Lets gang up on Vince! I have given facts, engine sizes, HP/Torque, along with payload/and towing. Gooba keeps discounting the engines, and saying they don't matter??? Is this because he has come to the reality that the 3.3 is a weak high tech joke? I am still searching and finding lots of good stuff about the Nissan vs Ford suspension, this is going to be good. I am also having a heck of a time finding a HP/Torque curves for the 3.3 vs the 4.0. Still also searching on the truck bed issues. Gooba, you question my offroad ability and knowledge. I have posted pics of both my truck, proof I live in the NW, and the Ranger in action. I have been offroading now for over 10 years, I know what I am talking about. I live in the NW and visit the Cascade Range quite often. Ever heard of MT Hood? or St Helens? or Rainer? or Jefferson? What kind of Mountain ranges do you have? No I havn't done anything to my Ranger as far as suspension goes. All I have done is add the P265x75R16 all terrain tires. I do however have the offroad pkg, that offers a heavier duty shock, limited slip diff, 3.73 gearing, skidplates. Sales do matter as much as many of the Nissan owners like to discount it. The Ranger outsells the Frontier about 5 to 1 still. Why? Why does it also continue too after all these years? I can tell you why. The Ranger offers more room in its supercabs, nicer interior, more engines, more choices, period. This is why the Ranger has stayed the number one selling compact truck for 13 years straight! Where is Nissan? they are not even in the top 20 and never have been! The Consumer rules, and makes the choice. I'll be back soon with more information, believe me. See you in the hills.
vince,I have to applaud you.The last response was the best I have seen from you yet.so,let us see if we can debate. The reason I said the engines do not matter is because not all of us bought our trucks with hp/torque specs as a major determining factor.I did not buy my CC thinking I sould get more power,if that was the case then I would have bought the Dakota with the 5.9L.The 3.3L engine in my truck has enough power for what I will need to do with this truck.I do not consider it a weak joke,as well as I am sure other people who purchased theirs found the engine to be adequate.There are other factors that need to be considered other than hp/torque numbers or you would have bought the Dakota also. I questioned your off road ability and experience because you haven't showed any.The closest thing I saw was when you said you did not experience wheel hop.That was something that you attested to,it was not something you found on the internet based on what Joe reviewer had to say.When you posted on the CC vs Sport Trac board you had no credibility to make the statements you made.Here,those same statements although difficult at times,would be credible if they were yours and not you parroting somebody else.When we compare the Frontier and the Ranger your observations,opinions and experiences with your Ranger carry weight because you believed enough to buy that Ranger.You invested your time and money,so you have a valid stake in this discussion.You said you are gathering info that is great,but tell me why I am wrong.I gave you what I thought based on my experience,and observations.If you have been doing this for 10 years and you know what you are talking about,tell me from you not from somebody else who has no stake in this.They did not put their money where their mouth is. vince,why do sales matter?I know it was not a factor in my decision.Was it in yours?Why would the sales figures be a large factor in your decision to buy your Ranger?Your last part of your response makes me wonder which Ford sales brochure you got that out of. As far as my area,I do not have mountains.I have alot of rocky terrain and alot of sand with open desert.I can go play in the sand dunes,or run in the small ranges here.That is one of the points I was trying to make,not all of us run up the mountains,just like you do not play in the sand.
Nice to see you adding your experiences to the discussions. This all we ever asked of you. I still disagree with you that the nissan 3.3L is a joke. The engines in the Le Car, mid-80's escort, Yugo and Hyundais were all jokes( not trying to start another debate/topic just making a point).
I would like to ask you some questions, in your repsonses you keep bringing up sales figures for ford. Since I am in sales and I am also the regional marketing director for our dealership I am intrigued why a consumer would use a company's sales figures in their basis for buying a vehicle. Remember our earlier posts on sales figures? These don't tell the whole story of a product's integrity, you should know that. In fact generally speaking, high sales in certain products means low priced cheaply made product. Sometimes high sales for an item might mean that the company designed that product to be a 'loss leader'. I have some questions for you or any of the rest of you. Why are sales figures important to you? What kind of vehicle did you have before your first ranger? Did sales figures factor into your buying decision when you got your ranger? What brand of truck would you consider if Ford went bankrupt this afternoon and you had to buy new(nice try, there were no more ford trucks available on the lots this afternoon...cncman bought them all...hehehe)? Would you test drive the competing brands? How would you test drive these trucks, hopefully you would take them off-road? Anyway I am interested in why the sales figures are so important.
mahimahi,I did not look at sales figures.Never have and never will.The popular sales does not mean that the vehicle will fill the needs the I have when I am looking to purchase one.Some of those popular vehicles that sold well were basically run them and then throw them away. I test drive everything that falls within the parameters of what I need that vehicle to do.I also put them through the same course so that I can compare them on equal terms. It is apparent that the US consumer is limited to the types and configuration of vehicles that are available.The CC I just bought is not the same vehicle that is available on the international market.The configurations and models are so diverse.The Ranger may be popular,but it is popular in the US or North America.
(1) price/availability of replacement parts and cost of service - the more trucks sold, the easier/cheaper it is to get repairs done or do myself
(2) aftermarket following - those crazy aftermarket guys make more fun mods for my truck
(3) dealership quantity/location - pleanty of dealerships around for me to get the best deal possible and service for my truck if needs be
(4) profitable company - the better the company is doing, the lower the cost of the end product, the more money pumped into R&D for innovations on future offerings I might be interested in
(5) resale - if nobody has heard of some particular make, they're not going to be paying top dollar to get it (see price of repairs/parts)
(6) availability - it's sooooo much easier to get the exact truck you want with the options you want in very little time, not so with lower volume manufacturers
I'm not saying that they're the basis of my purchase decision. But, they do have an effect on it. I wrote off the Frontier when I bought my truck in '98 because there was one dealer in my area (who didn't have a positive rep) who wouldn't make a deal with ya. So, off I went.
I couldn't tell you which truck I'd buy right now. But, I'd have one helluva fun time finding out.
vince,I have a question.I realize that Ford does put out some good vehicles,and I know how you like to bash Nissan and have been very vocal about the Nissan/Renault cooperative.What I want to know is how Ford fits into this?
The Nissan Terrano II 4WD is manufactured in Spain and is also sold in Europe as the Ford Maverick.
That was taken from an article about Nissan and this vehicle.Why is Ford relabeling a Nissan vehicle?I thought this was interesting.
cthompson21,I agree with your motivations.Your pointa are well taken and I had not looked at it that way.Thanks.
I read in one of those Renault/Nissan articles about Ford using a Nissan-built engine in one of their vehicles. The car companies of today have a lot of ties. One of them going under would probably cause shockwaves in the auto industry and ultimately hurt the end consumer with fewer choices and innovations.
Please don't put words into my mouth! Never did I say competition is bad. I believe if it weren't for the Toyota's, Honda's and Nissan's, Ford, GM or Dodge would have never improved and we would be stuck with garbage for vehicles. More information coming on the Nissan/Renualt merger/takeover, whatever you want to call it. Just a blurb from todays paper I thought I would share with you. Ford total U.S. vehicle sales rose by 12.1 percent from a year ago, with total car sales increasing by 15.4 percent and truck sales by 9.9 percent. Not bad for a company that is supposed to build inferior, bad quality junk huh? The consumer makes the final choice.
I believe I read in one of those Nissan/Renault merger articles that either 1998 or 1999 was one of Nissan's worst sales years in quite some time. So, it seems like there's only room to go up or out. But, credit to the new Frontier, Maxima, and Sentra for the boost. Probably more too if Nissan ever does come out with a new Z-car (especially if it's fun AND affordable).
Sorry,cncman,I was hoping to get you involved in this.cthompson21,you are entirely correct in what you said.I mainly posted that to show vince that from a little information he should not come to an all encompassing conclusion.There may be more to the story.
DOes Nissan count Infiniti in its overall sales figures or is Infiniti treated as a whole separate deal? I hear the new QX4 is getting good reviews. Way outta my price range though. It looks like all the new luxury model SUVs are incorporating all sorts of tracking/GPS/instant help/video mapping/and whatever else in their vehicles. I don't know about you all, but I have yet to ever need satellite tracking while I'm driving. Course, I lived without a cell phone for 30 years too until I broke down and got one last year. :-)
I gotta say that I'm really disappointed, in Vince8. It's too bad that he's got tunnel vision and proves to be a truck owner with very little experience in anything that has to do with trucks. Otherwise he might be able to add something to these topics, that could be useful. I gave him(as have some of you in the past) a chance to share with us HIS OWN experiences, HIS OWN knowledge and HIS OWN explanation of how he made choices in truck selection, but he completely blew it! Simply talking about what this newspaper says, what this magazine says, blah, blah, blah...I will say this though, Vince may not know trucks, but damn that boy can sure read the hell out of an article! We're all real proud of you and your ability to find links, which so far support nothing that you say. Furthermore, you shown to us that you cannot answer any question(s) directed to you, don't worry there aren't any questions for you in this post. After this Vince8 ignore my responses and I will respecfully do the same for yours.
cthompson21 thanks for your input to my earlier questions. You make good points. The point about the aftermarket goodies makes the most sense to me to take sales into account. I like to customize my vehicle a little just to differentiate from the norm. I was thinking about this point a little and wondering how the aftermarket is going to be effected by all the choices the a consumer is getting these days. What I mean is take Ford for example, look at all the options that you can get on your truck just from the factory. Steps into the cab, running boards,nerf bars, power back windows, sunroofs, bedliners, tonnue covers, hitches, bigger tires and so on. But I know what your point was, because I was in that predicament with my 1994 S-10 SS. They made an aftermarket turbo and supercharger for the 4.3L but not mine because it was a Vortec( I understand that they do now, but they're 3yrs too late).
gooba, I'd say I am like you I don't take published sales figures into account when I'm shopping for a vehicle. It just doesn't matter to me, in fact it actually might discourage me. I like to be a little different than everybody else(consequently this is where aftermarket items come in, help differentiate a little).
I would say I like different.My CC is Solar Yellow XE with a snug top shell that matches and I had the decals on the side changed to 4x4x4 off road.It matches the one on the Nissan web site and I had been trying to get that since Nov and finally had it made.I can sure pick it out in the parking garage.I don't really have to remember where I parked.Just the general area.
I agree with you cygnusx1, I think that between a GPS beeping, phone ringing, music playing on the radio and the pager going off one could get quite bewildered. Hopefully there won't be an emergency vehicle needing to get by.
Besides, isn't that why they make maps and have AAA to help plan a trip. VBG
LOL I think I see you from here, don't worry I have my sunglasses on...hehehe. I haven't seen a C.C. with a topper on. I've seen a hard tonnue. BTW, I now understand why you don't like the roof rack. If you have a snugtop I agree, it might look weird I'd have to see it.
My other vehicle is an SVT Contour. It is one of only about 15,000 vehicles made from '98-'00. I've only seen 2 or 3 other SVTour's in my area (over-populated SW Chicago suburb) over the past year or so.
As for the truck, I have yet to see a reg-cab, deep emerald green, 4x4 Ranger. When I first put in my purchase request of my first color choice (a sort of bergundy color), only 5 4x4's had been made in that color in '98.
My father has just purchased the ultimate in Ranger color exclusivity. It's a ext-cab, 4x4 in mandarin autumn orange or something like that. It's pretty much a rusty pumpkin looking color. He also put a custom-painted topper to match on the truck. It sounds a bit weird, but it looks very nice. Maybe I'll post some pics or something...
Later, -C
p.s. I love that solar yellow color. I was looking at a Nissan CC 4x4 with such a coat. Very nice. That is a definate must for my next vehicle (a summer fun 3rd car convertible).
cyg; usually the infiniti sales are seperate from those figures posted there, I think this is the case.
Cthompson; I am really glad to see you more active now, it is great having an intelligent oppossing view, so far you are the only one that I think can actually propose a compelling argument from the ford view. One thing though about the sales you mentioned, don't forget that higher sales can hurt resale too. Just look what happens when a ford taurus or regular contour runs through an auction, there might be 150-200 of those running from FMC, and all of the rental agencies, so the prices really go down.
One thing I have noticed, and the point was alluded to before, is why are almost all of these comparisons/debates/rants about either towing or 4x4ing, when those activites are vastly in the minority of what people do with these compact trucks, most people buy a 4cylinder 4x2 and use it for commuting and light hauling on the weekend. Maybe we can get some point of views on this aspect since this is most likely what people will be doing with the trucks. Me for one, even if it was shown that the ranger or some other truck is a better off-roader, it wouldn't matter to me, I would never do that, I still would have what I bought.
cthompson21, Other than tinting the windows, I don't know what else I'm going to do to the truck to set it off. It's a lease so my mods are limited. I think I'm going to get that bed extender, I didn't like it at first but I'm warming up to it. I also didn't care for the roof rack or nerf bars(like gooba) when I got my truck, now I wouldn't have the truck without them. My truck is the Alpine Green, I've only seen one in that color(I know there are many)and it was a 2-wheel drive XE. In fact mine is the only 4x4 C.C. I've seen in this whole area(Tampa Bay), I know more will come as time goes on.
cncman, I agree with you that most people drive their trucks everyday more on pavement and unloaded than towing and 4 wheeling. To defend my towing posts on the other topic(ST v. C.C.) I was trying to point out one difference between those two trucks. But it got sidetracked into transmissions and so forth. But actually in my opinion, this is where the real differences between trucks shine through by their 'truck' capabilities. I personally overall spend more time driving my truck like a car than I do hauling or towing or offroading. A couple of reasons I chose the Nissan Crew Cab was because I had to have 4 doors, it rides a stiffer than the other brands than I drove(which I happen to like, I missed the 'truck ride' w/my Acura)I'm not saying that you need a kidney-belt to drive them but you guys know what I'm saying. I got the 4x4 because I do hunt in Ga. and sometimes pull boats, it can help up a steep ramp. But because most of us do mostly on-road driving, I think it's interesting what people have to say about their experiences have been offroading. I've been offroading in older Nissans(when they were called Datsun) and Rangers but not the new ones. I haven't even been offroad in mine yet. So I have to ask you, what differences do you see between the trucks that made you get the version of truck that you got? I ask you this because I didn't look at the trucks in a 2 wheel drive point of view, which may mean that I overlooked an aspect of truck buying. I like learn from different points of views from differnt consumers.
Hey thanks. Same goes here. All of you Nissan owners seem to be very reasonable people to debate/discuss with. Not quite so on the Tacoma vs. Ranger board. The S10 vs. Ranger board is suprisingly civil too considering the long-heated Chevy vs. Ford debate.
The resale value on the Taurus and Contour is quite a pity. It seems that's what happens when a vehicle is used extensively in rental fleets. The market becomes flooded with <50,000 mile vehicles that have been abused. It's difficult to tell a cherry from a lemon. At least the price cutting isn't quite so with the SVTour. Anybody taken a ride in one? It's the M3 (well, 2/3 of an M3) for the guy on the budget. In any case, I don't plan on selling mine any time soon (or possibly ever).
I would estimate that at most I have been hauling or 4-wheeling (4wd on in snow or off-road) maybe 1,000 of the 21,000 on my truck. That's less than 5% of my driving time.
In reality, I could easily get buy with a 3L manual with a limited slip differential rather than my 4L 4x4 open differential. I tow a few thousand pounds of snowmobiles/gear up to Wis. a coupla times a year. I just like the look of the 4x4 so much more. It's nice knowing that you're not gonna get stuck in your driveway either (happened to me twice in my previous 3L 2wd auto Ranger).
That brings up another point. You can now get a "Trailhead" Ranger. It's 2wd with the looks of a 4wd truck (fogs, fender flares, etc...). Nissan has got those, right? I thought they have some sort of prerunner.
Strangely enough, I jumped back into a truck a few years back as a commuter vehicle. For some reason, a car just didn't feel quite right to me.
If anyone is wondering, my wife and I have sort of a strange deal with our vehicles. We own a '98 Ranger 4x4 and a '99 SVTour, but neither of us consider either one mine/her "primary" vehicle. I usually leave first in the morning and just jump in the one I feel like that day. I probably drive the truck a hair more than the car, though.
But, back on topic. I enjoy driving my truck as a commuter vehicle. I really like the interior ergonomics. Power is more than ample (especially with the KKM Tru-Rev and Gibson cat-back). The auto tranny is a lot easier on the legs on the horrible, horrible, horrible stop & go traffic here in Construction-Land, er... Chicago.
In short, I'll probably always have a truck, whether it be a Ford, Nissan, Chebby, Dodge, Toyota, etc...
Well Mahi, it's kinda of an interesting story why I ended up with my truck, (well maybe not, but I am kind of boring!) I always was a car person, especially sports cars, I had a celica, 240sx,integra, plus an accord, mg, fiat, I have been working for Nissan since 94, and I always thought about a truck, but I couldn't justify it. Then my girlfriend and I got a house together and I started thinking more about a truck for all of the yard projects on the weekend and we started going to the beach more too and cars aren't that good there, (esp. low sportscars).
This was right around 97, there were no frontiers yet, the nissan trucks were still just unofficially called hardbodies. I was impressed that I always had so many people that had really abused their hardbodies and put alot of miles on it and were in to buy another one or folks that were traditionally buyers of other makes and they bought their son a used nissan truck for school and he really put it through the ringer and it never let them down. But when I seriously looked at the hardbodies, I was hesitant, it didn't have alot of convenience features I was used to in cars, didn't have the handling or refinement I was used to in the sports cars. Then the frontier came out, we got to go to a comparison drive with the tacoma & ranger and I got to see how it handled and did with a load, and how comfortable it was and I saw the nicer features, cupholders, it sat up higher and so on. It seemed like Nissan had made the truck for me, I decided that I would wait until we got a used one on the used car lot, just to save a bit of money, then Nissan had the 4th of July sale and had a really good rebate and I saw what the used Nissans were going for and it was only about $3-400 for a new one with the rebate.
Needless to say I got the new frontier XE 5spd x-cab. That was summer of 98, I have 21,000 miles on it so far, no problems, and I am very happy with the truck. It is comfortable, economical, I haved pulled with it a couple of times, and have had the bed loaded down helping friends move, etc. Now I am completely sold on trucks. I live in the texas gulf coast, so I don't see snow, there aren't any mountains, and the 4x2 sits high enough to go on the beach anywhere comfortably, it is usually just me driving back and forth to work 5 minutes away, plus hauling bags of dirt, lumber etc. The only other truck I would have considered was the tacoma because of my experience with toyota, but I did not see anything worth the difference in price. So I was mainly interested in a 4cylinder that could do alot of work and still be economical, reliable and comfortable enough for a daily driver, for me the frontier won out, plus the low price, extra goodies like fender flares, higher stance, 15"alloys, dividers in the bed and the biggest bed really were just gravy. Pus the fact that it has the same 2.4l engine that was in my 240, (sometimes I close my eyes and imagine for a minute I am back in it!)Well, sorry if this was too long, but I think most folks choose a compact trucks for the same reasons as me and this info is important, thanks for listening.
Yeah, Nissan has a "Prerunner", it's the Dessert Runner. But I don't think you can get one with a regular cab like the Ford Trailhead Ranger. The dessert runners look just like the 4x4s unless you look at the sticker on the back.
I haven't gone away!!! Its spring time, I coach soccer along with volunteer to help low income older folks clean, paint, mow, whatever their homes@!! I am not glued to this PC 10 hours a day like some of you seem to be. I have some links written down and believe me I will find more. The reason I bought my Ranger over a Fronter: Frontier is ugly, no character, frumpy styling. No stepside offered. Frontier interior is cheap. Frontiers 3.3 had no Torque! More aftermarket engine parts for Ranger. More aftermarket parts for Ranger period! Kingab version of Ranger much larger than Frontier. And..... My last Ranger lasted me 96K miles with NO PROBLEMS. I saw no reason to change. What truck questions do you have that you think I know nothing about? Why haven't you tried to find torque curves for the 3.3 and 4.0? Why does Nissan need to supercharge its 3.3 in order to meet the same HP and Torque as the normally aspirated 3.4 of Toyota and the new 4.0 of Ford?? Where is the 5spd automatic that Nissan offers? For grins I made a trip down to the Nissan dealer again just to see a new Nissan CC. No way can you tell me these are nicer than a Sport Trac! The interior plastics were cheap, cheap, cheap. Fit/finish were subpar to Sport Trac. Same on the Frontiers! Seats were thin, carpet thin. I can't see how you can sit here and tell me the interior of the Frontier/or Frontier CC are better than a Ranger XLT or a Sport Trac. NO WAY.
vince,I gotta say at least you came back with an opinion.I cannot find fault as to your reasons for buying your Ranger.You felt strongly enough to put your money down and buy it.Now,you must take into account that people who bought their Frontiers may have the same opinions about the Ranger.I thought the Ranger was ugly,with no styling with a cheap interior.The aftermarket parts availability is true,although an argument could be made from your statement that there are not alot of Nissan aftermarket engine parts because there is no demand for them.If there is no demand,then maybe they do not break as often as the Ford.My last Nissan lasted 380,000 miles when I turned it over to a family member and it is still running strong.It has not had any problems.
You asked what truck questions do we have that we think you know nothing about.That is easy.HOW ABOUT THE ONES YOU DO NOT ANSWER?You still have not answered the previous posts.Reading and comprehension problems again or you have not found the link yet to support your position?It is apparent that you are unable to give your own answer in the majority of this discussion. WE never asked for the torque curves for both engines. The hp/torque specs were stated for the 3.3L and your response was the specs for the 4.0L and how high the specs were in comparison.I asked for the spec of the 4.0L at the same rpms as the spec on the 3.3L.YOU SAID you were going to find it.NOW, you want someone else to find it?That is pretty gutsy on your part. For someone with your "EXPERIENCE" you sure seem to be lacking.It has not come out yet.I have serious doubts that it ever will.
Vince, glad to see you are contributing something to your local community, because you sure don't seem to waste it here. Vince you need to learn the difference between fact and opinion, facts are thing like, frontier has a bigger bed than ranger, frontier has better reliability than ranger, ranger offers a bigger less powerful engine than frontier, frontier has a longer warranty than ranger, things like that. Opinions are this engine is weak, this interior is cheap, this styling is frumpy etc. The opinions do count somewhat if the other person you are talking too shares your opinion, but not if they don't.
I am glad you have some links, I know you are gathering ammunition, but maybe you can give us a sample of something useful while you are hiding out, oops, I mean busy.
Ok you say there are more aftermarket parts for the ranger, this my be the case, but how many more? which sites have you been to looking for frontier aftermarket parts? I highly doubt you have been to any, you are just taking someone elses opinion and stating it as your own. I know for my frontier, I have no problems getting, bedliners, cargo nets, brush guards, step rails, bug shields, window louvers, taillight covers, lift kits, superchargers, performance parts (steve millen designed too). SO I don't know what else I would need. And actually I am not even considering more than a bedliner and maybe a bug shield.
Ok, how much larger is the ranger supercab than the frontier king cab? I assume you mean inside right? Well if the frontier is wider with more headroom, where is the ranger larger? I know oyu mentioned a larger cargo area before, but how comfortable is anyone in either X-cab? And why does the ranger put that stupid console with the cupholders in the rear? that wipes out any room advantage and makes it difficult to put larger items back there.
I also love how when someone mentions the 4cylinder comparison, you always say, well it's only this much more for the 3.0l V6, but don't mention that you have to spend more money to get the 4.0l to get the features you brag about, like the 5spd tranmission, you also can't get, cold weather package, flareside, XLT sport package, limited slip, 4 doors and alot of other things too. So you brag about all of the options available to ranger buyers, but what that really is saying is that, you can't get the good stuff unless you buy the top of the line model. want a sliding rear window? oh you have to pay for that, want bucket seats and a center console? Oh well you have to get this package, want 15" wheels oh, well you have to buy this package, want a cheesy 80 watt stereo? Oh well, oyu have to pay for that too. want body colored bumpers and mirrors, well you can only get that if you also get this other stuff you don't want. Want a torsion bar suspension? oh, oyu need to look at a 4x4. God, I have seen simpler forms from the IRS! You are right, there are more options on the ranger than the frontier, because the frontier comes with more stuff from the get go. And while you are asking where Nissan's 5spd auto is, where is ford's 4cylinder auto? Oh, that's right the 4cylinder ranger engine is a JOKE, it is too WEAK, with NO TORQUE to handle an auto trans. (but that is just my OPINION)
cncman,I gotta hand it to you,I could not have said it better.I do have a question for you.Why can't we get the diesel in the Frontier?It is available everywhere but here,it seems.
vince,an observation.You mentioned earlier that you was not glued to the pc 10hrs a day like some of us seem to be.Correct me if I am wrong,but for you to be looking for all of these links and all this information you would have to spend as much, if not more time on that then what you are saying a few of us spend on the pc.Keep plugging away vince,because of your brilliant analysis of these trucks and your intellectual prowess and mechanical expertise in explaining the difficult concepts that we seem to have trouble with,I am forced to look for and print your posts.The people I work with like what you have to say,and how you say it.But,I also have to print Bozo criminal of the day,and the Darwin awards.Think there might be a connection?I don't know,but I know they do laugh pretty heartily. vince,why did Ford not offer their Quad cab Courier here?It is not a bad looking truck.
Gooba, I wondered that myself, in 98, my dad went to france and they already had the Crew Cabs! I have no idea why they had them before us, especially since I thought they were all built in Tennessee. They had a turbo diesel in it, I really don't see that much demand for a compact diesel truck over here, but then I could be wrong, I just hardly ever get asked about it, also, maybe they can't get the emissions acceptable for the US requirements, but these are just guesses.
You might want to qualify one of your points with:
"The Frontier 3.3L has 10 more horsepower and 25 ft/lbs less torque than a Ranger 4L."
You've got two different engine design philosophies there. Calling one more powerful depends on what measure you thinks sets the standard. Keep in mind that horsepower is derived from torque.
The 2.5L in the Ranger is a lackluster performer. The $400 is well spent to upgrade to the 3L V6. You'll only suffer marginally with mpg. You'll get the towing, hauling, and performance benefits of a V6-equipped vehicle (most people here in the US seem to prefer V6's). And, you'll probably make up more than the initial $400 cost when you trade/sell the truck.
Maybe this will all change when Ford comes out with the new 2.3L I4 this summer, which is supposed to be more powerful AND economical than the 2.5L I4.
And, a new I5 is on the horizon too...
If you're really power hungry, the Cammer is coming in the 2001 Ranger. Only a few more months...
Cthompson, yes there are going to be alot of good choices out there soon, I always liked competition it only helps the consumer, also it seems manufacturers are increasing the frequency of design changes it seems like the average was maybe about 5 years before, now it seems closer to three, with several minor improvements along the way. I said more powerful because the 3.3 has more horsePOWER, they don't call it torque power, I think I know where you are going with the HP is torque derived statement, but I am not much of an engineer, maybe you could elaborate, also explain why if HP is torque derived, how can an engine with less torque have more HP? Just curious really, I am trying to understand your point. Just curious, how do you get most people prefer a V6 if most of the compact trucks are sold in 4cylinder flavors? Glad to see Ford is going to work on getting an acceptable 4cylinder out there, plus the OHC 6cylinder, of course with fords history of first year models it would probably be best to wait until the 2002 model, I saw a concept drawing of the new ranger in some magazine, I hope it looks better in person, I did not like the drawing, it looked to me like they cross bred a dakota and a ranger, and the attractive genes for both got tossed out the window, but I will have to wait and see it in real life, rarely do they look the same when they hit the streets.
First, I'm not quite sure if Ford is actually revising the styling on the 2001 Ranger. The Cammer has actually been around for a while. It was offered in the Explorer starting in 1997 or 1998, so first year bugs should be minimal. I'd be most wary of the I5 that is supposed to be out in a couple of years.
I can never remember the horsepower formula. It is something like:
horsepower = rpm / torque * 5850
Torque is the actual scientific measurement, while horsepower is derived to compare engine output to engine rpm.
I don't know if it's just in my area (Chicago), but it seems as if only around 25% of compact trucks on the road are 4 cylinders, the majority being Toyota and Nissan. I'd estimate that only 10% of the domestic compacts around here are 4 cylinders. My numbers are probably off, but I'd wager that 6 cylinder (or V8s if you want to include the Dakota) outnumber the 4 cylinder trucks in my area by a large margin.
I have an 88 ranger. I cant help but feel the new model the EDGE ranger looks sad. Its headlights look like they are crying and the front bumper looks like a thick lip. I dont want to have a sad pickup it looks as bad as those oval shaped Taurus cars that came out about 5 years ago. SOme real poor designers at Ford. Who wants a sad truck looks are important if it had a tail the tail would be on the ground> I want a pick up that has a waggity tale, and nice eyes and happy lips.
OK here's a good link I found talking about HP and torque and it gives the formulas, http://www.oddparts.com/acsi/defines/torque.htm#Torque now since the formula for horsepower is; hp=(ft/lbs*rpm)5250, and HP is a function of torque at a specific rpm, wouldn't this imply that the frontier has a more efficient use of torque because of its higher HP rating? If not please explain, and also how can you have a high hp, low torque vehicle like, let's say a honda S200? Also on why you see more V6's, I would imagine in CHicago you would see mostly 4x4's right? because of all of the snow etc. maybe this is it, because the 4x4 ranger only comes with a 6cyl, what do you think, were they 4x2 or 4x4? National sales averages are still heavily weighted for the 4x2 4cylinder.
THanks for the link Xena, I still don't like it, I think if Ford was going to copy the Dakota style, they should have done it earlier, that style is getting old.
Hmmm. Suckysucky thinks the 2001 Ranger looks sad. Cncman thinks it is a copy of the Dakota? Put the two together and you've got one sad Dakota. Personally, I think it is a happy truck with a strong family resemblance to the F-150. Oh well...
cncman,I copied this from a different board.It was what I posted when trying to answer fordsporttrac.I hope it helps.I did not want to start from scratch again.
Torque is the actual rotational force that is applied to the crankshaft.The manufacturers use a dynomometer to measure the rpm,and the load being applied to the engine.(There are numerous other measurements being taken,but for this we are concerned with only a couple).Let's start with the Nissan 3.3L. It rates at 170hp@4800 rpm and 200ft/lbs of torque @ 2800 rpm. They hooked the engine to the dyno and floored it.Took it to the max rpm and started applying a load to the engine.Let us say that floored with no load the engine ran at 7000 rpm,you would apply a load against the engine until the engine just starts to drop in rpm.You record this and keep applying additional load to drop the engine rpm down and you keep recording the load and rpm data.(You could also do this proceedure in reverse and work your way up in rpm).What you will see is a torque curve at various rpms.So,in the case of the Nissan engine,it produced the maximum torque of 200ft/lbs @ 2800 rpm. That was the best it was going to get.Below 2800 it was still building to reach its max torque and above 2800 rpm,the torque decreased.From these numbers we can then calculate the horsepower of the engine at various rpm ranges and you then get a hp curve. Nissan's peaked at 170hp @ 4800 rpm.The same applies here,lower than 4800 it still builds hp and after 4800 the hp drops off. So what we have is the max figures of the engine.The best it will do. Let's look at the Sport Trac. The 4.0L israted at 205hp@5000 rpm and 240ft/lbs of torque@4000 rpm.So,the same applies here,the engine reaches the best it will do at 4000 and 5000 rpms.The Ford engine puts out more hp but you have to run the engine to 4000 rpm.Comparing the Nissan,if you wanted to set up your shift points for the best power,because you would want to keep it in the peak power range,you would shift at 2800 rpm,the Ford at 4000 rpm. The advantage of the higher "max" numbers in the Ford is that it works best with alot of rpm in the engine and will run down the road alot faster than the Nissan,if the gearing is close to the same.You will still be able to accelerate down the road. The advantage of the lower "max" numbers of the Nissan is that it performs better where speed is not a factor,but power at a lower speed.If you like to off-road your vehicle,this is particularly useful because most of your speeds are 25 and below and you need your power there. That is why you look at the numbers as a guide in slecting the vehicle and power combinations that best apply to your individual preferences and expectations for the vehicle. When vince8 in his discussions brought up the hp/torque figures,I asked for the curve.I am turning my engine at 2500 rpm and doing 65mph,so I know that I am close to max on my torque curve which is great.What I wanted to know is what is the torque rating for the Ford at the same rpm.Is it the same,more or less?If most of my vehicle operation is within this range then I am getting the best performance out of my engine.If your
My extremely simple take on torque and horsepower when discussing it with a non-technical person is:
Torque is the feeling of being squashed into the seat immediately when you floor the accelerator.
Horsepower is waiting a few seconds for the engine to build enough revolutions to get the feeling of being squashed into the seat when you floor the accelerator.
For a truck, I want torque. And, pleanty of it at the lowest possible rpm. It makes towing my snowmobiles, hauling dirt, and tooling around town seem effortless.
For a car, I want both, but usually settle for horsepower. To get both, you're gonna be paying a lot in gas and insurance (a.k.a. V8, or SC-V6 power). My car makes merging on the freeway and cruising along at 100mph+ seem effortless.
Maybe the 4x4 thing has something to do with it. I'd estimate them to be a third or better of the compact truck population. The income level in the area probably also has something to do with it.
It's really easy to see the relationship between torque, horsepower, and displacement.
Higher displacement engines have more torque. If you're wondering, forced induction simulates higher volume by forcing more air/fuel into the combustion chamber. This would be the case of an engine like the 4L in the Ranger.
Lower displacement engines must rev higher to produce large amounts of power. The 2.0 in the Honda 2000 has to rev to 8300rpm to reach maximum horsepower!!! It only puts out 150ft/lbs of torque at an extremely lofty 7500rpm.
The 3.3L is somewhere in between.
I guess it all comes down to having power immediately or having to wait for it.
Just wanted to let you all know that I am back from Korea and back into my truck. It now has 27,240 worry free miles. Never been in the shop once and not a problem to complain about. A guy I work with owns a Ranger 4x4 and wants my step up rails but he can't have them besides they say Nissan on them. Wouldn't that look funny. I get great comments about my truck.
Nice to see that Vince is up to his old tricks. I guess he still can't find a Boys Club for Rangers. We still love ya Vince despite your opposition.
cthompson21, I was reading one of your earlier posts, about most of the trucks in your area(post 451). If I'm correct you said that most of the compacts that were 4cyl. were toyotas and nissans. I was thinking that maybe a reason for that could be that the foreign 4 bangers are more peppy. I know when I test drove the s-10, ranger, and Toyota(all 5-sp trannies and 2wd.)back in '94 I felt like the ranger and s-10 were too heavy feeling compared to the toyota. I don't know what the tech. differences were but its what I felt. I ended up getting a S-10 with the 4.3 Vortec. But anyway it's just a thought that maybe the American 4cyl engines in these trucks feel like they don't have the power not saying that they don't. Plus the upgrade to the V-6 may not be that expensive of an upgrade in the chevy or ford.
Those would be my thoughts. The 4-bangers in the Ford/Chevy/Dodge compacts are weak. An engine upgrade to a decent performing V6 is only a few hundred dollars. I believe the upgrade to a V6 for the foreign makes is more substantial, and their 4 cylinders are already decent powerplants.
I wanted to ask you a few more questions about your Gibson muffler. Sorry to be such a pain... When you installed it, did you change any of the pipe diameters into or out of the muffler? The reason I ask is that on my B3000, the pipe that comes out of the cat converter is fairly good size. I'm guessing 2" or so. It is bolted to the pipe that leads to the muffler. This pipe tapers down and is significantly smaller (maybe 1.5") than the cat pipe. Is there any reason to maintain these different size pipes that you know of? Seems like it would make sense to have that whole section the same 2" size. I don't know much about exhaust systems. Any input would be appreciated. Thanks...
Hey, no prob. Always glad to offer any knowledge I might have to another automotive enthusiast.
I believe that the exhaust tubing diamater going to the cat is 2.5". The Gibson cat-back maintains the 2.5" all the way on out.
BTW, a cat-back system replaces everything from the cat on back [hence the name]. I've heard that 2.5" diameter pipe to be the maximum size to use for the Ranger V6's to maintain low rpm torque.
I would HIGHLY reccommend this mod for any vehicle. You get a significant power increase, a beautiful exhaust note [rivals my SVTour], and a slight bump in mpg [maybe 1-2mpg with a light foot].
I installed a Catback in my 98' Frontier reg. cab last summer. It sounded great and I felt a little difference. A month ago I finally installed a K&N air filter which made a world of difference more power and great gas mileage. I drive 60% highway and was getting 25 - 27 mpg. The K&N bumped it up to 26 - 29 with the a/c on most of the time - I live in AZ. 35,000 trouble free miles.
Comments
I have given facts, engine sizes, HP/Torque, along with payload/and towing. Gooba keeps discounting the engines, and saying they don't matter??? Is this because he has come to the reality that the 3.3 is a weak high tech joke? I am still searching and finding lots of good stuff about the Nissan vs Ford suspension, this is going to be good. I am also having a heck of a time finding a HP/Torque curves for the 3.3 vs the 4.0. Still also searching on the truck bed issues.
Gooba, you question my offroad ability and knowledge. I have posted pics of both my truck, proof I live in the NW, and the Ranger in action. I have been offroading now for over 10 years, I know what I am talking about. I live in the NW and visit the Cascade Range quite often. Ever heard of MT Hood? or St Helens? or Rainer? or Jefferson? What kind of Mountain ranges do you have?
No I havn't done anything to my Ranger as far as suspension goes. All I have done is add the P265x75R16 all terrain tires. I do however have the offroad pkg, that offers a heavier duty shock, limited slip diff, 3.73 gearing, skidplates.
Sales do matter as much as many of the Nissan owners like to discount it. The Ranger outsells the Frontier about 5 to 1 still. Why? Why does it also continue too after all these years? I can tell you why. The Ranger offers more room in its supercabs, nicer interior, more engines, more choices, period. This is why the Ranger has stayed the number one selling compact truck for 13 years straight! Where is Nissan? they are not even in the top 20 and never have been! The Consumer rules, and makes the choice.
I'll be back soon with more information, believe me.
See you in the hills.
The reason I said the engines do not matter is because not all of us bought our trucks with hp/torque specs as a major determining factor.I did not buy my CC thinking I sould get more power,if that was the case then I would have bought the Dakota with the 5.9L.The 3.3L engine in my truck has enough power for what I will need to do with this truck.I do not consider it a weak joke,as well as I am sure other people who purchased theirs found the engine to be adequate.There are other factors that need to be considered other than hp/torque numbers or you would have bought the Dakota also.
I questioned your off road ability and experience because you haven't showed any.The closest thing I saw was when you said you did not experience wheel hop.That was something that you attested to,it was not something you found on the internet based on what Joe reviewer had to say.When you posted on the CC vs Sport Trac board you had no credibility to make the statements you made.Here,those same statements although difficult at times,would be credible if they were yours and not you parroting somebody else.When we compare the Frontier and the Ranger your observations,opinions and experiences with your Ranger carry weight because you believed enough to buy that Ranger.You invested your time and money,so you have a valid stake in this discussion.You said you are gathering info that is great,but tell me why I am wrong.I gave you what I thought based on my experience,and observations.If you have been doing this for 10 years and you know what you are talking about,tell me from you not from somebody else who has no stake in this.They did not put their money where their mouth is.
vince,why do sales matter?I know it was not a factor in my decision.Was it in yours?Why would the sales figures be a large factor in your decision to buy your Ranger?Your last part of your response makes me wonder which Ford sales brochure you got that out of.
As far as my area,I do not have mountains.I have alot of rocky terrain and alot of sand with open desert.I can go play in the sand dunes,or run in the small ranges here.That is one of the points I was trying to make,not all of us run up the mountains,just like you do not play in the sand.
Nice to see you adding your experiences to the discussions. This all we ever asked of you. I still disagree with you that the nissan 3.3L is a joke. The engines in the Le Car, mid-80's escort, Yugo and Hyundais were all jokes( not trying to start another debate/topic just making a point).
I would like to ask you some questions, in your repsonses you keep bringing up sales figures for ford. Since I am in sales and I am also the regional marketing director for our dealership I am intrigued why a consumer would use a company's sales figures in their basis for buying a vehicle. Remember our earlier posts on sales figures? These don't tell the whole story of a product's integrity, you should know that. In fact generally speaking, high sales in certain products means low priced cheaply made product. Sometimes high sales for an item might mean that the company designed that product to be a 'loss leader'. I have some questions for you or any of the rest of you. Why are sales figures important to you? What kind of vehicle did you have before your first ranger? Did sales figures factor into your buying decision when you got your ranger? What brand of truck would you consider if Ford went bankrupt this afternoon and you had to buy new(nice try, there were no more ford trucks available on the lots this afternoon...cncman bought them all...hehehe)? Would you test drive the competing brands? How would you test drive these trucks, hopefully you would take them off-road? Anyway I am interested in why the sales figures are so important.
I test drive everything that falls within the parameters of what I need that vehicle to do.I also put them through the same course so that I can compare them on equal terms.
It is apparent that the US consumer is limited to the types and configuration of vehicles that are available.The CC I just bought is not the same vehicle that is available on the international market.The configurations and models are so diverse.The Ranger may be popular,but it is popular in the US or North America.
(1) price/availability of replacement parts and cost of service - the more trucks sold, the easier/cheaper it is to get repairs done or do myself
(2) aftermarket following - those crazy aftermarket guys make more fun mods for my truck
(3) dealership quantity/location - pleanty of dealerships around for me to get the best deal possible and service for my truck if needs be
(4) profitable company - the better the company is doing, the lower the cost of the end product, the more money pumped into R&D for innovations on future offerings I might be interested in
(5) resale - if nobody has heard of some particular make, they're not going to be paying top dollar to get it (see price of repairs/parts)
(6) availability - it's sooooo much easier to get the exact truck you want with the options you want in very little time, not so with lower volume manufacturers
I'm not saying that they're the basis of my purchase decision. But, they do have an effect on it. I wrote off the Frontier when I bought my truck in '98 because there was one dealer in my area (who didn't have a positive rep) who wouldn't make a deal with ya. So, off I went.
I couldn't tell you which truck I'd buy right now. But, I'd have one helluva fun time finding out.
The Nissan Terrano II 4WD is manufactured in Spain and is also sold in Europe as the Ford Maverick.
That was taken from an article about Nissan and this vehicle.Why is Ford relabeling a Nissan vehicle?I thought this was interesting.
cthompson21,I agree with your motivations.Your pointa are well taken and I had not looked at it that way.Thanks.
Just my $0.02
Just a blurb from todays paper I thought I would share with you.
Ford total U.S. vehicle sales rose by 12.1 percent from a year ago, with total car sales increasing by 15.4 percent and truck sales by 9.9 percent. Not bad for a company that is supposed to build inferior, bad quality junk huh? The consumer makes the final choice.
30 years too until I broke down and got one last year. :-)
cthompson21 thanks for your input to my earlier questions. You make good points. The point about the aftermarket goodies makes the most sense to me to take sales into account. I like to customize my vehicle a little just to differentiate from the norm. I was thinking about this point a little and wondering how the aftermarket is going to be effected by all the choices the a consumer is getting these days. What I mean is take Ford for example, look at all the options that you can get on your truck just from the factory. Steps into the cab, running boards,nerf bars, power back windows, sunroofs, bedliners, tonnue covers, hitches, bigger tires and so on. But I know what your point was, because I was in that predicament with my 1994 S-10 SS. They made an aftermarket turbo and supercharger for the 4.3L but not mine because it was a Vortec( I understand that they do now, but they're 3yrs too late).
gooba, I'd say I am like you I don't take published sales figures into account when I'm shopping for a vehicle. It just doesn't matter to me, in fact it actually might discourage me. I like to be a little different than everybody else(consequently this is where aftermarket items come in, help differentiate a little).
Besides, isn't that why they make maps and have AAA to help plan a trip. VBG
My other vehicle is an SVT Contour. It is one of only about 15,000 vehicles made from '98-'00. I've only seen 2 or 3 other SVTour's in my area (over-populated SW Chicago suburb) over the past year or so.
As for the truck, I have yet to see a reg-cab, deep emerald green, 4x4 Ranger. When I first put in my purchase request of my first color choice (a sort of bergundy color), only 5 4x4's had been made in that color in '98.
My father has just purchased the ultimate in Ranger color exclusivity. It's a ext-cab, 4x4 in mandarin autumn orange or something like that. It's pretty much a rusty pumpkin looking color. He also put a custom-painted topper to match on the truck. It sounds a bit weird, but it looks very nice. Maybe I'll post some pics or something...
Later,
-C
p.s. I love that solar yellow color. I was looking at a Nissan CC 4x4 with such a coat. Very nice. That is a definate must for my next vehicle (a summer fun 3rd car convertible).
usually the infiniti sales are seperate from those figures posted there, I think this is the case.
Cthompson;
I am really glad to see you more active now, it is great having an intelligent oppossing view, so far you are the only one that I think can actually propose a compelling argument from the ford view.
One thing though about the sales you mentioned, don't forget that higher sales can hurt resale too. Just look what happens when a ford taurus or regular contour runs through an auction, there might be 150-200 of those running from FMC, and all of the rental agencies, so the prices really go down.
One thing I have noticed, and the point was alluded to before, is why are almost all of these comparisons/debates/rants about either towing or 4x4ing, when those activites are vastly in the minority of what people do with these compact trucks, most people buy a 4cylinder 4x2 and use it for commuting and light hauling on the weekend. Maybe we can get some point of views on this aspect since this is most likely what people will be doing with the trucks. Me for one, even if it was shown that the ranger or some other truck is a better off-roader, it wouldn't matter to me, I would never do that, I still would have what I bought.
Other than tinting the windows, I don't know what else I'm going to do to the truck to set it off. It's a lease so my mods are limited. I think I'm going to get that bed extender, I didn't like it at first but I'm warming up to it. I also didn't care for the roof rack or nerf bars(like gooba) when I got my truck, now I wouldn't have the truck without them. My truck is the Alpine Green, I've only seen one in that color(I know there are many)and it was a 2-wheel drive XE. In fact mine is the only 4x4 C.C. I've seen in this whole area(Tampa Bay), I know more will come as time goes on.
cncman,
I agree with you that most people drive their trucks everyday more on pavement and unloaded than towing and 4 wheeling. To defend my towing posts on the other topic(ST v. C.C.) I was trying to point out one difference between those two trucks. But it got sidetracked into transmissions and so forth. But actually in my opinion, this is where the real differences between trucks shine through by their 'truck' capabilities. I personally overall spend more time driving my truck like a car than I do hauling or towing or offroading. A couple of reasons I chose the Nissan Crew Cab was because I had to have 4 doors, it rides a stiffer than the other brands than I drove(which I happen to like, I missed the 'truck ride' w/my Acura)I'm not saying that you need a kidney-belt to drive them but you guys know what I'm saying. I got the 4x4 because I do hunt in Ga. and sometimes pull boats, it can help up a steep ramp. But because most of us do mostly on-road driving, I think it's interesting what people have to say about their experiences have been offroading. I've been offroading in older Nissans(when they were called Datsun) and Rangers but not the new ones. I haven't even been offroad in mine yet.
So I have to ask you, what differences do you see between the trucks that made you get the version of truck that you got? I ask you this because I didn't look at the trucks in a 2 wheel drive point of view, which may mean that I overlooked an aspect of truck buying. I like learn from different points of views from differnt consumers.
The resale value on the Taurus and Contour is quite a pity. It seems that's what happens when a vehicle is used extensively in rental fleets. The market becomes flooded with <50,000 mile vehicles that have been abused. It's difficult to tell a cherry from a lemon. At least the price cutting isn't quite so with the SVTour. Anybody taken a ride in one? It's the M3 (well, 2/3 of an M3) for the guy on the budget. In any case, I don't plan on selling mine any time soon (or possibly ever).
In reality, I could easily get buy with a 3L manual with a limited slip differential rather than my 4L 4x4 open differential. I tow a few thousand pounds of snowmobiles/gear up to Wis. a coupla times a year. I just like the look of the 4x4 so much more. It's nice knowing that you're not gonna get stuck in your driveway either (happened to me twice in my previous 3L 2wd auto Ranger).
That brings up another point. You can now get a "Trailhead" Ranger. It's 2wd with the looks of a 4wd truck (fogs, fender flares, etc...). Nissan has got those, right? I thought they have some sort of prerunner.
If anyone is wondering, my wife and I have sort of a strange deal with our vehicles. We own a '98 Ranger 4x4 and a '99 SVTour, but neither of us consider either one mine/her "primary" vehicle. I usually leave first in the morning and just jump in the one I feel like that day. I probably drive the truck a hair more than the car, though.
But, back on topic. I enjoy driving my truck as a commuter vehicle. I really like the interior ergonomics. Power is more than ample (especially with the KKM Tru-Rev and Gibson cat-back). The auto tranny is a lot easier on the legs on the horrible, horrible, horrible stop & go traffic here in Construction-Land, er... Chicago.
In short, I'll probably always have a truck, whether it be a Ford, Nissan, Chebby, Dodge, Toyota, etc...
Then my girlfriend and I got a house together and I started thinking more about a truck for all of the yard projects on the weekend and we started going to the beach more too and cars aren't that good there, (esp. low sportscars).
This was right around 97, there were no frontiers yet, the nissan trucks were still just unofficially called hardbodies. I was impressed that I always had so many people that had really abused their hardbodies and put alot of miles on it and were in to buy another one or folks that were traditionally buyers of other makes and they bought their son a used nissan truck for school and he really put it through the ringer and it never let them down. But when I seriously looked at the hardbodies, I was hesitant, it didn't have alot of convenience features I was used to in cars, didn't have the handling or refinement I was used to in the sports cars. Then the frontier came out, we got to go to a comparison drive with the tacoma & ranger and I got to see how it handled and did with a load, and how comfortable it was and I saw the nicer features, cupholders, it sat up higher and so on. It seemed like Nissan had made the truck for me, I decided that I would wait until we got a used one on the used car lot, just to save a bit of money, then Nissan had the 4th of July sale and had a really good rebate and I saw what the used Nissans were going for and it was only about $3-400 for a new one with the rebate.
Needless to say I got the new frontier XE 5spd x-cab. That was summer of 98, I have 21,000 miles on it so far, no problems, and I am very happy with the truck. It is comfortable, economical, I haved pulled with it a couple of times, and have had the bed loaded down helping friends move, etc.
Now I am completely sold on trucks. I live in the texas gulf coast, so I don't see snow, there aren't any mountains, and the 4x2 sits high enough to go on the beach anywhere comfortably, it is usually just me driving back and forth to work 5 minutes away, plus hauling bags of dirt, lumber etc. The only other truck I would have considered was the tacoma because of my experience with toyota, but I did not see anything worth the difference in price. So I was mainly interested in a 4cylinder that could do alot of work and still be economical, reliable and comfortable enough for a daily driver, for me the frontier won out, plus the low price, extra goodies like fender flares, higher stance, 15"alloys, dividers in the bed and the biggest bed really were just gravy. Pus the fact that it has the same 2.4l engine that was in my 240, (sometimes I close my eyes and imagine for a minute I am back in it!)Well, sorry if this was too long, but I think most folks choose a compact trucks for the same reasons as me and this info is important, thanks for listening.
The reason I bought my Ranger over a Fronter:
Frontier is ugly, no character, frumpy styling.
No stepside offered.
Frontier interior is cheap.
Frontiers 3.3 had no Torque!
More aftermarket engine parts for Ranger. More aftermarket parts for Ranger period!
Kingab version of Ranger much larger than Frontier. And..... My last Ranger lasted me 96K miles with NO PROBLEMS. I saw no reason to change.
What truck questions do you have that you think I know nothing about? Why haven't you tried to find torque curves for the 3.3 and 4.0? Why does Nissan need to supercharge its 3.3 in order to meet the same HP and Torque as the normally aspirated 3.4 of Toyota and the new 4.0 of Ford??
Where is the 5spd automatic that Nissan offers? For grins I made a trip down to the Nissan dealer again just to see a new Nissan CC. No way can you tell me these are nicer than a Sport Trac! The interior plastics were cheap, cheap, cheap. Fit/finish were subpar to Sport Trac. Same on the Frontiers! Seats were thin, carpet thin. I can't see how you can sit here and tell me the interior of the Frontier/or Frontier CC are better than a Ranger XLT or a Sport Trac. NO WAY.
You asked what truck questions do we have that we think you know nothing about.That is easy.HOW ABOUT THE ONES YOU DO NOT ANSWER?You still have not answered the previous posts.Reading and comprehension problems again or you have not found the link yet to support your position?It is apparent that you are unable to give your own answer in the majority of this discussion.
WE never asked for the torque curves for both engines. The hp/torque specs were stated for the 3.3L and your response was the specs for the 4.0L and how high the specs were in comparison.I asked for the spec of the 4.0L at the same rpms as the spec on the 3.3L.YOU SAID you were going to find it.NOW, you want someone else to find it?That is pretty gutsy on your part.
For someone with your "EXPERIENCE" you sure seem to be lacking.It has not come out yet.I have serious doubts that it ever will.
I am glad you have some links, I know you are gathering ammunition, but maybe you can give us a sample of something useful while you are hiding out, oops, I mean busy.
Ok you say there are more aftermarket parts for the ranger, this my be the case, but how many more? which sites have you been to looking for frontier aftermarket parts? I highly doubt you have been to any, you are just taking someone elses opinion and stating it as your own. I know for my frontier, I have no problems getting, bedliners, cargo nets, brush guards, step rails, bug shields, window louvers, taillight covers, lift kits, superchargers, performance parts (steve millen designed too). SO I don't know what else I would need. And actually I am not even considering more than a bedliner and maybe a bug shield.
Ok, how much larger is the ranger supercab than the frontier king cab? I assume you mean inside right? Well if the frontier is wider with more headroom, where is the ranger larger? I know oyu mentioned a larger cargo area before, but how comfortable is anyone in either X-cab? And why does the ranger put that stupid console with the cupholders in the rear? that wipes out any room advantage and makes it difficult to put larger items back there.
I also love how when someone mentions the 4cylinder comparison, you always say, well it's only this much more for the 3.0l V6, but don't mention that you have to spend more money to get the 4.0l to get the features you brag about, like the 5spd tranmission, you also can't get, cold weather package, flareside, XLT sport package, limited slip, 4 doors and alot of other things too. So you brag about all of the options available to ranger buyers, but what that really is saying is that, you can't get the good stuff unless you buy the top of the line model. want a sliding rear window? oh you have to pay for that, want bucket seats and a center console? Oh well you have to get this package, want 15" wheels oh, well you have to buy this package, want a cheesy 80 watt stereo? Oh well, oyu have to pay for that too. want body colored bumpers and mirrors, well you can only get that if you also get this other stuff you don't want. Want a torsion bar suspension? oh, oyu need to look at a 4x4. God, I have seen simpler forms from the IRS! You are right, there are more options on the ranger than the frontier, because the frontier comes with more stuff from the get go. And while you are asking where Nissan's 5spd auto is, where is ford's 4cylinder auto? Oh, that's right the 4cylinder ranger engine is a JOKE, it is too WEAK, with NO TORQUE to handle an auto trans. (but that is just my OPINION)
vince,an observation.You mentioned earlier that you was not glued to the pc 10hrs a day like some of us seem to be.Correct me if I am wrong,but for you to be looking for all of these links and all this information you would have to spend as much, if not more time on that then what you are saying a few of us spend on the pc.Keep plugging away vince,because of your brilliant analysis of these trucks and your intellectual prowess and mechanical expertise in explaining the difficult concepts that we seem to have trouble with,I am forced to look for and print your posts.The people I work with like what you have to say,and how you say it.But,I also have to print Bozo criminal of the day,and the Darwin awards.Think there might be a connection?I don't know,but I know they do laugh pretty heartily.
vince,why did Ford not offer their Quad cab Courier here?It is not a bad looking truck.
I wondered that myself, in 98, my dad went to france and they already had the Crew Cabs! I have no idea why they had them before us, especially since I thought they were all built in Tennessee.
They had a turbo diesel in it, I really don't see that much demand for a compact diesel truck over here, but then I could be wrong, I just hardly ever get asked about it, also, maybe they can't get the emissions acceptable for the US requirements, but these are just guesses.
"The Frontier 3.3L has 10 more horsepower and 25 ft/lbs less torque than a Ranger 4L."
You've got two different engine design philosophies there. Calling one more powerful depends on what measure you thinks sets the standard. Keep in mind that horsepower is derived from torque.
The 2.5L in the Ranger is a lackluster performer. The $400 is well spent to upgrade to the 3L V6. You'll only suffer marginally with mpg. You'll get the towing, hauling, and performance benefits of a V6-equipped vehicle (most people here in the US seem to prefer V6's). And, you'll probably make up more than the initial $400 cost when you trade/sell the truck.
Maybe this will all change when Ford comes out with the new 2.3L I4 this summer, which is supposed to be more powerful AND economical than the 2.5L I4.
And, a new I5 is on the horizon too...
If you're really power hungry, the Cammer is coming in the 2001 Ranger. Only a few more months...
Choices, choices, choices... Gotta love 'em!
yes there are going to be alot of good choices out there soon, I always liked competition it only helps the consumer, also it seems manufacturers are increasing the frequency of design changes it seems like the average was maybe about 5 years before, now it seems closer to three, with several minor improvements along the way.
I said more powerful because the 3.3 has more horsePOWER, they don't call it torque power, I think I know where you are going with the HP is torque derived statement, but I am not much of an engineer, maybe you could elaborate, also explain why if HP is torque derived, how can an engine with less torque have more HP? Just curious really, I am trying to understand your point.
Just curious, how do you get most people prefer a V6 if most of the compact trucks are sold in 4cylinder flavors? Glad to see Ford is going to work on getting an acceptable 4cylinder out there,
plus the OHC 6cylinder, of course with fords history of first year models it would probably be best to wait until the 2002 model, I saw a concept drawing of the new ranger in some magazine, I hope it looks better in person, I did not like the drawing, it looked to me like they cross bred a dakota and a ranger, and the attractive genes for both got tossed out the window, but I will have to wait and see it in real life, rarely do they look the same when they hit the streets.
I can never remember the horsepower formula. It is something like:
horsepower = rpm / torque * 5850
Torque is the actual scientific measurement, while horsepower is derived to compare engine output to engine rpm.
I don't know if it's just in my area (Chicago), but it seems as if only around 25% of compact trucks on the road are 4 cylinders, the majority being Toyota and Nissan. I'd estimate that only 10% of the domestic compacts around here are 4 cylinders. My numbers are probably off, but I'd wager that 6 cylinder (or V8s if you want to include the Dakota) outnumber the 4 cylinder trucks in my area by a large margin.
www.blueovalnews.com/ranger_edge.htm
Horsepower = torque * (rpm/5252)
http://www.oddparts.com/acsi/defines/torque.htm#Torque
now since the formula for horsepower is;
hp=(ft/lbs*rpm)5250, and HP is a function of torque at a specific rpm, wouldn't this imply that the frontier has a more efficient use of torque because of its higher HP rating? If not please explain, and also how can you have a high hp, low torque vehicle like, let's say a honda S200? Also on why you see more V6's, I would imagine in CHicago you would see mostly 4x4's right? because of all of the snow etc. maybe this is it, because the 4x4 ranger only comes with a 6cyl, what do you think, were they 4x2 or 4x4? National sales averages are still heavily weighted for the 4x2 4cylinder.
THanks for the link Xena, I still don't like it, I think if Ford was going to copy the Dakota style, they should have done it earlier, that style is getting old.
Torque is the actual rotational force that is
applied to the crankshaft.The manufacturers use a
dynomometer to measure the rpm,and the load being
applied to the engine.(There are numerous other
measurements being taken,but for this we are
concerned with only a couple).Let's start with the
Nissan 3.3L. It rates at 170hp@4800 rpm and
200ft/lbs of torque @ 2800 rpm. They hooked the
engine to the dyno and floored it.Took it to the
max rpm and started applying a load to the
engine.Let us say that floored with no load the
engine ran at 7000 rpm,you would apply a load
against the engine until the engine just starts to
drop in rpm.You record this and keep applying
additional load to drop the engine rpm down and you
keep recording the load and rpm data.(You could
also do this proceedure in reverse and work your
way up in rpm).What you will see is a torque curve
at various rpms.So,in the case of the Nissan
engine,it produced the maximum torque of 200ft/lbs
@ 2800 rpm. That was the best it was going to
get.Below 2800 it was still building to reach its
max torque and above 2800 rpm,the torque
decreased.From these numbers we can then calculate
the horsepower of the engine at various rpm ranges
and you then get a hp curve. Nissan's peaked at
170hp @ 4800 rpm.The same applies here,lower than
4800 it still builds hp and after 4800 the hp drops
off.
So what we have is the max figures of the
engine.The best it will do.
Let's look at the Sport Trac. The 4.0L israted at
205hp@5000 rpm and 240ft/lbs of torque@4000
rpm.So,the same applies here,the engine reaches the
best it will do at 4000 and 5000 rpms.The Ford
engine puts out more hp but you have to run the
engine to 4000 rpm.Comparing the Nissan,if you
wanted to set up your shift points for the best
power,because you would want to keep it in the peak
power range,you would shift at 2800 rpm,the Ford
at 4000 rpm.
The advantage of the higher "max" numbers in the
Ford is that it works best with alot of rpm in the
engine and will run down the road alot faster than
the Nissan,if the gearing is close to the same.You
will still be able to accelerate down the road.
The advantage of the lower "max" numbers of the
Nissan is that it performs better where speed is
not a factor,but power at a lower speed.If you like
to off-road your vehicle,this is particularly
useful because most of your speeds are 25 and below
and you need your power there.
That is why you look at the numbers as a guide in
slecting the vehicle and power combinations that
best apply to your individual preferences and
expectations for the vehicle.
When vince8 in his discussions brought up the
hp/torque figures,I asked for the curve.I am
turning my engine at 2500 rpm and doing 65mph,so I
know that I am close to max on my torque curve
which is great.What I wanted to know is what is the
torque rating for the Ford at the same rpm.Is it
the same,more or less?If most of my vehicle
operation is within this range then I am getting
the best performance out of my engine.If your
Torque is the feeling of being squashed into the seat immediately when you floor the accelerator.
Horsepower is waiting a few seconds for the engine to build enough revolutions to get the feeling of being squashed into the seat when you floor the accelerator.
For a truck, I want torque. And, pleanty of it at the lowest possible rpm. It makes towing my snowmobiles, hauling dirt, and tooling around town seem effortless.
For a car, I want both, but usually settle for horsepower. To get both, you're gonna be paying a lot in gas and insurance (a.k.a. V8, or SC-V6 power). My car makes merging on the freeway and cruising along at 100mph+ seem effortless.
Higher displacement engines have more torque. If you're wondering, forced induction simulates higher volume by forcing more air/fuel into the combustion chamber. This would be the case of an engine like the 4L in the Ranger.
Lower displacement engines must rev higher to produce large amounts of power. The 2.0 in the Honda 2000 has to rev to 8300rpm to reach maximum horsepower!!! It only puts out 150ft/lbs of torque at an extremely lofty 7500rpm.
The 3.3L is somewhere in between.
I guess it all comes down to having power immediately or having to wait for it.
Nice to see that Vince is up to his old tricks. I guess he still can't find a Boys Club for Rangers. We still love ya Vince despite your opposition.
Enjoy the Ride!
I was reading one of your earlier posts, about most of the trucks in your area(post 451). If I'm correct you said that most of the compacts that were 4cyl. were toyotas and nissans. I was thinking that maybe a reason for that could be that the foreign 4 bangers are more peppy. I know when I test drove the s-10, ranger, and Toyota(all 5-sp trannies and 2wd.)back in '94 I felt like the ranger and s-10 were too heavy feeling compared to the toyota. I don't know what the tech. differences were but its what I felt. I ended up getting a S-10 with the 4.3 Vortec. But anyway it's just a thought that maybe the American 4cyl engines in these trucks feel like they don't have the power not saying that they don't. Plus the upgrade to the V-6 may not be that expensive of an upgrade in the chevy or ford.
I believe that the exhaust tubing diamater going to the cat is 2.5". The Gibson cat-back maintains the 2.5" all the way on out.
BTW, a cat-back system replaces everything from the cat on back [hence the name]. I've heard that 2.5" diameter pipe to be the maximum size to use for the Ranger V6's to maintain low rpm torque.
I would HIGHLY reccommend this mod for any vehicle. You get a significant power increase, a beautiful exhaust note [rivals my SVTour], and a slight bump in mpg [maybe 1-2mpg with a light foot].
last summer. It sounded great and I felt a little difference. A month ago I finally installed a K&N
air filter which made a world of difference more power and great gas mileage. I drive 60% highway and was getting 25 - 27 mpg. The K&N bumped it up to 26 - 29 with the a/c on most of the time - I live in AZ. 35,000 trouble free miles.