We have temporarily turned off the ability to post while we deal with a massive spam attack. Thank you for your patience.
Options
Frontier vs Ranger
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
There's nothing wrong with preferring one nameplate over another. But dazzling me with technical specs just doesn't work for me. I go by what I like. It wasn't just an impulse buy, either. I tested many trucks before deciding on the Frontier. The bottom line was bang for the buck. The Frontier was a better buy to me. To me it was win, win on price, power, and quality.
Specs do count, along with sales.
Is ain't a word? bozo?
I can't wait for this...
Frontier 2.4
HP: 143
Towing Cap: 3500lbs
Max Payload: 1330lbs
Ford 2.5
HP: 119
Towing Cap: 1600lbs
Max Payload: 1260lbs
Ford 3.0
HP: 152
Towing Cap: 2400lbs
Max Payload: 1260lbs
Hmm... Now fords TORQUE specs may beat nissan, but a ford comparable engine to nissan is still rated less for the important things. Oh, incase you guys need to know where I got those specs, because I am sure you will question me, they are on this site. I recently raced a Ranger 3.0 manual with my 2.4l 5spd and beet him 3 out of 3.
You fords guys' arguments are like saying (just because my octane rating is higher I am better, but in reality it does nothing for you). Welcome to the real world. Now, I expect you ford guys to come back on me hard and make me look like a retard. So don't disappoint me.
And your dreamin about towing 3,400 lbs with a 2.4. It may be rated at 3,400 but it sure won't do it very well, belive me. And once again you failed to visit the options list. For about $200 the Ranger can be upgraded in towing capacity. It is obvious you know nothing about trucks or Torque.
Look, Nissan messed up. The Frontier was a bomb, dive, whatever you want to call it. In todays paper there was an article about the new Frontier to arrive in 2001. It showed a picture and it looks much, much better. It has a more aggressive styling than the present Frontier. Even Nissan was quoted as admitting the current Frontier lacks the agressive looks of its competitors. And Nissan once again learned by its mistakes. New V6 Engine is on its way for 2002, and this summer a supercharger is supposed to be available for its 3.3. So, it looks like the cash infusion from Renault may be paying off. And a new Sentra is just around the corner too. It looks good too, much better than the present Sentra.
I think Vince gets a little carried away sometimes with his enthusiasm for the Fords, but most of the time, I gotta say he writes what he knows and means what he says. Whether you or I agree with him or not is entirely a separate issue. Let's leave out the personal attacks, shall we?
For light duty vehicles, the automatic transmissions do a better job shifting at the correct time than the average consumer does using a manual transmission.
Look at the 1 ton trucks, towing and payloads automatic to manual are nearly identical.
Don't get me wrong the 2.4 Nissan builds is one of the worlds best, Heck I would rate it above Toyota's 2.4 and 2.7. The NAPS Z 2.4 has been around for a long time and Nissan has massaged this little bugger into a good, reliable engine. I would be stupid in trying to compare this to Fords 2.5.
My take on the all the 4dr compact truck restyles are (in the order of most improved - not which is the absolute best):
1. Frontier - chunkier than even Prego.
2. Ranger - F-150 family resemblance. Worked for Dodge.
3. Tacoma - looks too much like a luxury car.
4. S-10 - ????
which is better, vanilla or chocolate ice cream!
So if you look at all the facts drive both of these and choose one over the other, only time will tell if you made the right decision for yourself and it doesn't matter what anyone else says.
Any way let's break this down. I think in the interests of all let's look at what compact truck buyers are really buying as that should matter the most in comparisons. As much as some tout their V6
4x4's the overwhelming majority of compact trucks sold are 4x2 4 cylinders. Here's the 4x2 VS 4x4 breakdown for all compact trucks. (BTW all of the figures I use are from March 98- february 99 to avoid complaints that the sales figures include the "trendy crew cab" so also realize that with the crew cab out, more attention has been brought to the overall frontier line and sales have increased accross the board.)
make %4x2 %4x4
ranger 73 27
S-10 90 10
dakota 70 30
tacoma 52 48
frontier 75 25
sonoma 87 13
mazda 88 12
So if you want to make a point that will speak to the most people, most people buy 4x2 4cylinder compact trucks. And it has already been conceded that the frontier has the best 4cylinder. So engine wise, the frontier is the best choice for the most people.
It has been said, paraphrased, the ranger sells more than the frontier, therefore it has to be a better truck. Well yes the ranger does outsell the frontier by a wide margin, but this is not becuase all of those buyers looked at all of the trucks, compared and came up with the decision that the ranger is the best truck. If this were true, then you would expect to see a closer margin of sales comparing the ranger and mazda, they are the same truck, but what you see is almost a 10:1 ratio. Which means that folks aren't buying more rangers
because they are better truck, merely because they are fords. TO make this argument, you would also have to say that the frontier is a better truck than the mazda because it outsold them over 2:1.But I don't see any of the ranger guys who use this argument agreeing with that point.
So again the sales argument has nothing to do with which is a better truck.
As far as frontier sales being flat, let's compare frontier 4x2 sales to tacoma 4x2 sales, these two trucks have the highest percentage of cross shoppers. Tacoma, 77,058, frontier 68,816. Hmm, not a big difference. One would hardly call it flat. And again, this does not include the crewcabs.
If sales and 4x4's do mean anything to you, also know that the frontier 4x4 outsold, the S10,GMC and Mazda.So again, I don't see what the point is.
I still feel that my frontier is a better truck, especially in term of quality and reliability. And
there are several things that confirm this. The nissan lineup has won more JD power intital quality awards than the ranger, Intellichoice rates the frontier excellent for ownership costs, the ranger, worse than average. Even the carpoint
site that has been talked about rates the Nissan trucks higher than the rangers.
So far as reviews, check out december 97 motor trend's first drive,they gave it a great review,
also april 98 truck trend, and also if you do want info on the 4x4 V6, check out the truck shootout in open road magazine between the mazda B400, frontier and tacoma. Let me quote, "In this comparison, the Nissan Frontier is my hands-down winner, because it is as equally adept at hacking its way through soft riverbed sand and other gnarly stuff as it is cruising the interstate. On the pavement, a blindfolded passenger would have a difficult time trying to figure out whether they were riding in a car or a truck. The frontier's chassis provides the smoothest ride of all three."
THis is why I chose my frontier and why it was the best for me,
I have had a great experience with imports and not domestics. I needed the bigger bed, better warranty, better ride, lower maintnenace costs and nicer standard features. I am not trying to race anyone or go crusing for women, I needed an inexpensive, tough commuter I could afford and wouldn't let me down, and that's exactly what i got.
Later guys, much!
Frontier sales haven't been that great either. Every review I read, the V6 3.3 is weak, especially when the airconditioner is used.
which is better, vanilla or chocolate ice cream!
So if you look at all the facts drive both of these and choose one over the other, only time will tell if you made the right decision for yourself and it doesn't matter what anyone else says.
Any way let's break this down. I think in the interests of all let's look at what compact truck buyers are really buying as that should matter the most in comparisons. As much as some tout their V6
4x4's the overwhelming majority of compact trucks sold are 4x2 4 cylinders. Here's the 4x2 VS 4x4 breakdown for all compact trucks. (BTW all of the figures I use are from March 98- february 99 to avoid complaints that the sales figures include the "trendy crew cab" so also realize that with the crew cab out, more attention has been brought to the overall frontier line and sales have increased accross the board.)
make %4x2 %4x4
ranger 73 27
S-10 90 10
dakota 70 30
tacoma 52 48
frontier 75 25
sonoma 87 13
mazda 88 12
So if you want to make a point that will speak to the most people, most people buy 4x2 4cylinder compact trucks. And it has already been conceded that the frontier has the best 4cylinder. So engine wise, the frontier is the best choice for the most people.
It has been said, paraphrased, the ranger sells more than the frontier, therefore it has to be a better truck. Well yes the ranger does outsell the frontier by a wide margin, but this is not becuase all of those buyers looked at all of the trucks, compared and came up with the decision that the ranger is the best truck. If this were true, then you would expect to see a closer margin of sales comparing the ranger and mazda, they are the same truck, but what you see is almost a 10:1 ratio. Which means that folks aren't buying more rangers
because they are better truck, merely because they are fords. TO make this argument, you would also have to say that the frontier is a better truck than the mazda because it outsold them over 2:1.But I don't see any of the ranger guys who use this argument agreeing with that point.
So again the sales argument has nothing to do with which is a better truck.
As far as frontier sales being flat, let's compare frontier 4x2 sales to tacoma 4x2 sales, these two trucks have the highest percentage of cross shoppers. Tacoma, 77,058, frontier 68,816. Hmm, not a big difference. One would hardly call it flat. And again, this does not include the crewcabs.
If sales and 4x4's do mean anything to you, also know that the frontier 4x4 outsold, the S10,GMC and Mazda.So again, I don't see what the point is.
I still feel that my frontier is a better truck, especially in term of quality and reliability. And
there are several things that confirm this. The nissan lineup has won more JD power intital quality awards than the ranger, Intellichoice rates the frontier excellent for ownership costs, the ranger, worse than average. Even the carpoint
site that has been talked about rates the Nissan trucks higher than the rangers.
So far as reviews, check out december 97 motor trend's first drive,they gave it a great review,
also april 98 truck trend, and also if you do want info on the 4x4 V6, check out the truck shootout in open road magazine between the mazda B400, frontier and tacoma. Let me quote, "In this comparison, the Nissan Frontier is my hands-down winner, because it is as equally adept at hacking its way through soft riverbed sand and other gnarly stuff as it is cruising the interstate. On the pavement, a blindfolded passenger would have a difficult time trying to figure out whether they were riding in a car or a truck. The frontier's chassis provides the smoothest ride of all three."
THis is why I chose my frontier and why it was the best for me,
I have had a great experience with imports and not domestics. I needed the bigger bed, better warranty, better ride, lower maintnenace costs and nicer standard features. I am not trying to race anyone or go crusing for women, I needed an inexpensive, tough commuter I could afford and wouldn't let me down, and that's exactly what i got.
Later guys, much!
I've got an old V6 Ranger, I'm researching my options for a new truck. I'd prefer a 4cyl for MPG if it can still haul my 2500lb trailer.
Thanks for any help.
Dan
I have no doubt the Frontier can tow the rated 3500lbs, but I wouldn't look forward to doing it day in and day out. You're better off with a full-size for that kind of duty.
OTOH, with the gas prices inching toward the $2.00/gal mark, I am sure glad I went with a fuel efficient 4cyl 5sp Nissan Frontier.
Fact are facts though, Nissans torque is the lowest in its class. Soon the Ranger will even stomp it more when its SOHC V6 rated at 205HP/240ft/lbs of torque arrives in about 6 months.
But hey, if you love your Ranger then that's all that counts. I'll stick with anyone but Ford.
Satisfaction: Remains high in spite of owners' complaints about reliability problems.
What this tells me is that many owners buy them because they think they're buying a piece of Americana with the Ford name. What they're really buying is a piece of S! Juts my own .02
and I shouldn't generalize them like that? Please.
I feel like I gave ford another chance when I bought the 98, and that was one chance too many, I don't care if yugo owns nissan, it can't be as bad as those rangers.
Ladies and Gents, the mind of Vince8....
In reality Vince probably uses his truck just to get to work. How much TORQUE is needed to move from point A to B. If you are towing and hauling why don't you get a bigger truck with even more TORQUE. Why stop with a ranger? I'm not saying that one truck is better than another. But TORQUE is just one of many factors that plays into a purchasing decision. Try exchanging the word TORQUE with PRICE, higher is not necessarily better nor worse. Try exchanging the word TORQUE with DISPLACEMENT, with vinces reasoning FORD 2.5l must be better than NISSAN 2.4l; their performances are debatable, but because the ford engine is bigger does not automatically make it better.
Brag Power (Join the Brag Club)
Doyle
http://carpoint.msn.com/Vip/Heraud/Ford/Ranger/2000R.asp
I am trying to point out that every manufacturer has its problems. Go to consumer reports and see how the Ranger stacks up, or consumer digest site.
The Ford Ranger is in the Top 10 selling cars and trucks and has been for the last 12 years. I think after 12 years if the Ranger were so unreliable and such a terrible truck consumers would have heard about it by now and Rangers sales would have plummeted. Fact is Ranger sales continue to climb and outsell their competition Nissan almost 5 to 1, Toyota 3 to 1. The Consumer makes the choice and as much as you want to bash the Ranger it continues to sell like gangbusters.
And to be leary of anything Ford. Your Ford may run fine, but for every one that runs fine there are a hunfred that don't. Check out the town hall, those are real folks with real problems.
Hmmm... I didn't know I signed an Indentured Servitude contract with Renault when I bought my Frontier. :-) Yikes! Here comes the horsewhip... HWAH-PAHH!
I still don't know why you talk about the 4cyl 4x4, Nissan does not make it anymore, and noone ordered it and I doubt hardly anyone bought it.
And if the ranger 4cylinder was only built for CAFE reasons, why is it that ford sells most rangers with a 4? Please at least get something right!
I can't help the facts on engine sizes/HP/torque, HP/Torque curves or whatever. Fact is the Nissan Frontier has the least Torque of any compact truck in its class with its high tech 3.3.
By the way, Ford just bought Range Rover from BMW. Where does a company that is doing so poorly come up with so much cash? Hmm.... Ford now owns Volvo, Range Rover, Mazda, Jaguar, Austin Martin, and rumors are they may buy a stake in a Korean maker next. Yep, Ford is doing so badly aren't they? Who does Nissan own, ooops, forgot NOONE!, they are owned by Renault.
See ya!
guys like lokki's friend that even if they do have trouble they don't seem to mind buying another ford, that's fine, if you like the vehicle the way it feels and is laid out, you will probably be happier in that vehicle, even if there was not one advantage to owning a ranger over a nissan or toyota you would still own one, because of your experience and preference, and there's nothing wrong with that, but don't expect others to overlook the signifigant advantages that the imports have, there is not one site that you have mentioned whether it is carpoint, jd power or any other site that has data showing the ranger is more reliable than either the frontier or the tacoma, they all show that the frontiers and tacomas are more reliable, you just can't overlook that. Let me correct one more thing here too, the lowest torque V6 in a compact truck is the ranger,
3.0l V6 192ft/lbs torque. And why are you afraid to answer the question about what you would say if lokki's experience was with a nissan or toyota?
have a nice day!
CNCMAN, welcome back. Haven't heard from you in quite sometime. How are sales for Nissan going? What I have read things have gone pretty flat for Nissan. The Xterra and Maxima are about Nissans only bright spots. And yes, the 3.0 does have the lowest torque. But you shot yourself in the foot, only 8 less than Nissan top of the line, high tech, multi-valve, cam mumbo jumbo. and 25ft/lbs less than the 4.0 and soon to have over 40ft/lbs less than the new 4.0 SOHC! Nice try CNCMAN.
I don't know if the 5-speed manual is all new or an improved version of the Mazda 5-speed. The OHV 4.0 was already pushing the limits of the Mazda 5-speed.
Nissan is also improving power with putting a supercharger on the 3.3L V6, which I believe is also available in 2001. Its output is in the area of 210hp and 240ft/lbs of torque.
Nissan's supercharger seems like a bit of a power "band-aid" to me. I hope they made other modifications to help the 3.3L handle all of the added stress from forced induction. I think that bumping up displacement (maybe close to 4L) and tuning the engine a bit would have been a wiser choice as far as long-term reliability. But, these are the differences between an American and a Japanese company. You just don't build/design large displacement engines in a country where a gallon of gas costs over $5.
I don't know what you have been reading lately, but if you look at autochannel.com the 3-2-2000 press release, you can see the facts. I'll give you a little taste here.
"21.8% increase in sales. Nissan's strong sales momentum continues." Lead by consistently strong maxima and truck sales. truck sales up 61.7%, maxima up 49%, and all of this before I got the 2001 pathfinder which BTW is the most powerful V6 SUV! thank you very much. ANd the new sentra which is a very nice car, we have sold most of our original shipment already. Yea, things look really bad, VInce, I wonder where I will be working next month! Now I am having trouble understanding something Vince, so please explain, you get caught in an outright lie, and I shot MYSELF in the foot??? I don't get it. And that's OK VInce I know
why you haven't answered Loki's question, I think we all know what you would say. I thought maybe you would be man enough to give us a response though, but I guess I was wrong.
produced a compact truck that out ranked the Ford
Ranger in every category including but not limited
to reliability, quality, power, etc would you buy
it or would you still choose to buy ford given the outranking was proven and not debatable? Based on your previous statements you would still choose Ford by way of your experiences and the name even though something better was available for an equivalent price? Probably. Wouldn't that be a suprise if you still bought a ford instead of the other vehicle even if it had more TORQUE, HP, Features, and Reliability. Maybe you can answer everyones questions or leave the board.
to go out later and try to catch some fish!
#996787
exhibit loss of oil pressure accompanied by possible engine noise/damage
#996884
internal low end noise described as a diesel and/or marbles in a tin can rattle
there is also a recall on the speed control cable
recall#99509
No wonder Ford is behind the industry average in quality!