuperCrew. But that's too big. All-in-all, not too impressed with the SportTrac showcase. And this is the vehicle I WAS most interested in. Come on Ford.....get with it! It needs more options.

    Lastly, I looked at the Dakota Quad-cab. In short, I like it. It has good leg room and practical spacing. It also has good engine options....definite brawn here. The payload is the largest in its class. This is actually a turn-off for me. I like the abbreviated beds in the Sport-trac and the SUT. The 4WD system appears more reliable and sturdy as it's mounted on the floor - no push-button electronics. Electronically controlled 4WD systems bother me. I've seen and heard too many problems with them....though, this may be an outdated opinion. I read the prior reviews in this forum about the questionable tranny reliability. This may be true. I can't verify it. But if it's well maintained and not abused, it should be fine.

    I was hoping to see if Toyota came out with a four-door competitor. Haven't seen or heard of one.

    Chevy supposedly has a four-door Silverado. Not sure about this one. Didn't see one at the show either. I've read so many articles at this point they're all starting to blur.

    Speaking of which. I think I'm blurred out. Thanks for the indulgence.
  • jcl64jcl64 Member Posts: 6
    Why did you not include the Nissan Crew Cab in your search? I just bought one and I love it! I put four adults (six feet or so) in it and they fit OK. My three boys and wife fit just perfectly. I bought it, though, because I have seen them in other places in the world and wanted one for years now to haul both my family and my goodies around. I'm not in the construction business and don't need a full sized bed, however with the tailgate down the bed IS full size. the price is better with the down-sized Crew Cabs. I got mine with most of the bells and whistles (minus power windows) for just under $19,000 and that's including TAX, tag, and title. Chevy and Ford (unless its an S-10 or Ranger version with four bangers) won't come close to that price. I have seen the Dodge around town, but being I already have my truck, I don't know what the asking price is. Anybody know? Concerning Toyota, the rest of the world knows it as the Toyota Hi-Lux Crew Cab. It is a good looking truck and very popular, has been for years. Consider the Nissan.
  • wrwhittewrwhitte Member Posts: 5
    Thanks for the reminder. Yeah, I did omit the Frontier Crew Cab. I may have discounted it in the back of my mind because the back seat seemed too small for my preference.
    I also figured that if I was going to "settle" for a 6 cyl, I'd opt for the SUT - due to it's added features. You convinced me, however, to give the Frontier another look - especially when considering the overall price.
  • asdf11asdf11 Member Posts: 1
    I have 12K on my Frontier Crew and it's getting
    more power and better mileage as the engine
    begins to loosen up. Mine has every option except
    that tacky roof rack and the limited slip diff,
    which would've been a good thing. I don't think of
    it as a compact crew cab truck, so much as a mid-sized SUV with
    wet storage. Park one next to a Cherokee or an Explorer and you'll see what I mean. This suits my needs. It's also
    a serious off roader. Shortish wheel base, good ground clearance. On road, I forget I'm in
    a truck. It corners very well and is a great
    mountain pass car. It eats up Tacomas and even Suburbans in this realm, not so much
    because of power (which is good) , but cornering and balance. Mine
    has the five speed manual. The automatic is a power sapping
    dud. To dominate, the only thing my Nissan Crew
    needs is another 30 horsepower and I'm waiting
    on the aftermarket crowd to come up with right
    computer chip. ARE YOU LISTENING OUT THERE?

    The Sport Trac is based on an Explorer which is
    a station wagon with high chair visibility and a big butt. In stock form it's offroad abilities are a little better than a Subaru Forrester.

    The Dakota 4 door
    came together in 24 months, presumably after they
    found out what Nissan was up to. That's a very
    short development time and Dodge is known for getting things
    right after about two or three go arounds ( ask
    early Ram owners about that one). The 4 dr Dakota
    is only a few inches shorter than a Suburban!
    How those guys get away with calling it a compact
    truck is a question to raise with writers
    at car magazines. Besides, I hate that priggish pilgrim throwback in
    the Dodge commercials. I bet he drives a Neon.
    I suppose if you want to bring
    your horse float or haul cinder blocks, the Dakota
    makes a decent welter weight tow vehicle. If you want to be able to climb and turn around in the real boonies, buy something that is smaller than a '67 Impala.

    Nissan Crews have been running around Central
    America, Australia and other developing places for at least 15 years. Down there, real adults use them for real work -- none of this market positioning showing gnarly youths and kayaks.

    Anyone who has owned a Nissan knows they will
    last for a very long time. Wouldn't it be nice
    if Nissan came up with a 4 liter V-8? The N-Crew
    could also use a factory equipped snorkel for crossing deep streams. Of course if they did that,
    Ford would come up with a bigger composite one in several designer colors. They would also claim
    that they did it first.

    The bed extender really adds to the utility of
    this rig -- 6 ft space. This is a fraction of an
    inch more than will be available in the Sport
    Trac -- which has an "innovative" bed extender,
    which is nearly identical to the N-Crews.

    If utility matters more than pose value in your
    SUV equation, think Nissan Crew.

    My Nissan dealer says the company is coming up with a Sport-Trac styled vehicle in 2000, while keeping
    the N-Crew for those of us who don't like so
    much plastic.
  • tgr1tgr1 Member Posts: 92
    Way too small for practical use. As for the rear seats in the Nissan, they're fine, if your "crew" consits of a couple of kids!
  • woody1111woody1111 Member Posts: 7
    I just started a new "clubhouse" on Yahoo. Follow this link to get there. You have to register with Yahoo to use it, but it comes with all kinds of nice features. I have already started a list of links to web sites.

    Regards, Mike
  • DTKWOKDTKWOK Member Posts: 131
    >The Explorer Sport Trac is a nice and roomy SUT.
    >Don't trust the forigen cars or trucks there just
    >pieces of [non-permissible content removed] I and mean that!

    If it weren't for competiton from these foreign s**t cars/trucks, I DOUBT American car quality would be at levels they are today.


    No, go with whatever suit your needs. Don't be bought into the "I'm an American so I must buy American." If I were laid off because my company builds an inferior product (not saying that Ford is BTW), then I have no one to blame but me and company, not the consumers.

    Don't get me wrong, I respect Ford (esp.) for the improvements and ingeunity that they have put into their products these couple of years. But as asdf11 pointed out, these Nissan crew cabs have been in use for quite awhile around the world, if they weren't any good, people wouldn't be using them for so long (and there are other car companies available to them).

    Interesting to note, on a recent trip to the Malaysian Islands, the only SUV's I've seen there were 4Runners, Discos, Jeeps, and some Pathfinders/Terranos. Of course, there's always those Suburbans used by the American embassies. Keep in mind that their infrastructure makes the worst pot-holed filled road in the US look like freshly paved ones. (Tire industry must be pretty profitable there!)

  • BrutusBrutus Member Posts: 1,113
    I guess it depends on your definition of "practical use" as far as a 4' bed is concerned. It wouldn't be practical for me since I have a 10'11" slide-in camper, but a standard short bed wouldn't work for me either. The Sport Trac bed has a steel frame that can be extended over an open tailgate that will allow you to carry plywood.

    A 4 foot bed will be more than adequate for the trips to Home Depot and for you to help a friend move some furniture. As far as moving all of your household goods, a few years back, I lived pretty spartan, but it still took me 3 1/2 trips with my fullsize longbed truck to move all of the stuff from a one bedroom condo. The next time, I spent about $50 on a U-haul (rental, gas and mileage) and moved it all in one trip, saving several hours in travel time and loading.

    A 4 foot bed will also be plenty big and convenient for the standard camping trip or picnic. There is plenty of room for the muddy gear, barbecue grills and fish coolers that you don't want inside the vehicle. A good percentage of full and midsize truck owners rarely use all of the cargo space in their beds, and usually use much less than 4 feet.
  • postalmanpostalman Member Posts: 11
    I find the four foot bed in my Nissan Crew Cab as the ultimate in practicality. It's not overkill for me, I'm not a contractor who needs to haul plywood, but my jonboat hangs four foot off the tailgate, and gets to the lake ok.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    The Ford Sport Trac will trounce Nissans Frontier crew cab. Its V6 is far superior and proven than the 3.3. The 3.3 is weak, weak, weak. at 170hp and 200ft/lbs of torque its torque rating doesn't even come close to the 225ft/lbs of the present 4.0 in the RAnger!
    And prices are going to be around the 20-24K range at first. When the hoopla dies down prices will drop.
    Nissan has the weakest V6 in its class!LOL.
  • DTKWOKDTKWOK Member Posts: 131
    Nissan may not have the most powerful V6 yet (will get to that later), but it is definitely a PROVEN engine. The 3.3L is derived from the same block as the old 3.0L V6, and that has been around for at least a decade. On top of that, it's been used around the world, can the same be said for the 4.0? (I don't know, would be interesting to find out.) One has to realize that auto part stores are not as plentiful everywhere else as it is in the US or Canada. Not trying to trash the 4.0, just pointing out that if Nissan's V6 was so terrible, it wouldn't have been around for that long. Also, the 3.3 has more hp than the 4.0, although it loses in the torque category. (Yes, I know that trucks are suppose to be built for torque so that they could haul cargo and haul, in general.) But you can't say that only torque matters and hp doesn't.
    Anyway, there have been some news that a supercharger will be out for the frontiers (not sure on the specs) and a new 3.5L V6 for the pathfinders (rumor @ 240 hp/265 lb-ft.), this year as 2001 models. Should be interesting....

  • ll7ll7 Member Posts: 16
    Hope you enjoy your Explorer Sport Trak. I'm sure that it will be a nice ride. It may be the vehicle for you. However, I need a vehicle that is reliable and long-lasting. I typically keep a vehicle for at least 8 years and 150,000 miles. I bet that in 8 years you will not be driving your Ford or if you are you will have spent a fortune in repairs. There is nothing wrong with American vehicles if you trade them in every few years. I don't have the luxury of being able to trade a vehicle in every few years. My experience is that American vehicles begin to fall apart at 60,000 to 70,000 miles. I'll stick with my Nissan Crew Cab.
  • DTKWOKDTKWOK Member Posts: 131
    Putting 96K trouble free miles is nothing to brag about, a well maintained/designed truck should last at least 150K miles. Heck, my '91 Finder has 105K miles on it, I've seen 'Finders with 250K + miles and the owners flogged the heck out of it!
    Yeah, I've seen some of the problems with the Frontier on this board (i.e. A/C system). I assume you were referring to something more serious (head gasket, engines need replacing, bad tranny)? Could you please point me to them? Thanks.
    By the way why did you sell your Ranger with 96K? Liked new styling? I assume you sold it because you mentioned having a '98 model with 20K miles on it (Ranger board).
  • ll7ll7 Member Posts: 16
    I did check several of the Ford internet sites. It scared the hell out of me. All I kept seeing was problem after problem. I have no doubt that you have received good service from your Ford and there are plenty others who have also. My only point is that overall I believe Nissan is a more reliable vehicle than Ford.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Absolutley, this crap about Fords not lasting is a joke. I had 96K and was ready for a new truck. At trade it ran good, looked good, interior was in great shape.
    I now own a 1998 4x4 Ranger XLT 4.0 5spd 3.37 limited slip rearend, offroad pkg, tow pkg, CD, air, tilt, 60watt stero, alarm, ABS, K/N aircharger kit, chipped, nerf bars, rock guard, linex bedliner in a light blue. This truck hands down is nicer looking than ANY Frontier on the road, and will outpower any Frontier also.
    Nissan has the weakest V6 in its class, like it or not.
  • DTKWOKDTKWOK Member Posts: 131
    Why do I get the feeling that just because "my" truck doesn't put out as much power/torque as "yours", that "my" truck is somehow inferior. If specs are all I wanted in a pickup, then I would have purchased a Chevy S-10 (4.3L) and blow away both the Ranger and the Frontier. But of course, not all consumers have the same priorities. My father currently has a '86 Toy pickup with the 22R engine (known for outstanding reliable) with 170K+ miles on it and still going strong (original tranny, engine, not rebuilt). Is it a high output engine? heck no! Does it get the job done, yes! BTW he uses it as a work truck for his little construction company, unlike many who just purchase these things as commuter vehicles.
    I agree with Brutus that we should compare actual usage when determining maintenance cost. Mileage in itself can be very deceiving.
    When talking about problems with any make of cars, one should separate those which are annoying (e.g. falling apatrt trim, paint chipping) and those which leave you stranded (blowing headgasket, tranny self-destructing). Which by the way has never ever happened to my family cars (knock on wood), ranging from a '83 Civic to '86 Toy pickup to a '91 Finder. Anyway my $0.02.
  • BrutusBrutus Member Posts: 1,113
    You're right about specs not being the only decision making factor since different people have different needs. One spec about the S-10 though that I will concern most people is the crash test results compared to the other trucks in its class. They are posted on this site.

    The only reason I sold my previous truck (92 F-250HD 4x4) was because I needed a bigger truck since I also bought a 4,000 pound Bigfoot slide-in truck camper. My current truck is a 99 F-350 Superduty dually 4x4 V-10 with 4.30 axle ratio. I owned the 92 for 86,000 miles. I suspect I'll drive this one for 150,000+ (I've just passed through 26,000 miles). The reason for getting my next truck will be "want" not "need". New technology in engines, suspension and design is always enticing.
  • DTKWOKDTKWOK Member Posts: 131
    I don't think that we're trying to say that all American products are inferior, but you have to admit that some sales are made mostly/purely for patriotic reasons/obligations. (Please don't tell me that the reason for the 3:1 sale of Rangers to other trucks are entriely due to quality...) I personally know of several co-workers who would rather "push their American vehicles than drive a foreign car"! I guess one of the best places to judge the quality of a car/truck would be Africa, they have no patriotic reason to favor one nation's product over another's, right?
    Okay here are some questions for you. Few people could argue against the statement that at one time imports were better than domestic made products. (1) Have domestics become better than imports? (2) If so, when did that begin - year(s)? By which company? Which models? (3) How could you tell?
    I've been asking the same questions myself. Considering the last car we bought is 8.5 years old, we don't quite know the answer to the first question, only from what we gathered from other people's recent experiences.
    Yes performance is a factor, however not everyone has the same needs. Like I said before, I have a 91' Pathfinder. On a business trip to Las Vegas, a family in a previous generation Jeep GC V8 just zoomed by us going up a 6% grade (about 85 mph, while we were going 75 mph). But you know what? A couple of miles past the Nevada/California border, we saw them stuck on the side of the road with steam pouring out of the engine compartment. Sure they had more power and blew my truck away on the highway, but at least I made it to my destination without a tow truck!
    Now, am I inferring that the same will happen to you? No, and I wouldn't wish it on anyone, but if you're towing a trailer I hope you do so responsibly, it's not a darn drag race. (Watching a family loaded-station wagon getting whipped by a tow behind u-haul from another car, was not a pleasant experience!).
    Well, see you at the job site.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    I am not one that pushes "American made vehicles". First I know there is no such thing anylonger. I have owned Nissan/Honda's in the past. In 1990 crossed over to the darkside and bought a Dodge van, used. It ran great, held up great too. Lasted me to 113K with only a water pump going. Since that experience and 5 other domestics later, some used, some new I see no reason to switch back.
    Quality of Ford/Dodge/GM have come leaps and bounds in the last 10 years. Get on the internet and poke around. You will be surprised at what you find out about Honda/Toyota and Nissans. is just one site, along with to name another.
    The imports at one time were hands down a better vehicle, better value, better quality, better all around no doubt. Ford/Dodge/GM havn't been sitting on their behinds just letting this go. I actually aplaud having Toyota/Honda/Nissan kick them in the butt!
    There is a perceived quality/reliability advantage that is going to take another 10 years to go away that the imports have. Its just a matter of time. The value factor that Toyota/Honda once held is gone, their cars/trucks are more expensive option for option. Nissan/Renault have been able to keep prices at bay at least.
  • lmeyer1lmeyer1 Member Posts: 215
    The reliability gap is still real, although it has narrowed. See Consumer Reports ratings.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    See consumer digest
  • lmeyer1lmeyer1 Member Posts: 215
    Don't forget, Consumer Reports is more independent than Consumer Digest.

    Consumer Reports is run by Consumers Union and is not-for-profit. They don't take advertising in their magazine, and they don't allow car makers to use their reviews in car ads.

    Consumer Digest accepts ads and lets car makers use their reviews. I also assume they are for profit.

    Also Consumer Reports bases reliablity ratings on thousands of surveys. Don't know how Consumer Digest does theirs, but don't believe it is survey driven.

    In short, I think Consumer Reports is a better source of unbiased information.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Yeah, us dumm Americans just can't build anything? huh?
    Hate to tell you. I work for a Japanese company in the High Tech sector. Now, don't get me wrong, I like the company, like my work. But this inferiority complex just perplexes me. Everyday I have to redesign something, fix something on a tool that was made in Japan. The tool either doesn't meet U.S. electrical codes or safety codes, or was just on ergonimically designed right. go figure??
    And your blind faith in the "if its built by a Japanese company it must be high quality right" stigma makes me chuckle. Search the net you may be surprised.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Its ergonomically also, sorry for my spelling.
  • jtangjtang Member Posts: 1
    In many other fiels, especially in high-tech, Japanese products might not be good, because they
    haven't got hang of it yet. But as soon as
    they got the know-how, they will beat anybody in
    quality. For them, building high quality products is almost the only way to survive considering Japan is a tiny island, their industry is export oriented. They don't have much choice like the domestic bully has.
  • skipdskipd Member Posts: 97
    I don't own a truck.......yet. So my comments are impartial and I'm bringing up these points in preparation to buy.

    1) Does the Ford Ranger 4.0 at 225 lbs/ft. torque really have that much of an advantage over the 200 lbs./ft torque rating of the Nissan 3.3. I raise this question becuase 90% of the Nissan 3.3 tourque comes in at a very low 1500 rpms. This low end tourque should be more than adequate for towing, offroading, and merging in to traffic. I have heard that the Nissan tends to run out of steam at higher speeds...then again, I'm not buying a truck to race it. Can anyone tell me what the tourque curve is on the Ranger 4.0. Vince.....I'm sure you can answer this one.

    2) Both the Ranger 4.0 and Nissan 3.3 are rated to tow 5,000 lbs when mated to the auto this is a mute point when comparing the two

    3)American Loyalty? Well when I looked on the sticker of the Nissan it stated the truck was bult in America....therefore employing american workers.....and 55% of it's parts were American. There are some american vehichles that can't state that. I'm not sure about Ford. Again....Vince?

    By the way.....the only trucks I have test driven have been a brand new '00 Dodge 4x4 with the 4.7 Liter V8 w/ automatic and a used '98 Ranger 4x4 4.0 w/ automatic. I was very impressed with the Dodge in every aspect, however reliabilty ratings and reports of tranny problems and engine problems (same engine in Grand Cherokee last year which has very poor reliability ratings by CR) have scared me away a bit. The used Ford didn't impress me shifted hard, especially between 1 and 2 gear, the engine was noisy, and the power window on the passenger side chattered on the way down. In all fairness it was used and looked liked it had been used hard. then again, that's what trucks are for.

    Looking forward to the comments.

  • BrutusBrutus Member Posts: 1,113
    My current Ford was built in Kentucky. My 1992 Ford was built in Canada. All manufacturers have parts made outside the US.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    Skip, let me ask you this. After the Nissan reaches its 200ft/lbs of torque, then what? The Ranger has another 25 to go.
    My truck was built in Kansas City.
    The 3.3 as high tech as it may be is a weak V6 when comparing to other V6's in its class. The 4.0 gets hammered for its pushrod technology. But hey, it works. And the Ranger will soon have the single overhead cam 206hp 240ft/lbs of torque, what will Nissan do then? Nissan knows the 3.3 is underpowered, this is why they are offerering a supercharger sometime this year.
    Also, I would never tow 5K with a compact truck, thats crazy. All I can say is test drive its free!
  • skipdskipd Member Posts: 97
    Can anyone tell me what the tourque curve is on the Ranger 4.0?

  • skipdskipd Member Posts: 97
    Ofcourse you wouldn't tow 5,000 lbs. with a compact pickup. My point is that both engines (Nissan 3.3 and the Ford 4.0) are rated to tow the same amount.

  • postalmanpostalman Member Posts: 11
    Hi guys,
    I've finally seen the Sport Trac, and guys, god it's ugly. I was worried after buying my Nissan Crew Cab, that maybe I should have waited to see the Sport Trac. Now I'm glad I went ahead. Got a great deal on the truck, and it fits my lifestyle perfectly. I absolutely love it. Well, that's just my opinion.
  • skipdskipd Member Posts: 97 have to know

  • ll7ll7 Member Posts: 16
    You definitely would not be praising Chrysler mini-vans if you had the automatic transmission. There have been horrendous auto trans problems with Chrysler mini-vans. Take a look at Consumer Reports or any other unbiased rating service. Anyone can cite a specific vehicle and their good luck with it. However, you have to look at the experience of the vehicle and make in its entirety. As a whole, Hondas, Toyotas and Nissans are way ahead of the Americans. Anyone who thinks otherwise is blinded by patriotic fever.
  • 2drive2drive Member Posts: 90
    What? "Hondas, Toyotas and Nissans way ahead of the Americans??" O.K., present your facts, and none of this blindness by "foreign fever"!! Let's hear about your 400,000 mile case histories!

    By the way, 400,000 miles on one vehicle is more than enough "quality" for me anyday.
This discussion has been closed.