Howdy, Stranger!

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





Howdy, Stranger!

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

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Nissan Frontier Crew Cab vs Ford Explorer Sport Trac - II

meredithmeredith Posts: 577
edited March 2014 in Nissan
This topic is a continuation of Topic 1033....

Nissan Frontier Crew Cab vs Ford Explorer Sport
Trac
. Please continue these discussions here.
Thanks!

Front Porch Philosopher
SUV, Pickups, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host
«13456717

Comments

  • goobagooba Posts: 391
    Congratulations vince,I hope you are able to
    retire when you want,but,that still does not
    address the original premise.Your decision to pay
    cash for your truck means you lost that capital
    asset.You are no longer making anything from it.You
    also lost an offset on your taxes.Again,I question
    the wisdom of your paying cash,which I did earlier
    and you came up with your story insted of
    addressing the question.
    All the other stuff about fads,JD
    Powers,etc,means........?Not relevant,nor is it
    worth discussion over again.
  • mahimahimahimahi Posts: 497
    Nice comment on the torque issue...sore loser? I notice that it's not an issue of where does the torque go but now it's where's the rest? Come on Vince I give you a torque curve, prove to you that the 3.3L doesn't drop off like you implied and you still have to take a different angle. As for your stock choices, anybody can invest in the 'blue chips'...take a risk make some $$$$$ you're young. Also, I noticed you didn't include Ford on your list of stocks...too big of a risk for you? You certainly took a risk buying a Ranger!
  • keaneckeanec Posts: 349
    Sorry for my incorrect post. I was saying that you normally measure increases/decreases using percentages. That was my argument. I was just quoting somebody else's example and I incorrectly copied it. I ment to Say if somebody ivests $100 and get a 69% return, he is doing just as well as somebody investing $10,000 and getting a 69% return. Does this clarify it? The man who invested $10,000 may have made more money, but he didn't do any better
  • mahimahimahimahi Posts: 497
    This might sting a little...more than the last post for you. But if Nissan is doing so badly 'cause of their quality, than how do you explain the Nissan vehicle that Ford rebadges as their own? Need help? I'm talking about the Mercury Villager. Ford must not think that Nissan's quality is that bad, if they're willing to purchase and fill the void that their own minivan must not be able to fill. Last I checked Nissan isn't rebadging any Fords. I also think that your evaluation on what vehicles are keeping Nissan 'afloat' are way off. With little research I bet YOU would find that Nissan's biggest sellers are neither the xterra nor the Maxima but rather, the Altima and Pathfinder. I see more of those vehicles than I do of any other Nissan(although, the frontier 2WD XE is very,very popular)vehicle. But I know that this is another one of your unresearched statements that you are so popular for sprinkling on these topics. in fact you probably will skim right over it and not even respond. Only time will tell.
  • mahimahimahimahi Posts: 497
    keanec,
    I agree with you that they are both doing the same percentage-wise. But, I would rather be the guy that was making 69% of $10,000 :)
  • dennisc2dennisc2 Posts: 10
    Here is my observation, In the Inland Empire of So. Cal., there are 4 to 1 more Nissan CC Vs. Sport Tracks and Dakota Quad Cabs. Sure the Nissan has been available 10 months longer, but for the large part the Nissans I'm seeing have dealer plates on them (= new purchases) It seems the people have waited for the competition to come out and play, and have come up with NISSAN !

    Sure the Nissan doesn't have all the best of the best features, but when you avg. out all the pros / cons ( especially price )The Nissan appears to be the "little truck that could !!)
  • cncmancncman Posts: 487
    Keanec;
    yes that is clear to me, I see what you are saying now,

    Dennis;
    yes the new competition has provided more oportunity fot the CC's to be discounted, and with a decent discount, and the sport tracs going for MSRP+ it seems most buyers don't see enough of a benefit to spend the extra $$.
  • The problem with the examples you provided to me in your previous post #496 is in order to show your point you HAD to specify some base line numbers. WHICH WAS MY POINT IN THE FIRST PLACE. How can you compair percentages when there is no base line. The original post only showd %, no base line numbers.

    As to the last paragraph of post 496 I do not choose either. I said in my orignal post

    "There are always exceptions but the norm is
    Quality = Sales".

    And I gave 2 examples, American Express and Federal Express. Why do more people use Federal Express and not, lets say, Airborn Express? Airborn is cheaper, why not use them?
  • Please go back and reread my post #485 and the post I was refering to #506. How can anyone determine anything from the comment;

    "Can you explain why Nissan truck sales were up 56% while ford truck sales were up only 3%?"

    Try and show your stock example without using any base line. You can't its not possible. Now do you understand why I say % figures are not useable numbers without a baseline?

    Even your comment;

    "The person who invested $100 did equally as well as the person who invested $10,000!"

    is inaccurate because you do not specify a base line. I know what your point is, but if I change your base line from which person had the better choice of stocks to which person had the greater increase in cash it changes the results without changing your numbers.
  • I forgot the Amex example,

    Amercan Express has a $50 yearly fee. Almost anyone can get a VISA/MC for no fees and use it like an Amex by paying it off at the end of every month and avoiding all finance charges. Yet millions of people have Amex cards.

    IMHO, Its the quality of their customer service and how they treat their customers. They do not have anything to sell but themselfs.
  • cncmancncman Posts: 487
    fordsporttrac;
    I think we have both made our points on the percentages figures, and I guess you know better than all of the professional automotive journalists out there that quote percentages.

    Let's get back to the automotive field to look at your theory that quality=sales, BTW, I would appreciate it if you would use IMHO before those statements like you expect everyone else to, how does the situation with the Mazda Bseries fit in with your theory? JD power gave the highest IQ award to the mazda this year, so the quality is there, but sales are at the bottom, especially compared to the ranger, even thought they are the same truck, and the mazda has a better warranty and there is no difference in performance etc.
    Also if you think of quality, Toyota definitely has the reputation for practically bullet proof debendability and quality, but tacoma sales are relatively low too when compared to the domestics,
    so how does this fit in with your theory? The only logical explanation is that there are other factors than quality that equal higher sales, unless you have another explanation?
  • keaneckeanec Posts: 349
    I am not sure you are using the proper terminology. I think you talking about context. I am not sure so let's drop that discussion because I don't agree and my IMHO doesn't match your IMHO.

    As for the Amex & Federal Express example...Millons of people have Amex? Links please? (Joke). How does that compare to Visa and Master card? Do they only have millions or maybe tens of millions? If your theory was to hold true, Amex would be the dominate card, regardless of cost. Same goes for Fed Ex? Do they ship more parcels than UPS? Do you know this for certain? If not, then again your theory doesn't hold water. I think many people have posted enough examples where quality <</A>> sales to say that this probably isn't the norm, IMHO. I think that Hyundai and Microsoft are two glaring examples; although Vince probably takes exception to the Microsoft example because he is a big shareholder...
  • goobagooba Posts: 391
    vince,you need to look at JD Powers a little closer before you quote quality issues.Granted the latest figures show Nissan below Ford on their study.Look at the study.It is for Initial Quality-within the first 3 months.Look at the previous years studies for Vehicle Dependability.The 1997,1998,and 1999 studies for vehicle dependability over the long term rates Nissan above the average each year and Ford does not even make the chart in any of the years.I do not know about anyone else,but I plan on keeping my vehicle longer then the 3 months as in the IQ study and the longer study is a better indication of vehicle quality.
    That kind of puts a little dent in the quality=sales debate.The long term quality of Nissan rates higher then Ford so that should mean that their sales should be higher.That of course is not the case.
  • keaneckeanec Posts: 349
    Vince you still haven't responded to my question about the repair frequency of your Ranger and Contour?
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,124
    My Ranger I repair free after 30K miles, no problems whatsoever. The 30K miles have not been easy either, beings I go up to the Cascades on average of 3-4 times a month now that the weather is good.
    The Contour.... Nice car but.... I will admit after the 7th safety recall my wife and I didn't have warm fuzzy feelings the car would make it to even 80K. The car handled wonderfully and still felt solid, but we dumped it, :-(... I still believe this car is one of the best values out there. Luckly we are financially set to have been able to get rid of the car and get another... I know I am never going to hear the end of this one.. Even though the Contour had 7 safety recalls, it NEVER, EVER left us stranded.. or broken down.. after 32K miles... Test drove the Nissan Altima (JOKE!), Saturn LS1, Accord, Camry, Mazda 626, My wife chose the Accord this time...
  • goobagooba Posts: 391
    vince,still waiting.........
  • mahimahimahimahi Posts: 497
    Ooooohhhhh Vince.....where are you? Commenting without answering the previous questions leads me to believe you got shut down again. This is becoming the norm. What's the matter can't admit when you spoke without proof. I'm not talking about your links about JD and the others(note gooba's post). The sales issue, what the numbers include(I'm sure it's not based solely on quality) and their source, the torque issue, and so on. Never mind, your silence on these issues answer my statements. I happen to notice some of the same phrases you've been slinging around here posted on the tundra pages. Full of creativity, huh?
  • mahimahimahimahi Posts: 497
    fordsporttrac,
    Let me see if I get what your saying here. I've been reading what you guys have been posting here on this subject the last few posts. If you take your 'Quality=Sales' and break it down for what it is saying then you get quality equals sales. If you make quality it will equal(more) sales. I don't see you saying that sales figures equal quality. This is what Vince8 is saying, the high number of sales shows quality. If my interpretation of your post is correct, then I agree with you. Your saying, If you make a quality product it will only help your sales numbers. But the theory(which by the way is based on an educated guess'hypothesis', something Vince8 knows nothing about)that sales numbers equal quality, in my education is wrong and way too broad. I mean if you look at sales numbers you must take in economics both macro and micro especially when it involves automobile manufactures. I bet if you were to talk to Ford's marketing dept. or design dept. they probably wished it was as easy as sales=quality.

    Another thought on the sales numbers. My experience with businesses and gov't agencies is that they really don't rank quality near as high as they do price. They don't have to. The businesses depreciate the vehicle as soon as they can and the gov't operates off of a tight budget and usually have fleet mechanics. So even if we were to say well, the businesses and gov't buy the rangers or Fords because of their reliability I don't think that it's true, as referenced by the above sentence. I think that quality is important to those of us who are buying the vehicle with our own money and will be owning the vehicle for some time. We worry about quality because more than likely we will still be the owner after the warranty. Don't get me wrong, commercial vehicles need to be reliable but don't forget if the company is large or is a gov't agency they usually have somebody manage the fleet. Whether it's their own guys or a dealership somebody is doing regular maintenance on them. This is why I don't think that the commercial part of the ranger's or Ford's sales should count. Besides they own their own rental car company and I bet those sales are included in there.
  • keaneckeanec Posts: 349
    Thanks for the response! Even though this hall is suppose to be about CC vs ST you have been making it a Ford against Nissan. Now since my Mother-in-law drives a Contour, I have a good idea about their quality/reliability (although I do agree it isn't fair to base an opinion on one car). You confirmed for me what my mother-in law says - tons of recalls and many problems. Cousin owns a 98 Altima w/130000miles (travels 150km one way to work every day) has done absolutely nothing outside of the regular scheduled maintenance. The Accord your wife bought WILL convince you eventually what true quality/reliability is all about. The Accord is an awesome car!

    I can't say anything about you Ranger, except congrats on its record, its a little surprising but it is a truck which Ford excels at. Nobody I know, absolutely nobody owns/owned a Ranger except for my friend's co-worker's husband 12 years ago owned a older Ranger! The vast majority of people I know buy the F150. And that is a good vehicle.
  • keaneckeanec Posts: 349
    A last thought on the quality=sales issue. I think mahamai has it right. If you build a quality product, it will help it's sales, although it won't gaurantee sales. I think in this day & age, more consumers are getting picking about quality products. Problem is , they want quality bought at economy prices which doesn't equate to high quality. That makes manufacturers cut corners where they can to keep the prices down. So although they put quality in there products, lots of times they don't put in high quality even when they can because of the price issue.

    By the way I have a sad face :(; my wife battered my CC! Two weeks she came home and said she hit a rock in her parking lot at work(I live in a mining town, so rocks are abundant). She just clipped the bumber and I could she a small scratch on it. Last Friday, she decides to hit the same rock again! This time she collapsed in the bumper skirt at the corner. It pushed the Fog light sideways and left yellow paint all over the skirt...The front of my CC no longer has a "happy face" it now has a "lopsided frown"!!
  • cncman you said;
    I think we have both made our points on the percentages figures.

    Sorry I do not get your point at all. You can't use % figures without a common base line. Since Ford and Nissan do not sell anywhere near the same # of units per year you do not have a common base line.

    cncman you also said;
    The only logical explanation is that there are other factors than quality that equal higher sales, unless you have another explanation?

    Of course there is! and there are exceptions to everything. What I said was (and using your words) it is the norm. To me the norm means most of the time. Is that your definition of norm?
  • Mahimai you said;
    I don't see you saying that sales figures equal quality.

    Nope I never used those words. Quality = Sales not Sales = Quality. The difference is slight but I would never argue Sales = Quality. I did express that Repeat sales = Quality.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Ok now that cncman and kenac have jumped to a conclusion, before you post, IMHO Repeat sales = Quality is the NORM. Sure you can tell me about the little old lady who had a lemon and brought another but that is NOT the norm.


    Mahimai you also said,
    My experience with businesses and gov't agencies is that they really don't rank quality near as high as they do price.

    But now I'm confused about your point because the Nissan's are less $$ than the Fords but I still see Ford fleet vehicles the most. Since the Nissan is cheaper why are they not buying Nissan or Toyota, etc..
  • You said;
    The front of my CC no longer has a "happy face" it now has a "lopsided frown"!!

    Well you are lucky in one respect. You are now over the anguish of your first scratch/ding, while the rest of us suffer painfully watching and waiting for our first ding.

    You should thank your wife.
  • cncmancncman Posts: 487
    Fordsportrac;
    you obviously have no idea what you are talking about, it is precisely because there is a difference in sales figures that you HAVE to use percentages, what we are basically talking about here is performance and performance can only be gauged relative to what others are doing by comparing % if there is a disparity in the numbers. It is a simple fact. In your eyes a company that usually sells 10,000 units goes up 3,000 units and they did just as well as the company that usually sells 100,000 units that went up 3,000 units, that is ridiculous, the 10,000 unit company obviously had a better performance, and a higher PERCENTAGE performance gain. Pick up an automotive news sometime and look at how they talk about sales increases, they don't say Ford sales were up 5,000 units this month, they say it was up X%.

    Yes I agree that is what the norm is, but you haven't given ONE automotive example to illustrate your point, if it is the norm, why can't you think of a simple example? I have given you two examples, the toyota and Mazda examples, that is two more than you have, so far it would appear that this is the "norm"
  • mahimahimahimahi Posts: 497
    I was confused too. Until last year I asked a couple of friends of mine( one is a supervisor for the city water/sewage department and the other is a sargent for a police department). I asked the supervisor why he didn't use Toyotas or Nissans and he replied that 1.) weren't allowed to buy foreign vehicles because they get subsidies from the Federal Government it has something to do with their contract together. Second, Ford and GM submit bids on the particular vehicles that the city will need and therefore the price is much lower than what you and I would ever see. This last statement is probably why our costs are so high anyways :), to cover the margin that they lose to these sales. I got the same answer from my friend that is a sargent in the P.D. He told me recently that his department is forefitting the Federal money this year because the department is springing for new BMW motorcyles. The City of North Bay Village(Miami) figures the operating cost will be lower than the Harleys they have now. So with this the foreign manufactures don't even get a chance. As it wouldn't be fair to count all of Ford's sales against all of Nissan's sales in Japan. Because Ford certainly wouldn't and doesn't get a cahnce at their gov't, they're propbably lucky that they are over there at all.
    As far as my statement about businesses I was talking about large businesses and this purely speculation on my part. I know that businesses are more likely to buy foreign than gov't agencies. I still don't think that they should be counted as part of sales figures along with the gov't sales. You said it yourself you need a baseline, in the case of the sales figures it needs to be a market that the competing manufactures sell to.
  • cncman You said;
    In your eyes a company that usually sells 10,000 units goes up 3,000 units and they did just as well as the company that usually sells 100,000 units that went up 3,000 units, that is ridiculous, the 10,000 unit company obviously
    had a better performance, and a higher PERCENTAGE
    performance gain.


    NOPE, I Never said that, Nowhere Nohow did I say that. Re-Read my posts you are completely wrong about what I said. I have no clue where you interpreted that from.

    To Review;
    You (or someone) said that Nissan did much better than Ford because Nissan sales were up 63.x% and Ford sales were up 3%.

    I said (and I have no clue why you don't get it)
    You cannot compare % numbers without a baseline. Suppose 63% is a 10000 unit increase for Nissan and %3 is a 50000 unit increase for Ford? So who did better???????????????

    Cars, Planes, Trains, Widgets, Paper plates. It dosen't matter what it is. You can't use % figures without a baseline for "COMPARISONS".

    Your confusing Stock performance % with a Industry Compairson. With stock you compare the +- to the companies own previous perfomance (Base Line)

    You are attempting to use % to compare 2 companies with 2 different base lines and saying that the % figures "ALONE" say how one company did against another. Its not valid now and never will be.

    I hope that explains my point to you. But if you still do not understand I think we should move on.
  • Mahamai you said,
    weren't allowed to buy foreign vehicles because they get subsidies from the Federal Government it has something to do with their contract together.

    Yea that make sense. I could see the Government forcing its own agencys to buy from companies it give loans and grants to. It actually makes good government sense to. I wonder if that carries down to the state and local level too? I guess it must because the State and local gov get their grants from the feds.

    If the above is true, than in reality Price in this particular environment should be the opposite of the previous posts (ie. not be a big factor). Because if the agency wants its grant money they have to pick an approved vendor. Humm major food for thought.
  • dennisc2 you said
    Here is my observation, In the Inland Empire of So. Cal., there are 4 to 1 more Nissan CC Vs. Sport Tracks and Dakota Quad Cabs. Sure the Nissan has been available 10 months longer, but for the large part the Nissans I'm seeing have dealer plates on them (= new purchases)

    I can't comment on the Dakota's but Ford is only Making ??50,000?? ST's this year and they have only been in production since Feb. Jump over to the ST topic and you'll see that most of the people who have order'd an ST are JUST getting them or still waiting. Production was also limited until late May. And until recently dealers were having trouble keeping a demo long enough for test drives. :-)
  • goobagooba Posts: 391
    It is against the law except in very special cases.That is why Nissan and Toyota cannot compete in those sales.It is also why you have to take those sales out of the total sales to get a true comparison of what the consumer is buying.

    The Buy American Act --

    (1) Restricts the purchase of supplies, that are not domestic end products, for use within the United States. A foreign end product may be purchased if the contracting officer determines that the price of the lowest domestic offer is unreasonable or if another exception applies (see Subpart 25.1);
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,124
    Will someone please answer me why Ford is still in business after 50+ years if all of thier cars/trucks/vans are of such low, crappy, unreliabile quality?
This discussion has been closed.