I judge a car/truck by how it feels to me when I drive it. I had a test drive of the '99 Ranger 3.0 and wasn't that impressed with the power. The fit and finish was better than my '94 B3000, but it didn't seem to have as much power. I bought my Frontier because the truck drove better to me and had better power. 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.
I like TORQUE! TORQUE is very important. Trucks need TORQUE to go. Vince like TORQUE really good. I is engineer too! You ain't no engineer, dufus! You need to go back to school and learn the difference between the words your and you're. What a bozo.
And we stoop to name calling. Usally when someone is backed into a corner, proved wrong they will fight back anyway they can, even if it means name calling. Specs do count, along with sales. Is ain't a word? bozo?
Hmm... I like how you ford guys quote your specs. Instead of spending all your time here at this site why don't you guys actually arrange some sort of competition with your friendly frontier owner? Go race a frontier or have a towing contest of some type.
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.
NO WAY did you race a 3.0 2WD and beat them. I have a friend with a 3.0 2WD and HAVE tested the 2.4 and NO WAY. AT 152HP and 192ft/lbs of Torque the Ranger will launch better and with the huge advantage of TORQUE will beat the 2.4. Now come off down your cloud. The 2.5 I will admit is a joke. 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.
Hey I own a 2.4L 5sp Frontier also but, no offense, I don't believe it could out-drag a 3.0L Ranger. I love my truck, but I didn't buy it for dragracing.
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?
All bickering aside, what's your honest opinion on the newly styled Frontier and Tacoma? I saw pictures of both at recent auto shows and I liked them both. Then again, I may be partial since I've owned both. The Tacoma frontend shows very strong Ford influence IMHO - grill/headlights look to me like a scaled down F250.
It's not that the Ranger couldn't tow more, check out the automatic side. The American Manufactures are intelligent enough not to tell you to tow so much with the manual transmission.
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.
The new Frontier will be a huge improvement over the present. Nissan listened to the critics and consumer. I read a new V6 with 240HP (didn't say torque specs) will be coming for the Pathfinder soon. The new Toyota looks like a Mazda B series truck in my opinion. Toyota took out all those bulges and bends in the sheet metal and went to a more contemporary truck look. 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.
Isn't the new Ranger going to have the 4.0L SOHC V6 finally? Sounds like the compact muscle trucks competition is heating up again. For a while now the full-size reduxes were stealing all the limelight. I like it.
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 - ????
Just returned from my Sister's. Here new ranger was built in January 2000. When she test drove it, she said it had more power than the other couple of 4.0 L Rangers. Could it be that Ford has begun dropping the 200 HP version into the Rangers?
Now I remember why I haven't been in here for awhile! But I still see the same tired faulty logic arguments thrown around. Let's look at some facts, I will give you my interpretation, and others can give theirs and I will go away for awhile again and come back in a couple of months to see the same thing. But seriously, neither of these trucks "suck" as bad as some folks say. There are several trucks out there for different tastes, and often the argument comes down to making about as much progress as debating 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.)
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.
Spoken like a true salesperson cncman. You need to visit all the other sites here at Edmunds with folks having troubles with their Froniters, airconditioner, transmissions, idle, electrical.... Frontier sales haven't been that great either. Every review I read, the V6 3.3 is weak, especially when the airconditioner is used.
Now I remember why I haven't been in here for awhile! But I still see the same tired faulty logic arguments thrown around. Let's look at some facts, I will give you my interpretation, and others can give theirs and I will go away for awhile again and come back in a couple of months to see the same thing. But seriously, neither of these trucks "suck" as bad as some folks say. There are several trucks out there for different tastes, and often the argument comes down to making about as much progress as debating 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.)
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.
I would like to know if anyone has taken their desert runner off road. Is it a worthy off roader.Is the toyota prerunner better? Which is better off road?
Just curious if anyone has towed a 2500lb+ trailer with the 4cyl Frontier and/or Ranger. The Frontier is rated 3500lb (5sp), this is much higher than the Ranger. The 4cyl Ranger is rated at 2200lb (auto). 3500lb does seem an awful lot for any 4cyl truck.
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.
Dig a bit deeper and you may be surprised. A Ford 3.0 is about $300 more than a 2.5, and when mated to a 5spd MPG is only about 2-3miles difference. And with the 3.0 you get a 152HP/192ft/lbs of torque! Plenty to pull your trailer. With the added tow package you can go up to 5K pounds too. Torque is what your after to pull your trailer not HP.
As the owner of a 1986 Nissan pickup, I am definately going to buy another Nissan. I have 276,500 miles and have had no major repairs. It is the original engine and tranny. It still gets 21 mpg. It doesn't burn oil and it still has enough pick up and go for what I need it for. More than that, although the owners manual does not suggest this, I have successfully towed a trailer weighed down with over two tons of rock and I was able to keep up with traffic on the freeway. So don't tell me about how great the Ford is. I have many friends with Rangers and B Series and they have nothing but trouble.
Vin - I doubt you'll ever convince satisfied Frontier owners about how great a Ranger is supposed to be. A Ranger is faster than a Frontier. Wow. Who buys a truck a beat somebody out at stoplight? Frontier has demonstrated that overall you get much more bang for your buck vs. a Ranger or an S-10 or whatever. CNCMAN's post pretty much sums it up. All the options you want, plus a fantastic off road vehicle - not to mention it's anything but a Ford. Personally, I have had nothing but problems with every Ford I've ever owned. I got tired of spending Saturday afternoons at the repair shop. Now I go where I please in a Frontier and it drives like you're on a cloud. Just .02 from a happy Frontier (and unhappy Ford) owner.
I agree that the Frontier is a better value overall - heck, I own a '99 Ext. cab XE. However, I would have to say honestly that if you are going to do a lot a towing, a V6 automatic (from anybody) would be a better candidate.
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.
I feel the same way about Nissans, I would never own one. I have had great reliability out of my Fords over the years and see no reason to change. 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.
And all the Ranger owners can congratulate each other on all that torque when they meet on Saturday afternoons at the local repair shop. But hey, if you love your Ranger then that's all that counts. I'll stick with anyone but Ford.
This is one ranger owner who has not had his engine miss a beat even once in 53000 miles. Let's not make generalizations here unless you can guarentee me you won't find any posts about Fronteir problems in the whole site. Or are you just basing your judgement on the stereotype that all domestics are pos and imports are gold.
I had to rangers, a 95 and a 98, the 95 was a lemon, A/C out, electronics, engine needed replacement 1,000 miles out of warranty, I figured it was just a bad one, so I bought a 98 4.0l XLT, mistake #2, with about 18,000 miles the engine started making a dieseling noise while it was running,and the rear end started leaking I had to fight Ford to get this taken care of.I am not rough on my vehicles and there are several other posts in the ranger 4.0l engine problems topic about the same problems, I wish I had read those first. Well enough was enough, as soon as it was out of the shop, I traded it in on a desert runner, I am so much happier with this truck, it rides better, is quieter, feels more powerful on the road, sits up nice and high, and I got alot more equipment for only a little more than I paid for my ranger 2 years ago! And it has to be more reliable than that POS ranger I had, I was ready to forgive ford for one lemon, anyone can make one, but two in a row was enough for me, I am not looking back and know I will be happy with my new Frontier, btw you can use that extra 25lbs of torque to pull that ranger in the shop! Ford qulaity job one, my fanny.
I'm basing on my own opinion/knowledge that Ford can't build a tranny for one, and that Ford reliability is horrid. Not saying that Nissans (or any other car) won't have a few problems, but after reading the problems on here that all of the Explorer and Ranger owners have posted, it just further supports my belief that Ford isn't worth a dime. I'll never own another as long as I live. From a carpoint review -
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
I have an answer for you on the satisfaction end. When I bought my 95, I was actually going to buy a tacoma because I liked the looks, then a guy at work that owned nothing but fords for the last 15 years talked me into looking at the ranger and said it would be a good truck, after I had all of the problems with the 98 I asked him if it was unusual and what kind of luck he has had, he told me he has had some kind of problem with almost all of his fords, but it was worth putting up with for the privellage of driving a ford! So even with all of those problems, if you asked him, he would say he is still satisfied, I just don't get it. TO be truthful, I don't know what kind of service I will get out of my desert runner, but I am happier than I was in my ranger even before the problems, and another guy at work has an 89 datson truck with over 240,000 miles! he has only done brakes, 1 clutch and a starter, and treats the truck like hell. So if that is an indication, I should still be very happy, besides the Nissan would have to be really really lousy to match my rangers.
vince I don't know who you think you are, but I think the fact that ford sold me TWO lemons in three years probably gives me the right to bash them, you sound like the guy that said I should put up with the trouble for the privellage of owning a ford. Why is it that when I buy two lemon rangers, it was my bad luck, and I can't generallize about fords like that, but when someone complains about the engine idle in a frontier, you say it is proof that all the frontiers are bad. Tell me this and be honest, what would you say if I was in here and said I bought two nissans or two toyotas in three years and they were both lemons, are you really going to tell me that you would say it was just my bad luck 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.
Didn't you guys hear, if your engine has less torque than mine, then you are loser. Torque is everything. Torque makes me big and strong. When I dream I dream TORQUE. When I take a dump I read TORQUE. TORQUE IS ALL. I live for TORQUE.
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.
The following link from MSN under the SATISFACTION category says Rangers have reliability problems. Sorry. But that right there is all I need to hear. Ford id known for bad transmissions and reliability problems in gerneral. Check out all the Explorer woes on here. Yikes!
The same can be said for you. Why do you put me down when I have had great reliability with Fords, along with my family and some friends? I state the facts about Torque and get hammered also. Torque does matter in a truck if you haul, tow, or pull with it and use it as a real truck. 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.
As far as displacement. The 2.5 is sold purely for CAFE reasons and as a very light duty engine. The Nissan 2.4 has 143HP and 152ft/lbs of torque. The 2.5 has 119HP and 146ft/lbs of torque. The 3.0 Ford offers has 152HP/192ft/lbs of torque, the 4.0 has 160HP and 225ft/lbs of torque. Why does Nissan still put the 2.4 in its 4x4's? I have read over and over this engine is too weak for a 4x4 and can barely pull itself! much less pull a boat/small camper or haul anything up a steep grade or trail.
Sells like gangbusters - despite owners complaints about reliability problems. I don't mean to bash you, Vince, I'm rather just offering some advice to Skip who asked about the trucks in this thread a ways back (if he's still reading). That advice would be to do your research on Ford's and their reliability ratings before plunking down and hard earned $$$. 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.
Vince8 wrote: How does it feel being owned by Renault?
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 don't believe it Vince, Loki tells people about how ford sold him TWO lemons in three years, have you ever heard of that in here with Nissan, No, and you are going to tell him he shouldn't bash ford! Why not answer his question, what would you say if instead of ford he said nissan sold him two lemons? Would you still say that he shouldn't generalize about nissan and it was just his bad luck? yea right. Let's see I think I have it figured out, owner opinions on a ranger only count if they are good, and they only count on a nissan if they are bad, that's real good logic. And how is it that ford can build a truck as "perfect" as yours and then the two loki bought? Is that the kind of consistency you want in a manufacturer. 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 notice how you have a lack of support for Ford? At least get some help to bash all other trucks in the Ranger class. All trucks has their own advantages and disadvantes, but to say Rangers are the only truck for everyone is plain stupid. I spent alot of time choosing my truck and I didn't have to spend an arm and a leg to get what I wanted. You may not like my Fronier but it fits my life style and my needs. I am certain that you could entertain me with an infinite number of reasons why a ranger is better than everthing else, but by all means please do. I on the other hand cannot give enough reasons you why you should buy any else. Honestly, if another manufacturer 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? 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. You would stick with what you like. Most of the people in this forum have not had the superb experiences of yourself and they have chosen to go elseware. I have had excellent experiences with my Nissans and if I hear good things about other vehicles I might decide to purchase it. But I do not discount everything else because I have so much love for my truck. I do not tell everyone they should buy a nissan because of this and that, I tell them to make their own decision and that I am satisfied with my decision to go with Nissan. Vince, you have admitted Fords have had their little problems and little disadvantages, but if you could just be open to other trucks no matter their comparison to your truck we all wouldn't be bashing you.
I know I have been labled a Ford fanatic, a Toyota/Nissan hater, basher. I have admitted Fords have their problems, they are not perfect. I have never heard a Nissan or Toyota owner say this about their products? Another site to go check out is www.alldata.com. There are plenty of TSBS for BOTH Ranger and Frontier. Why is it when someone likes Ford or has had great reliability with Ford it just can't be? 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!
Actually Vince, I do believe that you and several other owners of rangers have had very reliable trucks, and for you guys I would not recommend anything else, and it seems like there are alot of 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!
Yes, the Ranger is coming this summer/fall with a 205hp/240ft/lbs of torque SOHC V6. Available with a 5spd or 5spd automatic. 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.
The SOHC 4.0 will be offered in the Ranger beginning in 2001. It will produce 205hp and 235ft/lbs of torque and be available with the 5-speed automatic or a new, heavy-duty 5-speed manual.
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 am one of the lucky. I have a 91 2.5L shortbed I purchased to drive 100 mi. round trip to work daily that has given me little or no trouble. No internal work at all , major work done was two new coil packs. Other than that general tune ups and REGULAR oil changes (3000 mi.)At 223000 mi. I do believe I got my $8800(otd) worth. I am still driving it an I will post it when I have to put a timing chain on.
I am one of the lucky. I have a 91 2.5L shortbed I purchased to drive 100 mi. round trip to work daily that has given me little or no trouble. No internal work at all , major work done was two new coil packs. Other than that general tune ups and REGULAR oil changes (3000 mi.)At 223000 mi. I do believe I got my $8800(otd) worth. I am still driving it an I will post it when I have to put a timing chain on.
Hey there Vince, I just couldn't stay away from you long enough. I am glad to see we are finally tlaking about something different instead of going round and round. (well except for the torque thing). THat's why I am back.
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.
Honestly, if another manufacturer 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.
Man, I did not want to start a fight, I just wanted to vent a little of my frustration and warn others about my experience with ford, what it comes down to, is ford sold me two lemons in three years, I got fed up and bought a Nissan and am completely satisfied, and my experience is not unique or even unusuall, if I would have done more research before I bought the ford instead of going on the opinion of a ford nut, I would not have bought the rangers. I think that what I went through is important and others should know about it, if this happened with anyone else, in any other situation, I am sure they would be doing the same thing as me and I don't get why the ford guys are coming down on me. Well, I am going to go drive my desert runner, BTW, I did pull my friends boat with my Nissan yesterday, with the trailer and all of the stuff in it, I would say it was around 4,000 lbs, it did not feel under powered and had plenty of power on the highway, which is what you need the extra hp for, not the torque. But I do admit I never towed anything with my ranger, so maybe it would have been OK too, I don't know. You guys have fun fighting, I am going to go out later and try to catch some fish!
here's the TSB on the ranger engine problems loki had; #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!
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!