Nissan Frontier Crew Cab VS Ford Explorer Sport Trac

ricpr

The Dodge and Ford are within an inch on leg room. If you define 'clearly' by a mere inch well there you are, but there is definitely a difference in the interior due to the width of the Dodge. There IS more room inside the Dodge. What a difference between Nissan and the rest! Man, should you guys be searching in the full size truck section? You sure tow enough stuff! As for the CR V versus the Windstar, that van has got to be a massive lemon.

zack1000

Ricpr--

Here are the widths that are listed on edmunds:
Sport Trac: Width: 71.7 in.
Dodge Q Cab: Width: 71.6 in.

How is there "definitely a difference" in the Dodge due to it's width if the Sport Trac is .1 inch wider?

I wish you would look at the actual statisics of the vehicles before you post false information such as the Dodge having more interior room.

tgr1

The interiors (where it counts) in the Ford and Dodge are similar, with the Dodge being slightly wider at the hip and shoulder. They are both midsize vehicles. The main differences between them are:

bigger bed for the Dodge, and V-8 power and towing ability. The Dodge is more trucklike.

The main difference between the Ford and Nissan is:

bigger interior for the Ford, especially in back

When the sport trac comes with the 5.0 V-8, it will be very comparable to the Dakota Quad. The Nissan will then be more comparable with the new S-10 4 door.

scape2

Rumors are a flyin that Ford is looking seriously at a V8 for the Sport Trac, when? Who knows. The Dodge Dakota with its V8 has nailed a niche in the truck market right on the head. For those folks who don't want a full size truck, but need the towing power this truck is it. Now, lets hope Dodge can work out their reliability problems and quality issues.

casolaro

A few people have posted the question of if and when Toyota will put out the crew cab Tacoma. It will be available in September or October of this year. If you want to see it go to:

http://www.edmund.com/edweb/news/chicago00/new1.html#2

postalman

Vince,
I constantly hear you bashing Nissans, and Hey, I don't need the torque, ok. Nissans are great trucks, that's a fact, and your little torque figures don't change that. Different people have different needs for their trucks, not always the needs you have.
Second, I don't see all these people complaining about Nissan quality problems. I'm out here on Edmunds, and I don't see it. Just because you say it's so, don't make it true, no matter how many different forums you say it on. I do however see all the Ford problems. So my opinion is that Ford Sucks!
and it's worth just as much as yours, have a nice day

scape2

Gone postal have you? Take a look right here at Edmunds at the folks that have had braking problems, engine idle, drivetrain vibrations... Then go to the net and do your own homework. Nissans are not all trouble free as you may wish to think.
To a real truck owner torque does matter. I will let you go find the definition of TORQUE. Facts are facts the Nissans are the low man on the totem pole for Torque. Although, Nissan has seen the light and is coming out this summer with a new V6 for its Pathfinders, I believe its going to have about 220HP and a whopping 260ft/lbs of torque! Lets hope it finds its way into the Frontier and Xterra. And your beloved Nissan is owned now by Renault. Last I read this marriage isn't going too well.

DTKWOK

Vince8,
Yeah, the 3.5L V-6 in the 2001 Pathfinders will have 250 hp/240 ft-lb (manual) and 240 hp/265 ft-lb (automatic).

Bigeasyal,
Thanks for the info on the Montero Sport. For the record, the Jeep Grand Cherokee and your Sport are not the only SUV's that use non-leaf rear supsension. The Pathfinders use a mutli-link/coil setup (even my '91 Finder has it!), so do the new Isuzu Rodeos. I believe the Explorers are going to get independents in the rear soon (big mistake, IMHO). As for Mitsubishi vehicles, I don't have personal experiences with them, but am a little leary of buying from a company that makes everything (TV's, cell phones, etc...) Anyway, hope you enjoy your SUV!

wpoe

This is off topic a little but just for the record, Mitsubishi Motors and Mitsubishi Electric are completely separate companys even in Japan.

Okay, back to the topic.....

ricpr

Well, it looks like I have to defend myself for posting 'false info'. I guess I should be sorry for not sticking strictly to the tech #'s posted every where. I do realize the facts, but when I got in both vehicles (Sport Trac & Dakota) this is what I noticed. I should preface this by stating that I am only 135 lbs, so try to see it from my perspective. The front seats of the Ford are wider than in the Dodge. Thus the center console in the Dodge is bigger. This arrangement gives more usable room in the Dodge. The door handles in the Ford appear to protrude into the interior of the truck further than the Dodge handles. More room Dodge. And finally, if the Dakota back seat is like the Durango back seat (I do not know), the SAE volume for the Durango is 48-50 cu ft while the Ford is only 48 cu ft. The Dodge back seat area appears roomier. This is what I see while sitting in both vehicles. While I understand the need to assign dimensions to everything, I place the actual experience of higher importance. But I won't split hairs since I noticed the Ford SuperCrew truck is not much more expensive than the vehicles in this class and gets suprising similar gas mileage while bigger in every way.

ricpr

I forgot to mention that the front seat of the Dodge is a bench style seat which can seat three people in a pinch. The S-T front seat configuration only seats two people. Just a bit more usable room.

gooba

I have a Frontier Crewcab and I am quite happy with it. I have been following the dialogue especially from vince. I can understand his outlook and he does make a couple of valid points about prejudiced beliefs in manufacture.Vince you have to face a basic fact,you own a Ranger pickup. I am sorry but it is considered one of the throwaway vehicles that Ford made.The Ranger and the Explorer give the appearance that it is cheaply made. The interior reminds me of something that was made by Mattel.They do not have the ground clearance,and they are prone to getting stuck with their soft suspension.Not all of us truck owners need or want all that torque or horsepower in this class of truck. If we did we would not have bought a truck in this class,we would have bought a full size with a Cummins or a Power Stroke diesel in it.Vince, if that was important to you you would not have gotten your Ranger because you know that the 4.0L is not tops in the Ranger class of trucks. If you are ever in the southwest and want to run,I will gladly go along and pull you through some of the areas that your Ranger will get stuck in.

scape2

Gooba, Southwest!! LOL. I live in the NW, Ever heard of MT Hood, MT St Helens? or even the Cascade Range?? Ford Ranger a throw away vehicle? Ford Ranger is just one of Fords top sellers and ranks in the top 10 for all car/truck sales combined. I bought my second Ranger becuause my first was excellent in reliability and quality. I knew the 4.0 was not the state of the art engine with all those techno valves and cams. Before you jump all over the 4.0 better do your homework and compare the HP/Torque curves of the Nissan 3.3 and Toyota 3.4. The multi-valvers, overheadcamers have to work harder to reach their torque levels.
I am sorry you bought the lowest, bottom of the barrel V6 offered in any compact truck today, Nissans 3.3 is 170HP and 200ft/lbs of Torque. I just hope you don't try to hual or pull anything too heavy. the Explorer Sport Trac had a great review right here at Edmunds go take a peak. The SOHC 4.0 rated at 205HP and 240ft/lbs of torque offered in the Sport Trac is far superior to the Nissan 3.3.
Ground clearance: I have admitted Ford puts crap tires on their trucks. This is why I have P265x70R16's all terrains on my Ranger. This gave it plenty of ground clearance. I have measured side by side with a friends Toyota TRD and he may have about 1/2" advantage.

ricpr

Well, I see that you're at the old foreign/ domestic debate. Since I own a Nissan truck (6 yrs) and have owned 2 Rangers 9 3.5 yrs), here is my 2 cents. Seems to me that manufacturers on both sides of the pond have made poor vehiles, but when it comes to trucks, the Mighty Max and T100 are proof positive that Japanese auto makers will try to put gerbils under the hood and loyal import customers will buy them but not speak about it on sites like this. Who would admit to ownership?1? Meanwhile the 99 hp Ranger motor, need I say more. When it comes to interiors, the interior of the Ranger is comfortable for long trips while the Nissan should have come with chiropractor coupons. If you live anywhere near a highway and don't feel that you need the extra hp, then you are probably the person driving slow in the fast lane. Domestic trucks offer the extras where it counts, under the hood and in the interior. The Ranger with the 4.0 is very good and far better than the Nissan I own now. To get the equivalent of the 4.0 in a foreign truck, you will spend more for a Toyota. Gooba are you towing things or playing in the dirt? Why would you bring up diesel motors? There are plenty of great V8 trucks. I think that more truck shoppers will buy US crew trucks because of all around versatility and value. If the Japanese trucks are that much better, then why are there not extremely long waits for purchasing. While I will agree that the Nissan CC is very nice and has a good price, it is lacking in key areas where the competition doesn't.

ricpr

Well, I see that you're at the old foreign/ domestic debate. Since I own a Nissan truck (6 yrs) and have owned 2 Rangers 9 3.5 yrs), here is my 2 cents. Seems to me that manufacturers on both sides of the pond have made poor vehicles, but when it comes to trucks, the Mighty Max and T100 are proof positive that Japanese auto makers will try to put gerbils under the hood and loyal import customers will buy them but not speak about it on sites like this. Who would admit to ownership?!? Meanwhile the 99 hp Ranger motor, need I say more. When it comes to interiors, the interior of the Ranger is comfortable for long trips while the Nissan should have come with chiropractor coupons. If you live anywhere near a highway and don't feel that you need the extra hp, then you are probably the person driving slow in the fast lane. Domestic trucks offer the extras where it counts, under the hood and in the interior. The Ranger with the 4.0 is very good and far better than the Nissan I own now. To get the equivalent of the 4.0 in a foreign truck, you will spend more for a Toyota. Gooba are you towing things or playing in the dirt? Why would you bring up diesel motors? There are plenty of great V8 trucks. I think that more truck shoppers will buy US crew trucks because of all around versatility and value. If the Japanese trucks are that much better, then why are there not extremely long waits for purchasing? While I will agree that the Nissan CC is very nice and has a good price, it is lacking in key areas where the competition doesn't.

gooba

I have to agree with you that the manufacturers on both sides have made bad vehicles. I personnaly own a 1984 Nissan King cab, 2000 Crew cab,and a 1972 Ford F100. All of my trucks are 4wd. The 84 Nissan on a good day with a tailwind might hit 75mph on the highway. It is very low on horsepower.So,yes it is not a speed demon.It does ok in the desert in the lower gears.It also has 381,451 miles on it.So it is quite reliable.I bought the Crew cab for the room inside. The ride is quite comfortable and smooth especially on long trips.I use this truck in the dirt and tow my sandrail and bikes to the desert and the truck delivers.It has done everything that I have asked it to do.My Ford pickup is for when I want to get a little wild. The 429 puts out 550kp and 425ft-lbs of torque.It also gets 8mpg if I take it easy.I also maintain a fleet of vehicles that has Rangers and Explorers in them. The operators do not like to take them off-road because they cannot get very far.They have to insure that a larger truck is with them so they can get back.Their complaints are that the suspension is too soft,it wheel hops,and that it is too low to the ground.They do not complain about the engine,and I will agree that the engine does have sufficient power for the vehicle.The interiors has plastic stuff falling off and breaking all of the time.I brought up diesel motors becuse of a comment from vince about "real" truck owners being concerned about torque and horsepower.If "real" truck owners are concerned about these things then we would not be looking at this class of truck or expecting them to do what a larger truck is capable of doing.I would like to see the discussion get back to what this topic is about. (Nissan Frontier Crew Cab VS Ford Explorer Sport Trac).I admit that I am also guilty of getting off the main topic. I can see this discussion expanding to include the other quad cabs by the other manufacturers.You would have to exclude the full size quad cabs.This class of truck would offer an unfair comparison. That is my .02 worth.

cncman

I admit, I like the sport trac's looks, ford has usually been pretty good about designing good looking vehicles, (except for that whole taurus thing) I think one of the reasons I like the looks is because it reminds me so much of the Nissan SUT, especially around the rocker panel to bed area. If you haven't seen it, I think it may be on freshalloy.com, but I am not sure.
Come on VInce for such a Ford nut you keep forgetting that the standard ranger V6 is a 3.0l
with 192 ft/lbs of torque, that is "lowest, bottom of the barrel V6 offered in any compact truck today" and remember, torque is the only thing that counts in a truck right? Like I said I like the
sport trac, they seem to have followed Nissan's lead in alot of ways, like when they put the bed extender on it that Nissan has had for about a year now, and when they saw the success of the Xterra, BTW MT SUV of the year and AAA truck of the year even with that lousy 3.3l V6, they decide to follow again with that new compact SUV coming out, I just don't see why you would spend more money for a truck with questionable reliability,
a shorter warranty and a shorter plastic bed? But I do like that sport trac.

cncman

Oh I forgot to mention gooba,
did you see the wait for the crew cabs for the first 4-5 months? I had to go accross three states to get some more than once, and had people waiting
for 30-45 days. Same way with the Xterra, I am just to the point now where I can keep more than one on the lot.

gooba

I know what you mean cncman. I was actively trying to get mine for 6 months. I finally got mine the week before Thanksgiving. The hard part was getting the vehicle the way I wanted. It is Solar Yellow XE,auto,4x4,power package,utility package,and limited slip differential,bed extender,bed liner,and mats. The three dealers that were 180 miles away said that it was difficult to get the color in 4wd with the limited slip. Oh well. It was defintly worth the wait. My wife likes this vehicle so much that she said it was not for sale for any amount of money. I hope to get the same reliable service out of this vehicle that I am used to getting from my other Nissans. I believe that with any manufacture of vehicle that as long as you operate the vehicle within the parameters that it was designed for,and that you keep it well maintained,you will get good reliable service. I also enjoy all of the comments and looks that I receive from people when they see the truck.I should be getting my Snug Top shell next week,and that should make it look better yet.

exskwid

Drove both, bought the Sporty. I like The look of both but the seemingly bigger dimensions of the Sporty sold me. Plus, I liked the exterior 12V recepticle in the bed, the power up/dwn back glass and minimalist black mat of the sporty. Crew Cabs Utility pack was nice, I liked the rugged look of it. Anyway to each his own. I think either one will be a fine vehicle. I think the Sporty best suited me.

gooba

I am glad you got the Sporty. It has some features that I wish my Frontier had. I like the 12v receptacle in the back and the power rear window. At least you jumped into this class of vehicle. I would be very interested to know later on how the truck rides with the composite bed,and how it holds up. This is a new concept and it would be interesting to have the input of an actual owner who puts it through it's paces everyday. (cncman),if you read this I have a question for you. By your earlier response I have to assume that you are somehow connected to Nissan. If you are,I would like to know how to get the side decals that were on the truck in the earlier pictures. I am referring to the 4x4x4 decals.I would love to have that.

cncman

yea Gooba,
I sell Nissans in Houston, I was kind of wondering about those decals too, but I never saw them on the trucks, at least I don't think I did, I would imagine that a custom truck shop could figure out something for you, I will see if there is any way to get that from Nissan for you. Enjoy your crewcab. I do admit that the sport trac, following the Nissan, has improved the class since it came out, with some nice features, and I think this is good, because it will keep everyone on their toes and the consumer will benefit, nothing wrong with healthy competition, Soon the Nissan SUT will replace the crew cab, which will be nice with the
lift gate back, I think this will raise the bar once again and is better than just a power sliding window. Also the new design that will be out this summer looks great. check out freshalloy.com it is a great site for nissan info a pics.

gooba

thanks for getting back. I do check out Fresh Alloy and like the info on the site. It is good to have someone who works for Nissan as a contributor to the discussions.I agree that the competition is good for everyone. I,and I am sure a few others forgot about the SUT that is due out.I have not seen anyone mention them on other boards.One question that i have had as well as others,is whether Nissan will have a retro fit for the supercharger that they are putting on the 2001?I would assume that they did it to address some of the concerns for power in the 2000 model.

cncman

hey gooba;
I think the retro fit would depend on if there are other mods to the transmission, mounts, or anything else when they have the supercharger option. If they do you will probabaly have to do more than just bolt it on. we'll find out this summer. I was thinking also, on the decal, if you ordered another 4x4 replacement decal, you could just cut the "x4" and put it on the end, and it would be the same type face and everything.

gooba

Great idea on the decal. I will check around for price and availability on those. I guess we will have to be patient and see what the final product this summer is. I am beginning to think that patience might be a pre-requisite to being a good nissan owner.

scape2

Cncman, off topic. The 3.0 is fords lowest level engine put in thier 4x4 Ranger line-up. Nissan still puts the 2.4 in their 4x4's right? Lets see 143HP/154ft/lbs of torque vs 152HP/192ft/lbs of torque? Hmmm.... I wonder who would pull whom? Nissans top of the line engine, the 3.3 has 170HP and 200ft/lbs of torque, 8 more than Fords 3.0 and 18HP more than the 3.0.....
I help coach YMCA basketball and a parent bought a SportTrac in red. What a looker, stood out from the crowd. Interior was 10x nicer than a loaded Nissan CC.

cncman

Vince;
I guess you did not see my post before, Nissan does not produce the 4cyl 4x4 anymore, they needed the platforms for the Xterras and Crew cabs, which
the factory can't hardly keep up with the orders.
And I understand that 4x4's are the only thing you know about and care about, but why do you always talk about the 4x4's when most folks don't buy them? I do need to go see a sport trac, like I said I think they look good, and I like the competition finally starting to catch up to Nissan, and develope more advantages to their side
as it will be fun to see what happens next. I haven't seen the interior of the sport trac, but I will soon when I get some time.

gooba

Vince,
Now that the Sport Trac has finally reached the consumer,only time will tell how well the vehicle works in everyday situations. I learned a long time ago to only use the numbers as a guide. The hp and torque numbers put you in the ball park of where you want to be. It is in the practical application of this that you will see if it is adequate for your particular needs.cncman is correct that the majority of the trucks sold are 2wd models,and some of what we are saying may not apply. For those of us that believe that trucks should have 4wd,I would like to see how a 4wd Sport Trac handles the off road terrain,and how well the composite bed holds up under everyday stresses. The composite bed is a new concept and we need to see how it affects the handling of the vehicle due to the lighter weight,and will it stand up to normal off road driving and loads.I hope that Ford has improved the suspension package to where the power that the engine does have will translate to traction and not wheel hop.

ingalls

I just purchased the fully loaded Nissan Crew Cab. I love the truck, but I thought I would mention some items that I thought weren't designed quite right. The first is the rear axle. I believe they use a 430 or something which is way too high. I can take off in 2nd gear with a minimul of lugging, and (yes, I have the manual transmission) and at 65mph, it's running at aprox 3000 rpm which is half of red line. The Sport Trac (which I'm still waiting for one to arrive in the Bay Area) uses a 410 with the 16" tires, 373 with the 15"'s. I wanted a manual transmission, and I didn't want to wait for the fall for the Ford. I had a 99 Explorer Sport with the 5 speed auto that coulden't make up it's mind what gear it wanted to stay in, especially on the freeway!!. The Nissan's shifter is way too tall, covering the radio. The fog lighs are a joke, I put them on and I've seen flashlights that are brighter, so I immediatly went out and got a set of PIIA's for about $240.00 installed. They have a set that are about the same size, and about 10 times brighter. Another bright invention was that air scoop on the roof rack. It especially works well when you have the stereo/sun roof package. This thing covers about 3/4's of the roof so I immediatly removed that, now I can use it for what it was intended to be used for. Another problem is the seats sit too low. I went to Pep Boys and picked up a set of seat cushions, put them on the seats and put covers over them (also purchased at Pep Boys), This worked out great because they are better on my back, and I can see over the hood now (believe me, I'm not small!!)...so for about $100.00 you can solve that problem, and the covers fit and look really good. Overall, I love my new truck after some much needed aftermarket add-ons. There isn't a bunch or room in the back seat, and really no place for storage (I had a friend who bought a Suzuki SUV, they have these cool little trays under the front seats...great storage idea!!). If price isn't a big deal and you need more get-up-and-go....I'd go with the Sport Trac. If you want to spend aprox $2,000 less and you want what seems to be a great good looking mostly around town kinda vehicle, go with the Nissan. Of course this is only my opinion, but I did do a lot of research between the both....and I would suggest to anyone to go out and drive them both if this is the type of vehicle you are looking for. If you scared about the reliability thing, go through a Credit Union and get an extended warranty for 60-72 months....half the price of the dealership, and you will be covered for most breakdown for which ever vehicle you decide to purchase. One more thing, Ford finally got smart on their 2 door Sport and changed the suspension on the 2001 model. No more single leaf springs in the rear!!...wow, you can haul people and equipment now without the rear end dragging on the ground!!!!......

gooba

ingalls,
You make some good valid points in your comments. It is apparent that there are some things that Nissan could have done better,and thay apparently are addressing them with the 2001 model or in the SUT. You seem to have the same complaint that most people have who purchased theirs with a manual transmission. The rpms are too high. My crewcab has the automatic and at 65mph I am only doing 2500rpm.The extended warranty through the credit union is a good point also. There is also another option,and that is breakdown insurance,which essentially does the same thing and takes it out to 10yrs or 100,000 miles.I amcurious to know about your fog lights. Did they use your factory switch and wiring or did thet have to install a completetly seperate system?

ingalls

I took the vehicle to a place that specializes in camper shells and aftermarket sales. They were able to hook them up directly to the same wires that the others were hooked up to. It worked out great, they are tremendously brighter. There is another thing I noticed with the manual transmission....while holding the shifter through shifts, when I push on the pedal, the shifter moves back, then when I let up on the pedal, the shifter moves forward. I noticed that the 4X4 shifter moves back and forth also....is this normal???..I'm taking it in tomorrow, I'm not really pleased with the gearing of this transmission, and the way it shifts it feels almost like the old manual transmissions in the 70's with the compound low......I asked the dealership if there was any way to lower the shifter and he said they coulden't do anything due to liability issues......gee, never heard that before!!!....I really can't wait to see the manual transmissions in the Sport Trac when they come out in the fall........I'm sure they will be much sportier and have a closer shifting mechanism
...more like a sports car then an old truck!!....

mikes16

Nissan for 2001(prob this summer) will be releasing a supercharger for the 3.3L. It will bump its stats up to 210hp and 240ft-lbs of torque. So in that aspect power will not really be a problem. If you really want comfort...get a pathfinder. Standard on all new Pathfinders is a 240hp(automatic) 250hp(manual) 3.5L VQ. This is the same engine used in the maxima...and that is a world class engine. This is simply just a larger version of it. Granted...I will give you guys the point about the 3.3L not really being up to power. All I can say is that it is a really solid engine...tuned for low end torque. The result is no high end torque(hp). HOWEVER...as a rule of thumb...any [non-permissible content removed]/euro will have more hp and torque than its amercan counterparts...there are exceptions.

examples:

3L Nissan VQ(rated best 6 years running by wards auto world)

222hp/217ft-lbs

3L Ford Taurus.
200/200 or much less in OHV form.

My dad has a 3.8l ford thunderbird. 145hp...thats pathetic!

Isn't the V8 in the explorer only 210hp? Sure it has gobs of torque but still comes up short.

Nissan 2L sentra. 145hp 136ft-lbs

Ford focus 2l "ztech" 130hp 13some ft-lbs.

and the ztech...that is SO STUPID. Is that not a direct copy off of hondas vtech.? But vtech is an actual cam system..ztech is just a name stamped on the cover. A 2L vtech from honda is near 190-200hp..not 130 like the ford.

scape2

mike, where are you getting your stats from? The Ztech is world class variable valve timing engine devleped by Ford of Europe. The Ztech can be massaged up to 200HP. Ever heard of the Cosworth AWD Focus? Also if you keep up on auto news a Foucs SVT is coming soon too with 170HP ztec engine.
And the 3.0 Duratec engine found in the SE/SEL Taurus/Sable has 200HP and 205ft/lbs of torque. This engine can be massaged up to 250HP. Rumor has it Ford is going to have a special 3.0 Duratec that will make between 225-235HP in the very near future for the Taurus. Granted its a rumor but is possible.
Do you know what the difference is between HP/Torque? In an SUV Torque is what you need to pull/haul/tow, NOT HP. The V8 in the Explorer will out tow, out haul, out pull a Toyota V6 4-runner hands down!
The bandaid for the 3.3 of Nissans is the supercharger. Wonder how the engine will standup over time to forced induction?

gooba

vince8,
Is there a V8 in the Sport-Trac? Do you understand Torque? In vehicle comparisons you cannot look at just the 170hp/200ft-lbs for the 2000 Nissan and 206hp/238ft-lbs for the Sport-Trac,you have to look at the rpm ranges that it occurs in. Where is the hp and torque curves at? I would prefer my torque to peak at the 2800rpm of the Nissan instead of 4000 rpm for the Ford. What torque spec does the Ford have at 2800 rpm? It might surprise you. I do not know about you,but i do not like my engine turning in the 4000-5000 rpm range. that equates to more fuel consumption and more wear. The supercharger as you said,only time will tell.It will also tell about how well the composite bed and new suspension in the Sport-Trac holds up

exskwid

My Sporty seems to never get into the "sweet spot" of the Q (torque) / Hp specs. At highway speeds I am in the 2500 rpm range still far below the advertised max Q vs RPM band. I would be a little nervous about running it up in that range. Probably would have to have a load, highway speeds and the tow/Ovrdrv switch in tow. I was really wanting a Crew Cab, then went to the web site and saw the blown version and decided to wait. Then I saw/drove the Sport Trac and it was love at first drive. That supercharger is gonna make the Nissan a very attractive package. I'm gonna look at the site you all are talking about and see the concept Nissans. Toodles

jacksonole

I own a car and a suburban for my wife to drve around the kids. You have to worry about screwing up the interior on suv's when transporting landscape material and damp clothing coming home from the beach. I was never a truck person because they never had enough interior room. I remember renting a pathfinder in Costa Rica that had 4 doors a real back seat and a flatbed(although shoorter) and thought why don't they sell these in the U.S..
Then I saw the Crew Cab and thouhgt that's the next vehicle I'm getting. I loved it. Now I ready to buy and the Sport Tract just came out. So I checked it out. I love it! I just don't know if I can get one because the dealers can't get enough of them and there selling at a premium.
If you need a real truck for off-road/towing then the Crew Cab is probubley better. But if you live in the city like me (S.FL.) I never drive off road and I am not buying a boat. The Sport tract is perfect. Much better interior. Larger back doors that are easyier to get in and out of. Folding back seats for more cargo area. With the leather package it is really luxurious. just a nice as a car. It's just what the doctor ordered for someone like me. I want to haul yard debris from my home. Throw my bike or surfboard in the back, wetsuits, beach chairs, etc. and not worry about the interior. I also have plenty of interior room for the family. Ford was thinking of people like me when they built the Sport Tract and they put moore thought to the desinge. I still like the Nissan and now that the Ford is out they will probubly discount it so I may look at it again. First choise SPORT TRACT!

jeff555

Jacksonole,
The Nissan sticker is already about $3000 less than an equally configured Sport Trac, and in many areas, they are selling at or below invoice. The Sport Trac will probably always sell for about 3k more than a Crew Cab, because it is marketed as an Explorer with a bed, and the Nissan is marketed as a pickup with 4 doors. People will pay more for an SUV than they will for a pickup. That is one of the reasons Ford built the Explorer Sport Trac, and did'nt build a crew cab Ranger.

mahimahi

hey,
i just wanted to comment that those that bought the nissan but, haven't driven the sport trac that you aren't missing much. Because you probably bought your truck becuase you wanted a truck not a suv, i mean that's what the sport-trac looks and drives like. I drove both before buying the a fully loaded SE C.C. 4x4 w/auto trans. The ford looks good don't get me wrong but to me its like a 2000 four door Rancharo(without the H.P.). I also looked at factors like four people that all have Nissan trucks that are at least five yrs. old and have over 80,000 miles each and have never done anything to them except change oil and brakes and my friends with Fords and Chevys well, let's just say we've had our problems with as little as 2000 miles on them. I know that they all have problems but i have to go with the past track record of the nissan. I wanted to also pass along that, I got my truck on March 6th and have about 1700 miles on it, I am getting about 17.5 mpg and it's all around town with mid-grade fuel, just thought that might intrest some of you. Anyway, I just wanted you guys to know that the Nissan Crew Cab doesn't have any competition at least until toyota comes out with they're 4-Door, Ford w/Ranger,or even a 4 door chevy s-10. The sport-trac is for suv owners and the nissan crew cab is for those who need a truck one drive will tell you that!

mikes16

To answer your question...I do know the difference between HP and Torque. HP is simply a formula derived number. Torque=hp*5252/rpm of that hp. Yes lowend torque is very important, but when racing or going for fast acceleration top end IS needed. Sure when you rush through first gear that low end is great but once you reach the top the lack of power would make it hard to continue rapid acceleration. When your tranny shifts to 2nd your mostly likely in the mid range and then quickly out of the power band again. True..that is a problem with the 3.3L in a heavy truck like the pathfinder but not as bad with the xterra/cc. Also the pathfinder now has 240hp(auto) 250 5sp so that problem is over. Tell me...how does a 3.5L v6 pathfinder make 30 or 40hp more than the ford v8? The 3.5L even beats its torque with 268 for the nissan vs. 240 for the v8 ford? This will be one of many questions in this post:)

My point about the ford "z-tech": Honda has VTEC, a system that actually adjust the valves. It either changes lift or duration but to be honest I don't remember which. The ford version does have dohc BUT does not have any real technology behind it. Well maybe it does but no valve technology. When ford stamps ztech on the valve cover they are trying to associate with vtec! It is plainly evident with the hp ratings. When honda ships out a 2L prelude or 1.9L intergra they are pushing upwards of 190hp.(I think 175 for gs-r, 190for type R)

YES...I'm sure any ford 2L can be massaged to make 200hp...thats not the point. So can any engine with modifications! What I'm talking about is what actually comes off the line here in the US and 130hp from 2L sucks! For christ sakes toyota's 1.8L VVTi is making 145hp(in lesser tune) and 180hp in the top of the line celica. Even the nissan 2L is making 145hp! Explain where the extra 15hp comes from! They both have equal low end torque.

I do understand that great low end is a plus for suv's/trucks..hence my explaination above on torque/hp. Without a doubt the 3.3l is NOT high performance. It accels fine off the line but falls short on high end like most american motors.

Lastly...whats so big about a "duratec" v6? I just thought of it...again...what is with ford and the cheesy names? Why not just use engine codes....must we really say Duratec like its some revolutionary, long latsing, high performace engine? SO its making 200hp. Big deal...why does the nissan make 22hp more? Why 13 more lb-ft torque? BECUASE ITS A BETTER ENGINE(The nissan that is). So you say there is a rumor of a 225hp snorus....by the time that comes out the [non-permissible content removed] automakers will have something better..no doubt.

To the CC/sport owners sorry for the ramblings but I felt the need to school Vince.

Vince..I would love to continue this through chat or email.

Regards,
Mike S.

superjim2000

cant wait for vinces response

mikes16

The figures I posted for the exploer were for the 4L v6 NOT the V8. Again .5L large yet much lower hp and torque figures. Also, the ztech MAY have some kind of valve timing but ford.com doesn't really explain it. If it does its STILL shity cuz it just aint putting out LOL...gotta love american engines.

Mike

hollywolf

just got my CC SE last month in the retina burning solar yellow loaded with bells and whistles to go with the color...i love this vehicle!...yes i check every morning in the driveway to check if it was all a dream..heard that the shells are available for this-anyone know a webpage where i could view it?

hollywolf

also,the shells are factory..i checked the nissan homepage and and it wasnt listed..friends have told me they it being off loaded from the cargo ships for delivery so it must be just arriving..

gooba

The shells are made by aftermarket manufacturers. The leading manufacturers are Snugtop and A.R.E.. There are other manufacturers but the majority feel that these are the best 2. I personally just ordered a Snugtop shell for my Solar Yellow CC and I am anxiously awaiting its arrival.

danoc6

This is a long thread. So pardon if someone has discussed this before.

One of the things I like about the Nissan is the short wheel base of 116" versus the Ford 125". This would appear to make the Nissan a better off road vehicle for 4WD

Has anyone done extensive off road stuff in both vehicles?

As an aside what is the clearance difference for the XE-V8 Crew Cab equipted with P235/70R15 versus the optional 15 " Alloy Wheels P265/70R15?

Do you get more clearance with the SE-V6 16" alloy wheels P255/65R16?

If so is there any way to make the XE-V6 the same clearance? I don't need the consumer junk on the SE, but do want as good a clearance as I can get.

cncman

danoc,
I don't think there is any clearance difference if the XE has the alloy wheels too, the extra 1" for the 16" wheel comes from the inside of the tire,
basically, you have a shorter side wall with the 16" alloys on the SE, the tires are the same heighth. I will check my book for you later to confirm, hope this helps.

jaguar245

For those of you wondering what the difference between horsepower and torque. I personally prefer an engine that has good bit of torque. Torque is what makes you accelerate, while horsepower keeps you going when you get up to speed. The Honda s2000 has high horsepower, but it doesn't have much torque. When you compare the Honda to a Camaro(v6) the Camaro has less hp, but more torque which allows it to out accelerate the Honda. To mike16: I have a 1996 explorer with the 5 liter V8. I believe it has 210hp and 280lb/ft of torque. It will tow 6700lbs according to the manual, which is more than any of its competitors.

mahimahi

I know that we might have beaten this subject to death, but I wanted to throw my expreinces out there. When it comes to towing in the since of 10,000 lbs. or less the pickup will always make a better tow vehicle.....by a great margin. I see alot of people writing in magazines, on the web and hear people boast about the towing capacity of their suv. This is just a number that the vehicle is capable of towing, its not saying that it can tow good. I sold boats for five years and during those five years I've towed (26 ft. boats with tandem axle trailer to jon boats)with all kinds of vehicles at all differnt speeds and by far the pickup out pulls a suv even if the suv has a higher towing capacity, such as in the case of an Exploer with a V-8 versus a Tacoma with a V-6. I think it's because the rear suspension is designed for a true payload and being stronger it doesn't allow the sagging and swaying that is common in suv's. Of course I did leave out that wheelbase plays a factor too, the longer the better. So my point is those of you trying to decide between the Exporer Sport or the Crew Cab Nissan and you plan on towing you better pick the Nissan! If's room(I think the Nissan has plenty) you want and you need the 4 true doors, pick (and this hurts..j/k) the dodge! Just my advice.

zack1000

Mahimahi---While you may have a good point about trucks being better than SUV's for towing, recommending the Nissan over the Sport Trac for that reason doesn't make sense---the Sport Trac is a truck too! And the Sport Trac has more hp, torque, and towing capacity than the Nissan. And if it's true that the longer the wheelbase the better, the Sport Trac has a 10" longer wheel base that the Nissan. Since you do so much towing, perhaps you should try actually towing with a Sport Trac first before you make these illogical recommendations.

scape2

Why do you think Nissan is putting a bandaid on the 3.3 V6 with a supercharger this year?? No Torque or HP!!
Come on the Sport Trac will out pull, out tow, out haul a Nissan CC hands down. The Torque and HP ratings should show anyone this.