Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Toyota Tacoma vs Nissan Frontier
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The Tacoma felt faster and more nimble to me with about 450lbs less weight. I am well suited for it's 6speed, while others may not be. Saw it's 5Auto rated faster than it's 6sp, is it? Depends on who's driving.
Over the years I have seen varying acceleration times from the 'testers' on most models. After breakin, the times usually get faster.
These 6 speeds in the right hands are pure magic. I test drove both these trucks without a salesman and was quite impressed with both brands.
I feel sorry for people in the autos. I love my Tacoma 6 speed, it brings a smile to my face every time.
I remember seeing a Frontier SE DC 4x4 with a 6 speed recently. Thought that option was available on all models.
I admit there are pros and cons of both.
Taco: has excellent interior and comfort
not excited about the bed (yet, might need some convincing) & 5 to 10 less HP on regular gas.
-exterior noise was significantly louder once vehicle was started, interior noise just OK
-back seats more practical with storage
-toyota seems to be more prestigious than nissan when it somes to the truck dept.
Fronty: has a smooth ride and more power but a piss poor interior design....seems very plastic and cheap. back seats suck!
-very quiet start up and quiet ride
To me both trucks look great and handled well on road. (rugged canadian roads)
APR is lower on nissan 3.8%, 5.4% toyota
(canadian rates)
-prices are similar
I guess from my list I am slightly leaning towards a toy, but really liked the power of the nissan,
I have been reading the forums and worried about problems I may encounter with the toyota (ie squeaks and leaks and such)
I havent heard of many problems about nissans (yet)
Not sure who is the true leader in sales this year (if there are numbers published yet) or if I should wait till the fall for the '06's to come out
I am trying to get the best prices as well.
Best for Toyota so far is $34150 (without taxes)
=$39259 incl taxes, minus 1000....grand tally =38k and change? (any other canadian out there in ontario get a better deal)
Anyone have any nissan prices? 39k and change is best so far.
any reccomendations for my future investment?
tx
After 46,000 miles on my 2002 Chevy I traded it in with about 40% remaining on the original brake linings. Unheard of pad life for a GM pickup before 4 wheel disc was put on in 1999 model year trucks. Before 1999 it's like 12,000 miles per pad change!
GM brought back or still use the obsolete drum technology on the 2005 "light duty" pickups. The Hybrid and Heavy Duty models do not suffer this problem.
GM's excuse? Put 17" tires for bigger brake surface area over the 16" tire size on the 4 wheel disc models and use the "hardly used" rear brakes thought. GM claims it stops quicker (than the 16" 4 wheel disc system). So? It would stop just as quick if not quicker with 4 wheel 17" discs! When you feel the above drum kickback, suddenly you don't care how little they are used. it's no longer an issue! Then when you do put a trailer on the truck it isn't the time to find out the 'hardly used' means it As you wait for them to turn the now warped drums at the dealer!
You can't justify obsolete drum technology no matter how big you make the front disc brakes! So with the excessive brake dive, drum kickback, excessive pedal travel from the drum adjustor slack, and poor overall brake performance compared to a 4-wheel disc design of the same size my money is on the 4 wheel disc. Maybe the "Bean counters" at the car and truck manufactures will catch on when 4 wheel disc units outsell obsolete drum technology! Ford trucks still have 4 wheel disc, as do some other manufactures listed in this posting. It's something to think about when you are looking at the window sticker.
The tests of braking performance indicate that the Tacoma is at the top of it's class despite the drums. I would rather have discs, but oh well. Maybe someone will total an X-Runner and I can get a deal on them. Guaranteed, the next Tacoma will probably have rear discs...
Gotta say your viewpoint is refreshing. I came to this board looking to find useful info on both the Tacoma and the Frontier. What I got mainly from the Toyota side was anything but useful. Sort of a strange religious thing going on. There doesn't seem to be any die hard Nissan lovers, just objective folks making a prudent decision.
I commute to work about 50 miles and see some hills on the way. Sighting a Toyota on these hills sends up red flags in my mind as they generally slow, which makes me wonder how they got such a following. No matter I guess, they did as evidenced here on this board. I have a camry that has needed some work, so I know they are not bullet proof. (?)
Thanks for your input.
'96 Subaru Legacy Outback Wagon (4-disc) loaded at it's meager 900# (cargo/passenger) capacity vs. '69 Chevrolet C20 (3/4 ton) 2wd pickup loaded at 2000# cargo/passenger - I think this is below rated capacity, but I would have to dig a little to confirm. Under these conditions, 60-0 brake fade (this is not to say it stops as quickly as without the added weight) on the 4-disc vehicle is minimal (not noticable) while the drums exhibit significant fade to the point that 'pumping' to slow heat buildup is necessary/preferable. Unloaded (with only a driver at 180#), neither vehicle's brakes fade significantly and both exhibit consistent stopping ability throughout the 60-0 range.
Granted, this is an extreme example because rarely would you (if competent) slow the loaded C20 60-0 primarily on brakes unless in an emergency. But, then again, an emergency is when brakes are most critical.
Personally, I would prefer a 4 disc system on a truck because I use trucks to work at, near, or over their capacity fairly often and the better the brakes perform under these conditions, the safer it is for everyone on the roadway. With how 80-90% of Tacoma / Frontier owners use their trucks, this shortcoming of rear drums will probably never be noticed or impact roadway safety.
The point here is not that one is absolutely better or more justified than the other. I am simply saying that, based on my observations, drums exhibit fade faster than discs because they do not shed heat as quickly.
My garage isn't huge. Frontier is 2-1/2" shorter and almost 2" narrower, which is of great benefit and it's absolutely happy doing all things with 87 Octane. I'm after a truck I can live with and for my needs, Fronty fits my wallet and garage better than Tacoma.
Tacoma's a great truck, but Frontier wins the comparison at our house.
Asa
Heres a good link explaing the difference between the two type of braking systems.
And about nose dive, I drive a Chevy silverado (disk brakes all around) and the thing dives juut as much as a rear. Drums do not have less braking force, that's important to know. However Drum brakes are more likly to fade after long term use
Just got me a new 05 Taco reg cab 4X4 with 2.7L. Only have 385miles on her,
I do have to agree with the rear window visablity, It is poor. I solved it with a mini fish eye in the corner of the side mirrior of the driver side. I did drive both the new Frontier and Tacoma ; I have to say being biest toward neither the nissan reg cab i tested was a sloppy handling truck, compared to to taco i bought. The taco is bigger and sits higher, but corners like it's on rails. as for the power aspect I felt they were an even match. The cab on the taco is after all a cab of a truck unlike the cheap tinny feel of the nissan. The nissan looks cool and the Toyota looks Beefy. I'm 6ft 2 and I just sold my 2nd Ranger, I wanted to try some thing new. I liked many things about the ranger but it was a bit cramped. I liked the look and features on both the toyota an nissan, thus why I test drove both. I bought the Toyota because of the reputation that Toyota has and the fact that i wanted more of a truck this time like my old F-150 gave me, but with better gas mileage and better resale ok and more quality built in. The nissan has got a great little truck, but that is the problem. It's a little truck and for a little truck you should have car like visablity and car like power take offs' but it has a very uncar like ablity to handel well i.e. very sloppy in turns and a mushy rear end. Fit and finish, it didn't even come close to the Toyota, The nissan has plenty of plastic as well, just because it's painted or crome plated dose'nt make it any stronger. If you like the car/truck look, nissan is your next buy and a good one. I wanted a truck that operated like a truck and was hardy and roomy in side Thats why I took the Tacoma.
P.S. Thank you Upstate Toyota of Batavia N.Y. you guys gave me an awsome deal and top market for my ranger
500+ miles and not a single issue. Hopefully it'll match my Acura GSR which had $100k w/o issue.
Asa
Yesterday, I test drove a Frontier CC 4x4 AT. Today, I test drove the Tacoma DC 4x4 AT. A friend joined me on both trips as a passenger. After test driving both vehicles, we both came to the same conclusion: we both preferred the Frontier.
What I like about the Frontier:
- quiet cabin (engine, wind and road noise are quite dampened...almost like a mid-level quality sedan feeling)
- throttle and brake response was very good.
- the fact that I can switch on 4-wheel drive as long as I'm driving below 50MPH.
- front passenger seat fold down flat, rear seats is configured for 60/40 folding and folds up along back of cabin
- the two Utili-tracks on the truck's bed
- heavier lift gate (compared to Toyota's) that is also lock-able
What I dislike about the Frontier:
- lower rear end height
- low rear-view mirror placement
- drivetrain not coated (I checked the Frontier but didn't get a chance to check the Tacoma)
What I like about the Tacoma:
- handling feels a little more refined than Frontier
- angled rear-seats
- 400W/100W inverter option in truck's bed
- storage pockets along sides of truck's bed
What I dislike about the Tacoma:
- noisy cabin (road noise, wind noise, engine rev noise) all come thru
- throttle and brake response seemed soft/delayed
- lack of adjustments of driver seat
- low rear-view mirror placement
- 4x4 operation requires me to stop the truck (according to salesman)
- there were two different 4x4 indicator lights (green & red) with the red keep flashing during the whole time I was test driving it (and the salesman really didn't know why it was doing it or what it's indicating)
- poor visibility looking forward due to the raised hood
- poor visibility looking rearward due to headrest on rear seats
Price wise, I'm getting an offer of $24,900 for a base LE, where as the Toyota dealer wanted $500 below MSRP for the configured vehicle I test drove. Seems like I can get a lot more bang for the buck w/ the Frontier. Thus, I am in the process of getting more quotes for the Frontier as I'll be buying it instead of the Tacoma.
I certainly agree with your assessment of relative noise levels and relative handling feel. Fortunately for me, and it probably reflects my body configuration, the front seats in the Tacoma fit like a glove without further adjustment. Hope you enjoy your Frontier.
I like the interior of the Tacoma much better. Super comfortable seats, and high quality trim on the dash and doors. Plus I think the exterior of the Tacoma is more appealing and aggressive. And I don't notice much road noise, but I have the TRD sport which has quieter tires than the TRD Off Road. The only thing I would change on the 05 Taco is: add power seats, leather, and a sunroof.
Toyota is coasting on its reputation, IMO. It's still a nice truck, just not as nice as the religious fanatics claim.
I don't know how you can denigrate plastic when the Tacoma's inner bed IS plastic, while the Frontier's is full steel. There have been several posts about major accessories not being made for Tacoma's bed, just little "non-truck" things like tool boxes, contractor racks, and slide-in campers.
Composite (fiber-reinforced plastic) as a bed material is not inferior to steel (but that does not necessarily mean the Tacoma's composite bed is not inferior - it all depends on how it was manufactured). Again, I think the argument here is more a perception problem than a true lack of functionality. Steel, though, will likely hold up better to outright abuse (such as dropping/throwing heavy objects from distance), at least on the short term, than will composite because it will bend and tear rather than break.
Have there been any factory or testing updates since this debate began on either truck? Examples: Safety tests? Noise tests? Was the premium fuel question ever resolved? Are additional options that one truck had (such as leather & heated seats) now available on both? Thanks for any help people can offer.
Cool video I found.
Tacoma can be run without premium, however there is a ticking sound of the motor retarding the compression cycle to accomodate the lower grade fuel.
Safety test has been done on base model 2wd tacoma- 5 stars
Also one for frontier but I'm not sure what the rating was- it wasn't bad.
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/nhtsa_trucks.html
"Have there been any factory or testing updates since this debate began on either truck?"
There are a few enthuisits sites, they waver back and forth.
It comes down to personal choice, styling, comfort.
"Just got me a new 05 Taco reg cab 4X4 with 2.7L."
"I did drive both the new Frontier and Tacoma ; I have to say being biest toward neither the nissan reg cab i tested was a sloppy handling truck, compared to to taco i bought."
He said he test drove a Nissan Frontier Reg cab and commented on the sloppy handling. This statement needs further explanation do to the fact the new Frontier is not made in a Regular cab.
-The tacoma sits higher off the ground
-Tacoma has better apprach and deparutre angles
-Progressive rate springs on the tacoma
-Tacomas lighter
-Tacoma's engine has a smoother powerflow (Fronty is toruqy and quick off the line which is why some poeple like it better, not good offroad when you need slow crawl speeds)
-Shorter turing circle
-I didn't want a crome bumper
-I can fit a winch and farelane inside the bumper of the Tacoma, but not in the fronty
-Creture comfort (leather, moonroof, electric seats controls) come second to capablility
-Fronty only has one tow hook on the front on the right side, I could undersantd if it was in the middle but its not. (why nissan?)
-Tacoma's rated to tow more by about 300lbs
-Fronty's drive componets are not coated, Tacoma has the black poweder coat all over.
I realize these aren't the things most people look for in a truck but its the reason I chose the Taco over the Fronty.
Yes I've test driven both in 05 extended cab Frontiers, Thank you for my editing error who ever you are! As well as extended cab Tacomas' I like a reg cab because I don't have kids and all reg cabs no matter what the make TEND to handle better that extended cabs, I.E. body roll, cornering, power to weight and the like. Okay before I get 100 threads back saying "it's a truck not a sports car" or "not all makes handle better" :mad: Stop right there. I thought the frontier was sloppy around the corners compared to the Tacoma, and when compared to the Tacoma reg cab, the frontier extended cab's suspension design showed it's need to offer a reg cab. Yes the frontier is designed to get better handling at high speed in a straight line, but then you may get into the "it's a truck not a sports car" argument that Involved the before said Tacoma. I did like the frontier price, I liked the other bells a whistles offered on the frontier as well. The base motor on the nissan 4X4 was great, If your into paying round about $50 to $60 a week in gas! If you are, than the edge is given to Nissan, How ever the Toyota has variable cam that is controlled by a computer. I would think the aftermarket industry may soon help, The power hungry Toyota owner gain an edge. The nissan is a great looking truck, but in my opinion so is the Toyota. I was not too crazy about the composite bed, but the biggest thing i haul is me an my camping gear. You could Rhino coat if you looking to get some more strength in the bed, most people do that any way when they are going to put regular heavy loads in even a steel bed! As for time tested reliability of either vehical the only way to know that is, WAIT they just redesigned these vehicals' so any thing about which will be better in the long run is pure OPINION!!!!! For me I wanted a 4X4 with higher resale and reliability that the Chevy's, Ford's and Mopars I've been driving for years. I liked the fuel consumption of a 4 banger ,Toyota lets me decide if i want that in a 4X4 option, @ $2.30 a gallon that V6 is cool but I have a V8 in my 69 Buick. So affordable driving is a plus in Buffalo NY, where a 4X4 in the winter is nice and the daily drive 4 banger lets me keep some money for other things. Toyota and Nissan build great vehicals, I think being a mechanic for the last 14 years, gives one an apreatation for good design and innovation, I.E. composite truck bed/no rot. hell if i wanted a work truck I'd of got a one ton. I liked that fact the Toyota fit my needs and me a 6ft3in 225 lbs amiture power lift er, buy the way if your built like me the Nissan falls a little short and i do mean short, you'll need the moon roof.
The red flashing 4x4 indicator means its not engaged or has malfunctioned.
Im assuming your under fairly short not being able to see over the hood and the rear seats.
Noisy cabin?? were you driving the 2005?
I own one and could compare the road noise to a volvo or lexus.
1. Honda
2. Nissan
3. Toyota
4. Dodge
5. Chevy/GMC
Darren in Bakersfield
As for the magazine getting paid for a comparison, I say NO WAY would a business ever do some thing so unethical!!!!! Hint, Hint, Wink, Wink.
Check and see see how many times a vehical brand is advertised in the particular mag. and you might , I say might see a pattern!!!
tiger10: I could not agree with you more!!!!!