I went to check the edmund ratings. And I went through the Ford Ranger ratings (the ratings don't differ between engines). So the ratings are used for that model line as an average and are thus not as specific as you make them out to be. We know you need to twist the data around, but maybe spending more time researching to post a response will help, instead of posting as quick as possible to look "cool." As far as cncman calling you an idiot, I don't think thats too harsh especially if you think the V6 was available in 1998, but wait now you said you stated 1999. If the name "idiot" hurts your feelings maybe you need to call mommy.
vince,you are right for once.This is a Ranger versus Frontier forum.Since you are so keen on power,YOUR PERSONAL RANGER is a joke,joke,joke.It is underpowered compared to my Frontier,it has a soft suspension,and is cheaply made on the inside. In your own words.Frontier stomps your PERSONAL RANGER. LOL
Ok, I am going to post a few short posts as Vince's attention span is not that long, first I wanted to quote from intellichoice on the awards the frontier won, THe best overall value in its class The best compact pickup 2 years in a row The lowest maintenance cost in the compact pickup class one of the lowest total ownership costs in its class The lowest repair cost in its class.
VInce if you remember, you were the one that brought up the Taurus VS Maxima Edmunds review, not me, so lets see, Vince gets to post outside of the topic if it is favorable for ford, if anyone else uses anything bad about Ford, it is off topic, that is mighty convenient for you Vince, And the other vehicles I just brought up were off of the list that you posted, so don't start whining when people use your own information to show how hypocritical and uninformed you are. Do you have an explanation as to why Ford overall had an absolutely terrible performance compared to the superior quality Nissans?
Vince, your words have already been posted again for you, you did say 98, if you can't even remember what you said a few posts ago or even bother to look back how can you expect anyone to take you seriously.
OK you wanted the info from where I got the Ranger braking info, well if you remember about a month ago when you were hiding, oops, I mean "researching" how the ranger suspension was so much superior, which BTW we have seen none of. I posted the info from open road magazine, with the shoot out between the Mazda, Toyota and Nissan 4x4, From 60-0 the Nissan was 140ft. the Mazda was 191ft! 80-0 the Nissan was 257 ft. the mazda was 352ft! I would certainly hope the ranger did better than the frontier in a crash test, you really need it because you are going to hit, (just make sure you do it off set)
OK this is a miscellaneous, Vince I posted the source where I got the braking info from like you asked, COmments? Or are you just going to sweep this under the rug too? ALso I just filled up this morning one of those 5spd 4x2 3.3l V6 you said doesn't exist, what ever happened to that comment?
This room has really sunk to low, low levels of name calling and put downs. I posted several sites and links showing my findings and you guys just don't like it. I am trying to find the braking data cncman speaks of. You all constantly quote the OLD 4.0 and seem to miss that the new 4.0 on the Ranger is due out in about 4 months. What will Nissan do then? OH yeah, they put a bandaid on the 3.3, a supercharger. Do you realize what the 4.0 SOHC supercharged, would do to a 3.3 supercharged? You do the math. No, I'll do the math. This would be about a 235HP/280ft/lbs of torque engine! Nissan is playing catch-up. Ranger rules! It is so obvious you don't understand what torque is. What happens when the 200ft/lbs of torque runs out after the 3000 rpms? besides the Ranger reaches its 225ft/lbs of torque at 2750rpms.... Fact is the Ranger is safer, better performer, and better quality and you just can't handle it!
Well Vince, I guess I am giving up on you ever responding to anything ever directed to you, even when i break it up into little pieces for you that are easily digested, I'll be back after you decide to participate, so it may be awhile, And Vince do you have a fax#? I will be more than happy to fax a copy of the article with the stats on the braking to you, even though you will still make up some story about it or probably just ignore it. And you are confusing fact with opinion again, those things aren't fact, they are your opinion, or someone's opinion you copied.
Yeah, I've been in Baltimore on business last week and Wisconsin for pleasure over the weekend. The room has been pretty active during my absence. It seems like there's a lot of BS and name-calling flying around, tho.
In that braking comparo, how was each equipped? No ABS, 2-wheel ABS, 4-wheel ABS? It really makes a huge difference. Anybody that doesn't automatically check that 4-wheel ABS box on the option form has got a screw loose.
Aren't those turbos/superchargers mostly for high performance aftermarket applications? I'm sure they did a helluva lot more to those vehicles than just slap on a SC/Turbo.
BTW, I don't think a supercharger is a band-aid in either application. They're just the cheapest way to get more power. If I were a Nissan guy, I'd be yelling to get that 3.5L out of the Pathfinder instead of a SC 3.3.
I'm not sure who was talking about interiors, but I've found both the interiors of my '95 and '98 Rangers to be high above my expectations (no, i don't have low expectations) in interior ergonomics and fit and finish.
I found the interior of the Nissan to be a bit spartan and unstyled. I'm not saying that it wasn't perfectly functional or ugly, either.
Cthompson; the article just says, disc/drum ABS for both, I know the Frontier had 4wheel ABS, because they all do in 4x4's. Don't know about the other's setup but defintely ABS. And actually from what I understand, ABS has almost nothing to do with stopping distance, it is designed to maintain steering control during a panic stop. If that is not so let me know, but I have heard that from alot of engineers. Yes they did do a whole lot more to the Nissans when they added the SC/Turbo, just as Nissan will do to the Frontier. I still don't think we will see the VQ in a frontier, perhaps when they come out with the full size truck, but who knows, I see a more likely 3.5-4.0l version of the current engine, probably when they introduce the SUT. Hope you had a good trip, welcome back!
I've never been a huge stickler for details when it comes to the interior. The Nissan works fine for me. The only drawback I see with it is the switch to turn the cruise control on is kind of hidden down on the left and unless you know exactly where to reach you have to take your eyes off the road for a second or two. The rest of the cruise functions are on the steering wheel right about the 4:00 position which is nice.
Ever notice when reading car reviews the reviewers always find a zillion little things to complain about in almost every interior? It's highly subjective though. I mean, they dock points for not having a certian cup-holder in a certain place or something.
But as far as trucks go, as long as everything seems in the right place and there doesn't seem to be too much cheap plastic that will eventually rattle, then I never really pay a lot of attention. If I were buying a luxury SUV or something then I'd expect the works, but for compact/mid size pickups I don't think it would ever be a deciding factor.
ABS does make a big difference in stopping distances. It keeps the wheels just shy of breaking traction for maximum stopping ability. It also aids a great deal in control during emergency stopping. 4-wheel ABS is vastly superior to 2-wheel ABS or no ABS. Especially so in trucks where it's rear-wheel ABS. This makes absolutely no sense as there's little weight over the rear wheels and the front brakes are the much larger force in stopping a vehicle.
One more thing, I have never quite figured out why all vehicles aren't equipped with 4-wheel disk brakes. Disks are far better than drums. I guess it's that stupid bottom line again or people who will skimp on the safety of themselves and their family to save a few hundred dollars. It absolutely blows my mind. My uncle (who owns a body shop) has told me all sorts of convert stories after serious accidents.
Those car rag reviewers have got to figure out something to [non-permissible content removed] about. Not enough cupholders, too many cupholders, cupholders in the wrong places, cupholders in the right places but still wrong, etc...
It seems that they think everybody just jumps in their ride carrying 5 or 6 big gulps from the local convenience store to pass the time on the commute to work.
About the only gripe I've got with the interior on my 98 Ranger is the sliding rear window latch. At times, it can rattle (the only thing in the truck). And, it's very easy to break into. It only takes a coat hanger and 30 seconds. Other than that, we all adapt to the controls of our particular vehicles, so it doesn't even matter.
actually the SUT was the concept originally put out, Nissan decided to put it off and simply modify the existing frontier platform for the SUT, but the SUT has a hatch for the back of the cab that lifts up and has styling that IMO, Ford copied for the sport trac, I think maybe there might be something on it at freshalloy.com.
Cthompson; I read a little more about the different ABS systems last night, everything I read said the main advantage was being able to maintain steering control and stop a skid, they did say that it shortened stopping distances on ice or wet pavement, basically no difference on dry pavement, and could be longer in loose snow or gravel. I guess it was dry pavement those engineers were talking to me about,also they sadi that light trucks typically had rear wheel ABS because this prevents the rear end from sliding sideways, but the front wheels can still lock up. Well, thanks for getting me out there looking this up.
The SUT concept (used to be called king cabs) has been out for years. Just think back to the king cab full-sized trucks of the '80s. There's nothing new there. They're just making king cab (CC, SUT, whatever you want to call it) vehicles out of the smaller trucks. Toyota has also had CC versions of their p/u's in other parts of the world for years too.
BTW, wherever the Sport Trac got it's styling from, it's still ugly. I don't see much resemblance between the Nissan CC (which looks good) and the Sport Trac (which does not).
I agree that ABS isn't much of a factor in low speed, dry pavement stops. But, as speeds increase and traction decreases its effects are exponentially higher. This may be the reason of the discrepancy in stopping distances in the article you described, as stopping distances separated much more at higher speeds.
How could these techs say that ABS stops will be longer in loose snow/gravel? I would expect (and my personal experience seems to dictate) otherwise.
wdoyle: I think the F150 Super Crew is pretty nice looking too. But, I wouldn't like paying for gas for that truck, especially here in Chicago at $2/gal for the cheap stuff in the outlying 'burbs.
Note how under "Do cars with ABS stop more quickly than cars without?" they say "On very soft surfaces, such as loose gravel or unpacked snow, an ABS system may actually lengthen stopping distances."
"In what circumstances might conventional brakes have an advantage over ABS? There are some conditions where stopping distance may be shorter without ABS. For example, in cases where the road is covered with loose gravel or freshly fallen snow, the locked wheels of a non-ABS car build up a wedge of gravel or snow, which can contribute to a shortening of the braking distance."
This latter article seems well worth reading all the way through, especially the section on rear wheel anti-locks vs all wheel.
In case anyone thinks I'm panning ABS I should give the next paragraph from the quoted article:
"If I live in the Snow Belt, how can I benefit from ABS? Even in fresh snow conditions, you gain the advantages of better steerability and stability with four-wheel ABS than with a conventional system that could result in locked wheels.
In exchange for an increased stopping distance, the vehicle will remain stable and maintain full steering since the wheels won't be locked. The gain in stability makes a potential increase in stopping distances an acceptable compromise for most drivers. All in all, these benefits outweigh the rare instances where the ABS system increases distances over non-ABS equipped vehicles"
The only situation where ABS might not decrease stopping distance is on a loosely packed (gravel, snow, etc...) road surface. It trades some stopping distance for vehicle control.
I watch Motorweek every week and it seems in every show they have the same little 30 second segment about using ABS properly (don't pump the brakes, etc.). They say that in almost every situation ABS shortens stopping distance. Then they show a couple of tests with a Jeep GC with ABS on and with it disabled, and the Jeep with ABS stops shorter and with more stability. I think they do say something about it not helping on loose surfaces.
I agree with you guys, to me the sport-trac is ugly. I like a truck to look 'truckish' not all rounded and bubbly..to each his own right? I test drove the super crew 150 and it was nice tons of power! But I just couldn't justify it's $34k price tag...when I could get a F250SD equiped the same(crew cab) for that price.There's dealer (actually two) that's had their sport-tracs on the lot for over two months! The dealer has a white one and the St. Pete dealer has at least six of them, just sitting there...hmmm????? I've also noticed the Toyota dealer here(clearwater) doesn't seem to be exactly blowing out the Tundras. I wonder if everybody is waiting for the new models? My dealer is almost out of crew cab, again...funny though I don't see a whole bunch of them- mine's the only 4x4 I've seen.
I've posted this before so if it's redundant I apologize. ABS can increase stopping distance in some circumstances, it's happened to me.
Scenario 1 is coming to a slippery intersection too fast and the ABS cycles and actually releases the brakes where I much rather would have liked them to have locked since steering control didn't matter as much at that time.
#2 is offroading coming around a blind curve and there's an obstacle. The only thing I want is full lock up and the ABS releases the brakes.
Both these examples are similar in that they were low speed and steering control was secondary. ON a highway were loss of steering due to locked brakes can be fatal ABS is very beneficial.
Well guys I admit it, I like the way the sport trac looks, there has only been one or two times I looked at it and didn't like it, (I think it was from the back or 3/4 view)At least it is different and that does count for something,
Cthompson: Doesn't the 4x4 ranger have 4 wheel ABS like all 4x4 frontiers? And if not, would front wheel lock really make 100 feet of difference? THe drivers in the magazine rated the ranger's braking control as good, so I doubt they were skidding out of control. Besides, I believe the 4x4 Frontier weighs more than the ranger too right? (I'll verify this later) WOuldn't you think that the disadvantage of more weight would compensate for the ranger's disadvantage for only 2 wheel ABS? DO you know what setup the tacoma has? I think it is just rear wheel ABS, and the toyota still was pretty close to the frontier, I think only 7-12 feet difference. Why is the tacoma able to stop safely with just rear wheel ABS and not the ranger? (oops, I just noticed I was saying ranger, but it was actually the mazda B400) Also one thing all V6 Frontiers have even in 4x2 mode is a G-sensor, it is like a master brain over the 4wheel ABS, this helps stop the ABS from acting up in some off road conditions, this may have helped modvptnl in his offroading situation.
After owning a Ranger a few years back, and now having a Frontier CC, I know that the Nissan is far superior to the Ford in almost every way. I travel a lot on business, and the other day I decided to be brave at the Budget rental counter. Budget rents the ranger ext. cab XLT for $19.95/day. I decided to give a try for one day to see if any improvements were made in the past few years. Before I even got out of the airport traffic, I was regreting this decision. The ranger had 4,000 miles on it and it already had numerous rattles. It's noisy, rough riding, and still a real P.O.S.
I was glad to get back home and into my Frontier CC. Give it a try, go rent the ranger P.O.S. edition (it even has a hard tonneau, oh boy) at your nearest Budget rental car.
This P.O.S is rated better a J.D. powers in quality, is safer, better performance numbers right here at Edmunds too!, outsells the Frontier about 6 to 1, looking at the latest sales figures. Its amamzing how a truck (the Ranger) that is supposed to be such a piece of garbage can still continue to outsell its competitors and stay number one for 13 years straight!@ The Frontier doesn't even rank in the top 20!!! I love the way cncman and his crew has brushed all my links aside showing the Ranger is BETTER than the Frontier. For those of you who have a kingcab version, your room in the back is an absolute joke...
I was reading the posts on the ABS and I have to say I really like it especially when I am off road.I have bettewr control especially coming down hills.No more hang on and lets go for a ride. I was kinda enjoying vince being silent.like they say all good things must come to an end.
vince,you still do not have a clue or an honest opinion that is your own.Your Ranger is not safer then my Frontier because my year and model was not tested. As far as the sales figures go,we have already established that the driving force on those sales figures is not so much the quality of the vehicle as it is FORD WILL FINANCE ANYBODY. Hey vince,how does it feel to have a bigger engine and less hp than my Frontier?i guess I will have to start referring to you as vince I got no power 8. Ha HA
Vince only post after some else said they had a bad experience with a Ranger. So maybe if we just talk about things like ABS, he will loose interest and go away or we could just bash him.
I do not favor the ranger either. But I feel that Vince is the worst of the Ranger owners. I think he gives all ranger owners a bad name. There are normal people who have rangers too and have minimal problems.
Vince; What's your fax# I need to get the braking figures to you you said you wanted, and don't brush this aside like everything else you have, And what posts are you talking about that we swept aside? I only remember 2, the JD power and the crash test, both have been addressed by more than one person, where are your responses to all of the posts you said you were going to respond to? WHere are all of those fantastic links to the sites you said you had that proved the ranger suspension was better? Have you looked under your truck yet, I think you need to take a long hard look at yourself before you accuse others of avoiding issues, Hey I even broke all of the points down for you into easily skimmable chunks and you still don't say squat, go back and read them again. you are still throwing out opinions, most of which aren't even yours and claim them as fact, safety wise, the site you posted had the same real world injury rates for the frontier and the ranger, so how does this show the ranger is safer if these figures are the same, this test also doesn't include the 2000 model and alot of changes have been made. And how does the ranger perform better? the frontier brakes better, has a tighter turning radius, is more stable with or without a load, has a better suspension, better ABS setup etc. Not to mention better reliability, lower maintenance, lower insurance cost, better resale value, a bigger bed, more standard features, less money, better steel, longer warranty, and so on and so on. Yea that ranger really puts it to shame,
ANd why are you still arguing about the sales figures? Nissan trucks were up 56% last month VS a year ago, even with reduced incentives, Ford was up 3% so how does this fit in with your "consumer rules" theory? And why does Nissan way outsell the Mazda B series, if you are saying that the ford is better because it sells more than the frontier, then you also have to admit the frontier is better than the mazda, SO WHICH IS IT? Either you admit the frontier is a better truck than the mazda by your own theory or stop using that faulty argument, you only make yourself look less and less intelligent every time you use it and you need what little credibility you have left son,
cncman,I am going to ask you this because of your affiliation with Nissan,but,anyone can jump in.Do you forsee Nissan taking the ABS system to the next step as Land Rover apparently has by utilizing it for traction control?
gooba; good question, not sure that I have an answer, I think if you participate in the forums at freshalloy.com you could probably get some better opinions, besides, I know I have alot of fun there and check it out every couple of days, there's a good interview with hirschberg, and the infiniti racing team also.
I will defend any Frontier owner's right to disagree with Vince. Shoot, I'm a Mazda B-Series owner myself, and I'm not sure I always agree with everything he says. But when a generalized, derogatory comment is applied to not only an individual, but to a whole group, then I take exception. Croy2, you mentioned that you recently went on a business trip. I sincerely hope that you did not refer to any clients or associates in that manner. Disagree with Vince, that's fine. However, that sort of reference from #92 is inappropriate.
The Ranger doesn't outsell the Frontier because of Ford Motor Credit. This is pure lunacy. How many of you Ranger owners out there bought their truck because Nissan wouldn't finance you?
The Ranger outsells the Frontier because of personal utility. In general, it provides more value dollar for dollar to the average purchaser than any of the other compact trucks (this explains why it's first in sales). How they weight each area of value is personal opinion.
I'm not sure about the Mazdas, but I believe that all Rangers come standard with 2-wheel ABS. I think that only the 4x4 XLT trim levels might have 4-wheel ABS standard.
Mazdas seems to be optioned quite a bit differently than Rangers. They put everything in big packages.
Also, Rangers tip the scales between 100-200lbs more than Frontiers (given similar trim levels/drivetrains). Tacomas are 100lbs or so lighter than the Frontiers (making them around 200-300lbs lighter than a Ranger).
I'm buying my Ranger because it fits my needs. My needs are particular to myself and nobody else. Those needs don't make the Ranger a better truck than the Frontier; it's just a better fit for me. Under different circumstances I might have bought a Frontier, or a Tacoma, or whatever. Let's try to go back to objective comparisons between the trucks (as per cthompson21's last post) and avoid the rants and insults.
I am not saying it is the only factor,but it is a big factor. The following I took from an article on Ford's profits. Ranger – Popular four wheel drive supercab model with the 3.0L V6, accompanied with huge package savings discounts and terrific Ford Credit – Red Carpet Lease programs, have left many dealers bone dry. The Ranger has been America's top selling compact truck for 13 years in a row. Like I said earlier,I personally know of 10 people who bought Fords since January who had their bankruptcies finalized during this same period.I know financing plays a big role in purchasing a vehicle,and I believe that people will go to where they can get the best deal.If this is not true then why am I reading all of the posts on price and deals? I think dollar for dollar the Frontier is the better value. Ford does offer the better rates.
Comments
In your own words.Frontier stomps your PERSONAL RANGER. LOL
THe best overall value in its class
The best compact pickup 2 years in a row
The lowest maintenance cost in the compact pickup class
one of the lowest total ownership costs in its class
The lowest repair cost in its class.
And the other vehicles I just brought up were off of the list that you posted, so don't start whining when people use your own information to show how hypocritical and uninformed you are. Do you have an explanation as to why Ford overall had
an absolutely terrible performance compared to the superior quality Nissans?
I like it...in 'skim reader' form huh?
morning one of those 5spd 4x2 3.3l V6 you said doesn't exist, what ever happened to that comment?
I am trying to find the braking data cncman speaks of.
You all constantly quote the OLD 4.0 and seem to miss that the new 4.0 on the Ranger is due out in about 4 months. What will Nissan do then? OH yeah, they put a bandaid on the 3.3, a supercharger. Do you realize what the 4.0 SOHC supercharged, would do to a 3.3 supercharged? You do the math. No, I'll do the math. This would be about a 235HP/280ft/lbs of torque engine! Nissan is playing catch-up. Ranger rules!
It is so obvious you don't understand what torque is. What happens when the 200ft/lbs of torque runs out after the 3000 rpms? besides the Ranger reaches its 225ft/lbs of torque at 2750rpms....
Fact is the Ranger is safer, better performer, and better quality and you just can't handle it!
In that braking comparo, how was each equipped? No ABS, 2-wheel ABS, 4-wheel ABS? It really makes a huge difference. Anybody that doesn't automatically check that 4-wheel ABS box on the option form has got a screw loose.
Aren't those turbos/superchargers mostly for high performance aftermarket applications? I'm sure they did a helluva lot more to those vehicles than just slap on a SC/Turbo.
BTW, I don't think a supercharger is a band-aid in either application. They're just the cheapest way to get more power. If I were a Nissan guy, I'd be yelling to get that 3.5L out of the Pathfinder instead of a SC 3.3.
I found the interior of the Nissan to be a bit spartan and unstyled. I'm not saying that it wasn't perfectly functional or ugly, either.
the article just says, disc/drum ABS for both, I know the Frontier had 4wheel ABS, because they all do in 4x4's. Don't know about the other's setup but defintely ABS.
And actually from what I understand, ABS has almost nothing to do with stopping distance, it is designed to maintain steering control during a panic stop. If that is not so let me know, but I have heard that from alot of engineers.
Yes they did do a whole lot more to the Nissans when they added the SC/Turbo, just as Nissan will do to the Frontier. I still don't think we will see the VQ in a frontier, perhaps when they come out with the full size truck, but who knows, I see
a more likely 3.5-4.0l version of the current engine, probably when they introduce the SUT. Hope you had a good trip, welcome back!
off the road for a second or two. The rest of the cruise functions are on the steering wheel right about the 4:00 position which is nice.
Ever notice when reading car reviews the reviewers always find a zillion little things to complain about in almost every interior? It's highly subjective though. I mean, they dock points for not having a certian cup-holder in a certain place or something.
But as far as trucks go, as long as everything seems in the right place and there doesn't seem to be too much cheap plastic that will eventually rattle, then I never really pay a lot of attention. If I were buying a luxury SUV or something then I'd expect the works, but for compact/mid size pickups I don't think it would ever be a deciding factor.
One more thing, I have never quite figured out why all vehicles aren't equipped with 4-wheel disk brakes. Disks are far better than drums. I guess it's that stupid bottom line again or people who will skimp on the safety of themselves and their family to save a few hundred dollars. It absolutely blows my mind. My uncle (who owns a body shop) has told me all sorts of convert stories after serious accidents.
It seems that they think everybody just jumps in their ride carrying 5 or 6 big gulps from the local convenience store to pass the time on the commute to work.
About the only gripe I've got with the interior on my 98 Ranger is the sliding rear window latch. At times, it can rattle (the only thing in the truck). And, it's very easy to break into. It only takes a coat hanger and 30 seconds. Other than that, we all adapt to the controls of our particular vehicles, so it doesn't even matter.
SUT??? Isn't that the Frontier CC?
but the SUT has a hatch for the back of the cab that lifts up and has styling that IMO, Ford copied for the sport trac, I think maybe there might be something on it at freshalloy.com.
http://www.ocnow.com/partners/autos/special/cruise/031799cruise_sutbig.html
I read a little more about the different ABS systems last night, everything I read said the main advantage was being able to maintain steering control and stop a skid, they did say that it shortened stopping distances on ice or wet pavement, basically no difference on dry pavement,
and could be longer in loose snow or gravel. I guess it was dry pavement those engineers were talking to me about,also they sadi that light trucks typically had rear wheel ABS because this prevents the rear end from sliding sideways, but the front wheels can still lock up. Well, thanks for getting me out there looking this up.
BTW, wherever the Sport Trac got it's styling from, it's still ugly. I don't see much resemblance between the Nissan CC (which looks good) and the Sport Trac (which does not).
How could these techs say that ABS stops will be longer in loose snow/gravel? I would expect (and my personal experience seems to dictate) otherwise.
wdoyle:
I think the F150 Super Crew is pretty nice looking too. But, I wouldn't like paying for gas for that truck, especially here in Chicago at $2/gal for the cheap stuff in the outlying 'burbs.
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/equipment/ABSBRAKES.html
Note how under "Do cars with ABS stop more quickly than cars without?" they say "On very soft surfaces, such as loose gravel or unpacked snow, an ABS system may actually lengthen stopping distances."
This is repeated at:
http://www.abs-education.org/faqs/faqindex.htm
where they tell you why:
"In what circumstances might conventional brakes have an advantage over ABS? There are some conditions where stopping distance may be shorter without ABS. For example, in cases where the road is covered with loose gravel or freshly fallen snow, the locked wheels of a non-ABS car build up a wedge of gravel or snow, which can contribute to a shortening of the braking distance."
This latter article seems well worth reading all the way through, especially the section on rear wheel anti-locks vs all wheel.
"If I live in the Snow Belt, how can I benefit from ABS? Even in fresh snow conditions, you gain the advantages of better steerability and stability with four-wheel ABS than with a conventional system that could result in locked wheels.
In exchange for an increased stopping distance, the vehicle will remain stable and maintain full steering since the wheels won't be locked. The gain in stability makes a potential increase in
stopping distances an acceptable compromise for most drivers. All in all, these benefits outweigh the rare instances where the ABS system increases distances over non-ABS equipped vehicles"
Does that seem about right to everyone?
Thanks for the links, steve. Very informative.
I wonder if everybody is waiting for the new models?
My dealer is almost out of crew cab, again...funny though I don't see a whole bunch of them- mine's the only 4x4 I've seen.
Scenario 1 is coming to a slippery intersection too fast and the ABS cycles and actually releases the brakes where I much rather would have liked them to have locked since steering control didn't matter as much at that time.
#2 is offroading coming around a blind curve and there's an obstacle. The only thing I want is full lock up and the ABS releases the brakes.
Both these examples are similar in that they were low speed and steering control was secondary. ON a highway were loss of steering due to locked brakes can be fatal ABS is very beneficial.
Cthompson:
Doesn't the 4x4 ranger have 4 wheel ABS like all 4x4 frontiers? And if not, would front wheel lock really make 100 feet of difference? THe drivers in the magazine rated the ranger's braking control as good, so I doubt they were skidding out of control. Besides, I believe the 4x4 Frontier weighs more than the ranger too right? (I'll verify this later) WOuldn't you think that the disadvantage of more weight would compensate for the ranger's disadvantage for only 2 wheel ABS?
DO you know what setup the tacoma has? I think it is just rear wheel ABS, and the toyota still was pretty close to the frontier, I think only 7-12 feet difference. Why is the tacoma able to stop safely with just rear wheel ABS and not the ranger? (oops, I just noticed I was saying ranger, but it was actually the mazda B400) Also one thing all V6 Frontiers have even in 4x2 mode is a G-sensor, it is like a master brain over the 4wheel ABS, this helps stop the ABS from acting up in some off road conditions, this may have helped modvptnl in his offroading situation.
I was glad to get back home and into my Frontier CC. Give it a try, go rent the ranger P.O.S. edition (it even has a hard tonneau, oh boy) at your nearest Budget rental car.
Hint Hint, You can ignore this too, that is what you do best (even better than posting garbage).
I was kinda enjoying vince being silent.like they say all good things must come to an end.
vince,you still do not have a clue or an honest opinion that is your own.Your Ranger is not safer then my Frontier because my year and model was not tested.
As far as the sales figures go,we have already established that the driving force on those sales figures is not so much the quality of the vehicle as it is FORD WILL FINANCE ANYBODY.
Hey vince,how does it feel to have a bigger engine and less hp than my Frontier?i guess I will have to start referring to you as vince I got no power 8. Ha HA
What's your fax# I need to get the braking figures to you you said you wanted, and don't brush this aside like everything else you have, And what posts are you talking about that we swept aside?
I only remember 2, the JD power and the crash test, both have been addressed by more than one person, where are your responses to all of the posts you said you were going to respond to? WHere are all of those fantastic links to the sites you said you had that proved the ranger suspension was better? Have you looked under your truck yet, I think you need to take a long hard look at yourself before you accuse others of avoiding issues, Hey I even broke all of the points down for you into easily skimmable chunks and you still don't say squat, go back and read them again. you are still throwing out opinions, most of which aren't even yours and claim them as fact, safety wise, the site you posted had the same real world injury rates for the frontier and the ranger, so how does this show the ranger is safer if these figures are the same, this test also doesn't include the 2000 model and alot of changes have been made. And how does the ranger perform better? the frontier brakes better,
has a tighter turning radius, is more stable with or without a load, has a better suspension, better ABS setup etc. Not to mention better reliability,
lower maintenance, lower insurance cost, better resale value, a bigger bed, more standard features, less money, better steel, longer warranty, and so on and so on. Yea that ranger really puts it to shame,
ANd why are you still arguing about the sales figures? Nissan trucks were up 56% last month VS a year ago, even with reduced incentives, Ford was up 3% so how does this fit in with your "consumer rules" theory? And why does Nissan way outsell the
Mazda B series, if you are saying that the ford is better because it sells more than the frontier, then you also have to admit the frontier is better than the mazda, SO WHICH IS IT? Either you admit the frontier is a better truck than the mazda by your own theory or stop using that faulty argument, you only make yourself look less and less intelligent every time you use it and you need what little credibility you have left son,
good question, not sure that I have an answer, I think if you participate in the forums at freshalloy.com you could probably get some better opinions, besides, I know I have alot of fun there and check it out every couple of days, there's a good interview with hirschberg, and the infiniti racing team also.
The Ranger outsells the Frontier because of personal utility. In general, it provides more value dollar for dollar to the average purchaser than any of the other compact trucks (this explains why it's first in sales). How they weight each area of value is personal opinion.
BTW, you can get a Frontier for less $$$ than a Ranger.
Thanks for the wonderful input, especially the name-calling, generalizing, and stereotyping.
Mazdas seems to be optioned quite a bit differently than Rangers. They put everything in big packages.
Also, Rangers tip the scales between 100-200lbs more than Frontiers (given similar trim levels/drivetrains). Tacomas are 100lbs or so lighter than the Frontiers (making them around 200-300lbs lighter than a Ranger).
The following I took from an article on Ford's profits.
Ranger – Popular four wheel drive supercab model
with the 3.0L V6, accompanied with huge package
savings discounts and terrific Ford Credit – Red
Carpet Lease programs, have left many dealers bone
dry. The Ranger has been America's top selling
compact truck for 13 years in a row.
Like I said earlier,I personally know of 10 people who bought Fords since January who had their bankruptcies finalized during this same period.I know financing plays a big role in purchasing a vehicle,and I believe that people will go to where they can get the best deal.If this is not true then why am I reading all of the posts on price and deals?
I think dollar for dollar the Frontier is the better value.
Ford does offer the better rates.