Howdy, Stranger!

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

Toyota Tacoma vs Nissan Frontier



  • Boy, this scene is getting nasty. Whatever happened to live and let live? I looked at both trucks and found them both to be good choices. I have mentioned the reason I selected the Frontier over the Tacoma in previous posts on this thread.

    If I drove on the highway a lot, which I don't, I would have picked the Tacome hands down. It has a much more comfortable seat for my particular size and weight.

    I do not see how either side can say the other drives junk. Both trucks are way above
    average and you have to be looking to please a particular quirk in your personality to
    be able to say one is better than the other.

    Depending on what is most important to me I could have picked either truck and been happy. For my criteria the Frontier was right for me, but tomorrow if there were some
    changes in my driving patterns the Tacoma would be right for me.

    Let us all be glad for having the choice between two very good trucks and respect the
    choice the other guy makes.

  • Dude, chill out. I was mistaken about the Nissan SAE tests. Forgive my error.

    Regardless, Frontier's new ratings will still be higher than the Tacoma (the big three in detroit are actually increasing specs under the revised J1349).

    Like I said, more power, better handling, stronger frame, better truck. I get 22 mpg on the highway as well. Don't forget, your not saving any money when you need premium fuel.

    And don't even dare compare Dyno's from different operators, in different environments. You know better than that.

    Bottom line, the Frontier is a more powerful, more agile truck. And it costs much less than the Tacoma. Whats that you say? You use regular fuel. Oh no, there goes another 10HP on the Tacoma. I guess my Frontier will be ahead of your Tacoma at 50, 60, 70, and 80+ mph. The Frontier doesn't need the extra octane for full power.

    Nissan Frontier: the most powerful midsized truck on planet earth.

    Toyota Tacoma: the most powerful second place truck (well third place if using regular octane, rotflmao)
  • Too bad it's soooooo freakin' ugly!
  • I was just wondering how do you get 22 mpg?Coast down hill?
  • "And don't even dare compare Dyno's from different operators, in different environments. You know better than that."

    Where do you think they get these HP ratings from? You think Nissan and Toyota get together and have a "dyno party". If K&N gave a crap about the Frontier, I'd use there dyno tests as well. But they don't and there isn't any such tests, so I used one of your fellow Frontier owners tests (if you're insinuating that one of them may be off, it's probably error in your favor). A dyno is the only way we have to control variables or as you so hastily pointed out "environment".

    I'd love to point out that there is no noticeable change in HP using 87, 89 or 91 octane but you don't "believe" in dyno testing. There is a slight difference in mpg but according to actual Tacoma owners with their real-world experiences, it's not even worth noting. If you owned a Tacoma and had an owner's manual or at least did a little educated research you'd see that premium fuel is recommended but not required. Furthermore, if you read the previous posts you'd notice I use 89. :P

    You'd also have read what I just posted, less than a week ago, about how much I hate people like you posting negative claims about information and opinions you have no actual knowledge or experience of.

    Stick to why the Frontier is so great. Not why you think a truck, you don't own and have barely driven is so much (insert negative comment) than yours.
  • Here we go again!!! Blah Blah Blah!! KCram please stop the madness!
  • time2time2 Posts: 25
    No doubt the Nissan Frontier is the prime choice of the midsized trucks. I had my heart set on a Tacoma, but it just seemed oddly cheaper and the launch has been rocky with so many problems popping up. Were they part of the last Toyota recall? (850,000 vehicles)

    The Frontier is now the leader based on it's merits and not just blind brand loyalty. It's more robust with its fully boxed frame, has standard four wheel disk brakes (not rear drums like the Tacoma), much more power, and a tighter, firmer handling. It's just a better truck period. The Tacoma is good, the Frontier is better. My buddy who is a Toyota fan even conceeds that the new Frontier has it all over the new Tacoma. He has a Tundra "work" model, and he even admitted he likies my Frontier better than his Tundra.

    Sorry Tacoma fans. I know it must be upsetting to be in 2nd place. You can always trade up to a Frontier.
  • Just can't play nice 'eh?? Funny..I like my Tacoma better than your buddies Tundra too!!

    Hope you Nissan guys gonna step up & talk when your trucks have problems too(and they will) But just in lowly Tacoma owners will stick around to remind you.

    P.S .."Much more power"....."The frontier has it all over the Tacoma".... "2nd place"...."Trade UP to a frontier".. LMAO!!

    P.S.S. Those rear drums been stopping Toyota's for years!!! ;)
  • time2time2 Posts: 25
    I'm laughing, too!

    Love my Frontier!!
  • Any of you frontier fans seen the latest sales figures? Read them and weep or better yet just drive
    by any nissan dealer and see how many of those "beauties" are sitting around. The frontier is
    almost as ugly as a chevy Colorado. Fifteen more horsepower, whooptie dooo!
  • I have not checked out the Nissans, but from what I read and have experienced since atleast 1986 when the hard bodies came out, Nissan has been worthy competition for Toyota. I had a friend with a new 86 Toy and a friend witrh a new 86 Nissan. The Nissan did have a litgtle bit more of a tinny sound and feel to it, but I would have driven either if I wouldn't have had that sweet Chevette in the driveway. Both have made major improvements on a wonderful vehicle while the domestics have designed dinasaurs that have outlived their usefullness. GM did come out with the attempt to improve with the Canyon/Colorado, but we all know it fell short. The Toy and Nissan each have features that make them stand out, but at the end of the day (or trail), they are both head and shoulders above the domestics, and throw in a few arms and legs if you include the sorry Ridgeline in the mix. Who in their right mind would pay 8K extra to say they have a Honda truck? Hey, but it has a trunk.
  • I second that.
    Certain individuals on this board seem to have to convince themselves that they made the right choice in purchasing whichever vehicle. In the process, they think counterpointing every contrary view/fact/opinion on the subject is going to help others make a good decision on which vehicle to purchase.
    That type of person will never cease running their mouth (keyboard). Inability to compromise or to see that what is best for one person may not be best for another indicates some level of insecurity.
    Negativity could deter people from wanting to be a part of this forum.

    At any rate, both are great vehicles. I've said it before, and I'll maintain, despite all the meaningless argument about which is better, that both are good choices. Pick which one suits your tastes and needs, and you'll be pleased with the choice.
    Folks argue that sales numbers indicate a better truck. Greater sales don't necessarily indicate a superior product.
    Would I buy my Frontier again? Yes, because it was the best value and meets my needs quite well.
    Best to all.
  • I'm not convincing myself of anything, just setting the record straight for all these ignoramuses who can't tie their shoes let alone, god help us, drive.

    So let me get this straight, you wouldn't respond to me if I said the following:

    The Frontier sucks. It gets 15 mpg on premium fuel. That utility track system in the bed couldn't hold 20 pounds. It's butt ugly. The bed is going to rust out in one year because it's sheet metal. You couldn't take that thing to the drive-in without it getting stuck or bottoming out. The chassis are weak. Sunroofs are for sissies. It has pizza cutters for wheels. The Frontier has so many bugs, dash rattles, exhaust rattles and every single one has a paint problem. It's only bought by old men who use it as a daily driver.

    Please stop me any time now. Don't kid yourself, you want to say something. This is the type of crap I read every single time I look at this board. Not only is it not factual, it's not even about their truck. Tell me that you wouldn't want to correct any of these (mostly) false opinions.

    You are right about one thing, "Negativity could deter people from wanting to be a part of this forum".
    I never see one Frontier owner say anything good about their truck. It's all negative garbage about the Tacoma. I'm sick of it. I'm done with this forum, it's the same fight everyday, that I apparently can't win. It's a sad day in America when freedom of speech dies and libel and slander rule the day.

    Look it's already started, again. I didn't even finish my post. More regurgitated opinions, name calling and for god sakes give up on the Car and Driver article! You get one good write up and you'd think it was written by god himself.
  • Trade up to the Frontier? Has anyone on this site acknowledged the quality of the interior and drivetrain on the Tacoma? I guess the Frontier's interior is OK...if you like the look of plain, black plastic. I don't know how anyone could argue that the Tacoma interior isn't class-leading. By the way, Tacoma has a faster 0-60 time so difference in HP isn't significant.
  • time2time2 Posts: 25
    I actually prefer the Frontier interior to the "Darth Vader" look of the Tacomas. Whew! Talk about gaudy! Yuk! Again, I like my Frontiers interior very, very much.

    The Tacoma's 0-60 time is a "who cares?' 16 year olds who race trucks?

    I'll take the heavier, fully boxed frame, 4 wheel disks, raw power and integrity of the Frontier over gaudy fake chrome, and 0-60 lightweight truck street race times.

    Frontier sets the standard.
  • bamacarbamacar Posts: 749
    I think as usual that Toyota is a generation behind when it comes to interiors. Hyundai in the mid 90's was using all the shiny metal look. Toyota finally joins the party for the 2005 just when all the other leading edge interior designers are abandoning ship on the shiny easily scratched interiors. The frontier looks classy not gaudy by comparison.
  • toykicktoykick Posts: 104
    lol i haven't posted in a few days and people already talking crap... Facts vs. Opinions... as for the frame being weeker... well then why did the almighty Frontier do worst then the tacoma in both Governments crash tests and highway offset crash tests... heres something to think about... The dakota has a stronger frame then the frontier but did worst.. you know why? because some areas of the body were more fragile then the frame its self... one example is the heritage Ford F150... the frame was strong but the body had a lot of weak areas...

    a frame needs to flex... Have you ever seen a big rig with 80k? the frame flexes... a Big rig doesnt use rear disc brakes and if they were bad then why do they come up with lower stoping times vs. a rear disc brake vehicle(comparable). lol old technology sometimes is better...
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJPosts: 3,516
    ...but the name-gaming will stop.

    kcram - Pickups Host
  • toykicktoykick Posts: 104
    thats great to hear.. since a lot of Titan owners keep complaining of the easily scratched cheap plastic in their trucks ... :P
  • badnessbadness Posts: 242
    when your grow up what do you want to be ,and adult!!!!
  • The only #1 for Frontier is price, you get what you pay for. You mention fully boxed
    frame yet towing and payload are less for the frontier. You mention 4 wheel disk brakes but the tacoma will stop quicker. You mention tighter and firmer handling for the frontier but the tacoma has faster slalom times. It looks to me like the heavy frame on the frontier has hurt performance not helped.

    I have a 1998 frontier good truck tacomas are better
  • toykicktoykick Posts: 104
    theres two things on the Tacoma Manual... Suggested & recommended

    All of Toyotas vehicles have these two in their manuals...

    Suggested 87

    recommended 91

    Read any toyota manual and you will realize why a lot of people think the tacoma should only run on 91... its so damn retarded but people like C&D always find ways to screw things up.

    the manual basically says 87 is ok but for better performance and longitivity use 91 or above... The tundras manual says the same thing... and so does the rest of the toyota and lexus line up...
  • It has always been my understanding that drum brakes work just fine as long as they do not get hot nor wet. It is in these two areas that the disc brakes excel.

    With my type of driving I'll probably rarely face these situations, but I am glad for the disc brakes never the less.

  • To me longevity would be the key word in your post. That would be the thing that I would
    question. The Tacoma has plenty of power for me no matter what octane fuel used. I
    would only wonder how the different grades of fuel would affect the longevity of the Tacoma.

    I do not own a Tacoma, but I probably would be driving one instead of my Frontier if the
    dealer had not been so hard to deal with.

    Well, I have to admit that inspite of some people saying how ugly my Frontier is I actual-
    ly prefer its looks to the Tacoma. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

    My mother once told me when I was dating a girl in my younger years, "love goes where
    it is sent even if it is up a horses behind". She did not like the girl and no I did not marry that girl.

  • time2time2 Posts: 25
    I imagine the faster stopping, quicker slalom, quicker 0-60 have something to do with the lighter overall weight of the Taco. I suppose that plactic bed in the Taco and lighter partially boxed framed reduces the weight.

    As a matter of principle, I'd still choose four wheel disk brakes over rear drums every time. I'd still prefer a heavier more powerful truck with a steel bed and fully boxed frame if given the choice. After test driving both I found the handling of the Frontier to be much more predictable, firm, and pleasureable than the Taco.

    As for magazine articles, I've found with most products, they tend to just follow the established trends. In the case of the new Frontier vs. Tacoma, you need to do your own thinking. Faster 0-60 and slalom times are less important to me than the build quality and real-world handling of the truck. Your list of priorities may be different.
  • toykicktoykick Posts: 104
    Who said the bed is plastic ? lol well as for built quality, Time will only tell. Keep in mind the Frontier is also small in other places and lacks the options the tacoma has...

    so heres a few things the tacoma does a bit better then the frontier( proven )

    1. Acceleration
    2. MPG
    3. Offroading ( better Approach and departure Angle)
    4 Higher towing Cap(without 4.10+ gears)
    5. Bigger inside and out( wider and longer then the Frontier)
    6. Better Government crash test results

    To keep in perspective how big the tacoma is (C&D tested)... The Double Cab long bed tacoma has a 140.+ wheelbase The Crew Cab Nissan Titan has a 139.+ wheelbase.. :surprise:

    C&D tested the long bed version of the tacoma... Its kinda logical your going to get sloppy handling from a truck that is so long... whats also funny is the Acceleration time... 7.1 for the longbed tacoma and best average MPG

    lol kinda makes you think what kinda times an Access Cab can get
  • toykicktoykick Posts: 104
    lol dont know if any of you guys have checked out toyotas website, They revealed the new 06 rav 4 v6 which has 268hp lol and yep thats not SAE ratings... talk about a big HP gain...

    consider this thread hijacked.... :mad:
  • toykicktoykick Posts: 104
    oops last post in wrong forum...
  • time2time2 Posts: 25
    The acceleration is really a moot point, unless you're a 16 year old street racing your 16 year old buddies. Everyone who dives a VQ4.0 Frontier has been more than impressed with the acceleration.

    MPG? On regular or Toyota's recommended 91 octane? I'm getting 21 with my Frontier CC auto transmission. I doubt if the Tacomas are getting enough better to brag about. Then there's the less horsepoewr and 91 octane issue. Hmmmm.

    Offroading. Well I'l take the better ground clearance og the Frontier, I'm not an "off roader" in the pure sense, but I like to drive through dirt roads when hunting or in our big snowfalls to get to work here in the north country. Scaling boulders I don't need those numbers. Higher ground clearance is a real-world measurement from which I benefit.

    Higher towing? My Frontier has more than enough towing for my 2500 pound boat. Really, who among use with these truck tows 5000+ pounds anyway. Moot point again. . Truthfully, when I have a steep boat landing I enjoy my Frontier's greater horsepower for pulling my boat out. That's more important type of towing power for my needs.

    Bigger inside and out? Hmmm. When we test drove the Taco we both seemed to sense less leg and head room than the Frontier. The Frontier just felt roomier and the seats were designed better with a better sitting position. The Frontier has great seats!

    Government crash tests? OK, you can have that one. Maybe the lighter Tacoma with the plastic bed and partially boxed frame just crashes softer than the Frontier.

    But, long bed or not, the Taco we test drove felt very sloopy and mushy handling. It actually felt like we were going to tip over when we took sharp turns.

    I am totally happy and impressed with my Frontier EVERY time I see it or step inside. As long as you guys like your Tacos, well, who cares. We're all happy. Right?
This discussion has been closed.