Midsize Pickup Comparo

eagleg · March 2006

Is this really a fair comparison?All of the trucks were loaded except the non TRD Tacoma.Was box size a consideration in your comparison?Tacoma is the only crew with a 6 ft. box.How long is the Sport Trac box?3 ft?

buffalonickel · March 2006

Interesting info when someone can take the time to test these and put up with the salesmans' pitches. I wonder what riding around with 4 different blokes would be like on a Saturday afternoon?

One minor point I noticed in the Yota listing: "Because of the cab roof shape I can not get a moon roof."--did you check out an aftermarket moon roof? I have an '05 Taco with a Webasco (sp?)made in Holland and it works like a charm. I don't know why Yota didn't offer the moon roof in '05. And just to add to the fray I don't offroad at all so I use my truck to commute and haul mulch, dirt, and my dog. I like it so far and think it is a vast improvement over the '03 I owned previously.

ustazzaf · March 2006

And I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me what Payload restrictions have to do with Towing capacity. Or do we have a few posters who need to have the difference explained to them?
I have always heard that a vehicle with a 6500 pound towing capacity loses 1 pound for every pound of weight in the bed/cab. So if you have 500 pounds in the bed, you can only tow 6K. Maybe the rules changed.

varmint · March 2006

Yes, any weight carried in the vehicle will have an impact on the towing capacity of the vehicle. That's true whether the weight is in the bed, on the roof, in the cab, or a passenger's hips.

It doesn't matter whether the vehicle has a payload rating of 5,000 lbs or 1,000 lbs. You load it with 500 lbs of cargo and the towing capacity will drop the same.

The Ridgeline's towing capacity is 5,000 lbs plus 2 passengers, plus 200 lbs of gear.

The Ridgeline's max payload is 1,550, give or take 5 lbs. That max weight rating includes weight which must be placed in the cab to distribute it correctly. THAT IS EXACTLY THE SAME SITUATION WITH EVERY OTHER VEHICLE IN THE CLASS. ANY WEIGHT YOU PLACE IN THE CAB WILL REDUCE THEIR MAX PAYLOAD IN THE SAME MANNER. The only difference is the fact that Honda is up front about it.

ustazzaf · March 2006

And it took several days and several posts to figure that out. Someone said that of the 5000 towing capacity, 500 had to be in the cab. Obviously the truth is that the vehicle can tow 5000 and carry an additional 500. So the total carrying capacity is 5500 (aprox).

danielacosta · March 2006

"I am almost certain the ABLS (Active Brake Limited Slip) on the 4WD Frontier is only engaged when in 4-wheel drive. On 2WD models, I believe it is always 'on.'"

It's always on for whatever set of wheels are powered. When a 4x4 is in 2wd mode, then it works on the rear wheels, just like you describe for a 2wd truck. When you switch into 4wd, then it works on the front as well.

woodshop28 · March 2006

Per the manual:
"On 4WD models the ABLS system operates in both 4H and 4LO modes. On 2WD vehicles, the ABLS system operates on the drive axle only."

I interpret that as indicated in my original post, though I could be wrong.
I do know I can easily make one wheel spin on wet or icy pavement without any ABLS intervention.

danielacosta · March 2006

"Per the manual:
"On 4WD models the ABLS system operates in both 4H and 4LO modes. On 2WD vehicles, the ABLS system operates on the drive axle only."

I interpret that as indicated in my original post, though I could be wrong.
I do know I can easily make one wheel spin on wet or icy pavement without any ABLS intervention."

With my 4x4 NISMO, if I turn the VDC off while in 2wd, I can get one rear wheel to spin. With the VDC on like it normally is, the ABLS kicks in and prevents either rear wheel from spinning through brake application and/or power reduction. In 4-lo with the rear diff locked, VDC turns off but the ABLS on the front axle still works.

It could be that you are correct and it's the VDC that is preventing the rears from spinning in 2wd. The important thing for me when I test drove the vehicle was that I could do a full-throttle turning start on slick pavement and not spin a rear tire.

Nissan has a better system on the Pathfinder that not only stops the rear from spinning but also sends traction to the front, but for whatever reason they don't offer the "Auto" 4wd mode on the Frontier.

moparbad · March 2006

Tonnaue covers would intefer with utili trac in the bed. Also, covers are not easily removable like they are on the trac. Its either an open, unsecured bed or a closed bed.

On the Frontier there are tonneau covers that do not interfere with the Utilitrack. Undercover is one of several.

dustyk · April 2006

Well, my comments aside in the final analysis your preference for these vehicles would probably be the same. However, and I think the one thing that has kept Dakota people from this discussion, is the assumed characteristics of the listed vehicles really are too broad for direct comparisons. For example, I do not see a fair comparison between the Ridgeline and the SportTrac to the other listed three. Both the Honda and the Ford are trying to be more part truck, part car.

Of the vehicles included in this forum topic the Dakota is the most unpretentiously truck-like vehicle being considered, the closest thing to a real truck if one defines that in the conventional terms of a full-size, light duty pick-up. In my area Dakotas are commonly found in service with Time-Warner, Rochester Telephone, Rochester Gas & Electric Corp., Monroe County, Niagara Mohawk, NYS Department of Conservation, Rochester Truck Rental, and a host of commercial entities. Even in Quad Cab configuration, these are primarily used as a work vehicle. I don't see either the Ridgeline or the SportTrack fullfilling that kind of role to the same degree of a Dakota.

Just for the record, pluses you didn't mention for the Dakota include:

*fully boxed frame and as of 2006, the stiffest in the industry.

*The Dakota Quad Cab has the largest cargo box area.

*Dakota has the highest rated maximum towing capability at 7150 pounds, properly equiped.

You don't define why you judge the Dakota engine to be "the worst," but in my experience both the 3.7 V6 and the 4.7 V8 are among the most solid engines in the entire industry. They have been extremely reliable, very smooth, very quiet, and supply excellent torque in the range expected of a work truck. In my mind this one comment stands out, especially since your preferred choice utilizes an engine family that's been the least reliable of the candidates under discussion.

Regards,
Dusty

danielacosta · April 2006

Regarding Dakota: I seriosly considered Dakota, and especially liked its rear seat room. What made me choose Frontier over Dakota was Dakota's limited ground clearance (only 7"), and Frontier's better power plus better gas mileage. Yes Dakota tows more than Frontier (7,000 vs 6,500 IIRC), but drive the two back-to-back and you'll swear Frontier feels stronger.

dustyk · April 2006

The Frontier should feel "stronger:"

Frontier w/4.0 V6:
265 HP
173 lb. ft. torque @ 4400rpm
vehicle weight 3675 lbs.

Dakota w/4.7 V8:
235 HP
240 lb. ft. torque @ 4000rpm
vehicle weight 4261 lbs.

The standard 4.7 V8 in the Dakota makes more torque and slightly more horsepower at lower rpms. While a dealer test drive will undoubtedly produce a greater sensation of acceleration and speed in the Frontier, at load or towing the torque limitations of the otherwise excellent little Nissan motor will be much more clearly evident.

This was the point in my earlier post. Dodge has concentrated on satisfying the mid-size market segment with a truck that will be used more frequently for work. I'm aware (and I'm sure Dodge is, too) that this often works against them when the Dakota is compared to smaller trucks or crossover vehicles like the Ridgeline. Dodge is answering a market demand for actual commercial work trucks.

With the exception of the Ridgeline and SportTrack, in my opinion this attempt at comparison of each of the aforementioned vehicles is an apples and oranges conversation. None of the other vehicles under discussion can do what the Dakota can do, and likewise the Dakota cannot give you what some of the others can provide. By size alone the Dakota outclasses the Frontier and the Tacoma. The Ridgeline and SportTrack cannot do what the Frontier, Tacoma, or the Dakota can do.

By the way, for 2006 Dodge does have a high output 4.7 rated at 260 horsepower. Unfortunately, it requires higher octane fuel.

Regards,
Dusty

driver56 · April 2006

You got yer' specs. wrong Dusty.
A Frontier with a V-6 is rated at 265 H.P. and 284 lbs.ft of torque at 4000 r.p.m.
The V-6 King Cab averages out to approx. 4300 lbs. curb weight.
And I agree, comparisons are fine and dandy, but, they can only go so far. All these trucks have their attributes, their pluses and minuses, and they are all decent trucks in their own way. The rest is subjective.

kipk · April 2006

....especially since your preferred choice utilizes an engine family that's been the least reliable of the candidates under discussion.

Which engine group are you refering to, and what are your sources of information.

Kip

Kirstie_H · April 2006

Folks, let's avoid making personally-directed comments. With so many models under comparison here, it's unlikely that everyone's going to agree on which one is best, and not every preference is based on pure fact.

Thanks!

kirstie_h
Roving Host
Host, Future Vehicles & Smart Shopper discussions

dustyk · April 2006

You're right and I stand corrected. I had referenced the Road & Track 2006 Truck Buyers Guide. It now looks like they were quoting the weight and engine specifications of the I-4 engine.

Of course, that only makes the Frontier even more powerful.

My apologies.

Best regards,
Dusty

dustyk · April 2006

The source is me.

I was employed in the management of my company's fleet vehicles for a number of years. Begining in '99 we began purchasing F150s for our light pick ups, replacing our then current GM truck fleet. We phased in just under 100 by 2004 nationally. Currently we are down to 54 F150 nation wide.

Problems we have seen on the 4.6 Triton modular motor are:

*coil pack failures
*exhaust gasket failures leading to cylinder head or exhaust manifold replacement
*intake manifold cracks
*freeze plug failures
*head gasket leaks (coolant)
*spark plug spitting
*rear crankshaft oil seal failures

There are a collection of other problems, such as O2 and other sensor failures. These problems affected a certain population of vehicles, none of these problems affected all vehicles. But compared to our Chevys and Dodges the Triton motors have required a higher level of maintenance and or repair. In most other respects the pre-2005 F150s were pretty good vehicles. Our small purchase of six 2006s have revealed a drastic increase in total vehicle repair rates, unfortunately.

Our experience seems to match other fleet operators that I've talked to.

Regards,
Dusty

driver56 · April 2006

No biggy!

Cheers,
Mick

kipk · April 2006

That type of info is valuable. You got to view the "BIG" picture of a goodly number of vehicles, over a large area, over a long time period, driven by people that didn't pamper them.

How did the transmissions of the various vehicles hold up as the miles got high?

Did y'all have any Japanese vehicles in the fleet? If so, how did they do?

Thanks,
Kip

dustyk · April 2006

Hi Kip,

We've had and do have some Asian nameplate cars and minivans (no trucks) in our fleet, but the number is very small. These vehicles are used by our service force when they are singularly assigned territories at automobile manufacturing sites. For instance, our service reps that visit Honda in Marysville, Ohio, are assigned Honda vehicles. Since the numbers are very small our results would be statistically invalid.

We've had Asian truck samples given to us for evaluation from time-to-time. Last year, for instance, Nissan gave us a couple of Titans to use for six months.

Our experience with transmissions on various vehicles has varied over time. If you are inquiring specifically about trucks, it depends on the model and year. The 4LE60 used in smaller engined GM trucks have been the most unreliable. The 4LE80 used in the larger engined or heavier models is the most overrated transmission I can think of. Not as bad as the 4LE60, but nowhere near the reliability that many people claim it is, at least by our experience.

The 45REs in our Dodges would be next, however we have selected Dodge as our only 4x4 supplier and we typically use them for plowing and other heavier work. So this may not be a fair comparison. The 46RE found in later RAMs was better. Our '03 and up RAMs all have the 545RFE. We have not had one single issue with any of these transmissions.

The 4R70s behind the 4.6 motor used in the F150 have been very good. The 4R100s in F250s have not.

The one thing you didn't ask me about was long term body condition. I remember how Fords rusted prematurely and very badly years ago. Our F-series trucks since '99 have been exceptional in this regard. Our Dodges have been just as good. Our GMs, however, have not. We have had perforation on GMs as early as five years. Rocker panels, rear wheel well lips, lower cab corners, and floor pans are typical weak spots. This really affects resale value when we turn them over. (Factor in piston slap and you can take a bath on a GM LD pickup!) And we're having the same issues on our Venture fleet.

Hopefully our newer GMs are better.

Regards,
Dusty

ramzey28 · April 2006

How do they truly measure ground clearance of a truck. Do they take the lowest part (point) and measure to the ground, or by the axle?

varmint · April 2006

For the number most commonly published for consumers, it's the distance from the floor to the bottom of the differentials. Typically, that is the lowest point for any essential hardware.

If you're serious about using a vehicle for off-road use, there are a number of other measurements you'd want to consider.

badness · April 2006

I must say Ford Ranger needs a huge Facelift!!!

kipk · April 2006

Yep! Seems they have been looking the same for a long time now. There may have been some very subtle changes, but hard to recognize.

They have been "STUCK" in that mold while others have been changing in size as well as engineering.

Kip

thegraduate · April 2006

Tell us; have you been on a trip lately in your truck? What kind of mileage did you get? Any problems lately? Anybody rented a Colorado/Canyon lately? Anyone driven to a Colorado Canyon?

rsholland · April 2006

Anyone seen a Colorado /Canyon?

Bob

thegraduate · April 2006

Nope, nor have I been to one.

Ok, I actually did see a wrecked one the other day. Actually fared well (cosmetically) against the Impala it had creamed.

sugarman1 · May 2006

4.0 Liter v6 236horsepower,266ft./pds. torque,Bullet proof reliability,the complete package. This info is brought to you buy a real truck owner not a test driver.

thegraduate · May 2006

The only info you provided is listed on their website (power ratings). The rest is opinion, something which everyone is entitled.

.
.
.

"Mark one vote on the tally for the Tacoma, fellas!"

moparbad · May 2006

4.0 Liter v6 236horsepower,266ft./pds. torque pds?ROTFLMAO! :P

4.0L 265 HP 284 lb/ft torque (VQ Wards 10 BEST for 12 Years!) Far superior to the wimpy Tacoma engine.
Frontier better engine.
Frontier better value.
Frontier better audio.
Frontier better seats.
Frontier better off road.
Frontier better on road.
....Tacoma is an also ran. Just as well buy a Rideline and stay on pavement.
Ridgeline is best handling.
Frontier is best off road.
Is Tacoma best at anything?

2005lekc · May 2006

Well, if my memory serves me correctly the Tacoma was faster in the 1/4 mile runs and it
also has the best reliabilty rating.

In case you think I am a Tacoma driver you are wrong. I drive a Frontier, but we all have to face the truth when discussing these trucks.

Most of us make our selections based on person-al preferences. For me it was the price difference, the convenience of the dealer and the looks of the Frontier.

I could have been just as happy driving a Tacoma, but I just felt for me the choice was Frontier. I don't think the Tacoma would be a bad choice for any of us. In fact if they quit making the Nissans where else could we go?

OkieScot

ustazzaf · May 2006

4.0 Liter v6 236horsepower,266ft./pds. torque pds?ROTFLMAO!

4.0L 265 HP 284 lb/ft torque (VQ Wards 10 BEST for 12 Years!) Far superior to the wimpy Tacoma engine.
Frontier better engine.
Frontier better value.
Frontier better audio.
Frontier better seats.
Frontier better off road.
Frontier better on road.
....Tacoma is an also ran. Just as well buy a Rideline and stay on pavement.
Ridgeline is best handling.
Frontier is best off road.
Is Tacoma best at anything?

Last time I checked, Tacoma was selling more than Fronty and Ridgeline combined. Guess what they do best is convince the majority of buyers of these three vehicles that it does what the consumer needs most, best. It may not be the fastest or the largest or the best looking in some people's eyes, but it is the best all around package for the majority in this group.

eagleg · May 2006

Brilliant observation!

driver56 · May 2006

Toyota in general is best for having a good reputation. In my mind that only goes so far.

driver56 · May 2006

The last time I checked, the Ford Ranger was still selling more compact trucks than anyone. Are they the "best"? They certainly are for some. The Tacoma is a good package, no doubt, but I couldn't say definitely that it is "the best" all around for the majority.
I must admit with the rising gas prices that the shine that I had for the Taco and the Fronty has died down a tad.
Both these trucks get poor mileage (the Tacoma is marginally better) and at nearing $5.50 a gallon for 87 octane here in Canada the m.p.g. ratings play an important consideration. And we haven't entered the summer driving season yet.

eagleg · May 2006

I'm averaging 20.45 mpg (U.S. Gal.) with my 05' Taco D/C L/B V6-5spd.auto. in mixed driving.Not bad for a truck.Sounds like the Fronty,according to Edmunds test drive, is averaging something like 14.5 mpg.,that's too bad.Nissan claims 17 to 21 mpg.What's up with that.That must be measured at the flywheel, like the H.P..Don't you hate it when manufacturers are less than honest?Come on driver56,live the now,that Fronty is calling.Exhibit some Testicular fortitude and take the plunge.

sugarman1 · May 2006

Then you and Moparbad should take the plunge and buy a Fronty or any truck for that matter and quit telling us real truck owners what we already found out for ourselves is that Toyota Tacoma is the total package if it aint go buy a Fronty.

sugarman1 · May 2006

Some Fronty owners are only averaging 11-13mpg,s that rots while my Taco gets 21.45mpg US all around thats the real deal,Driver56 and Moparbad wouldnt know this because they dont own a Fronty or any other truck for that matter they believe what they read in the comic books.

moparbad · May 2006

So what, this is my third Toyota pickup all clocked over 200,000miles each how many have you owned

600,000 miles in Toyota trucks. WOW! That is 40 years of driving at the average rate of 15,000 miles a year.
I was not even born 40 years ago.

moparbad · May 2006

MPG the truth.

In Edmunds testing the results were.
Frontier 16.10 mpg
Tacoma 15.4 mpg

Colorado 13.54 mpg
Dakota 14.87 mpg
Ranger 13.62 mpg

Frontier obtained the best mpg. No surprise.

Some Fronty owners are only averaging 11-13mpg,s that rots while my Taco gets 21.45mpg US all around thats the real deal, In your dreams sugarboy!

2005lekc · May 2006

My frontier is getting 18.5 to 19.5 mpg around town and on a recent 1100 mile trip I got 21.3
mpg at 75 mph, 23.1 mpg at 70 mph, 25.6 mpg at
55 mph and for a 5 mile stretch of 45 mph speed limit I got 26.4 mpg.

So that stacks up pretty well against a Tacoma
in my books. By the way I was using the a/c on
this trip too.

I keep trying to tell you that these trucks are very comparable. There is just not much difference in any catagory that I am aware of.

Can't we be friends? You know, live and let live.

OkieScot

sugarman1 · May 2006

Then go buy one,at least I stand behind the truck I own do you own any? :P

hasel · May 2006

I Have a 2005 Dakota Quad Cab,4WD, 4.7L V-8 Auto and 3.55 posi over 7920 miles am averaging 17.24 MPH, this is not flat land driving

KCRam · May 2006

A few of you don't seem to get the message. If you can't discuss the trucks in a civil manner witholut getting personal, then you will find yourselves on the outside looking in. Knock it off or find another website.

kcram - Pickups Host

ustazzaf · May 2006

Do you have the data for that test? I don't doubt they were published considering the source, but I would like to see how they were testing. My 4WD 4 door averages better than 15.4 going uphill pushing the wind pulling a Fronty (well maybe not pulling the truck), but the numbers are low for even city driving. I have averaged over 17 in 10K miles with less than 500 miles on the highway. Looks to me like the Ford was 100% off road, the Dodge 90%, The Colo 100%, the Taco 75%, the Fronty 50%, ect... Obviously not a comparable test.

ustazzaf · May 2006

The last time I checked, the Ford Ranger was still selling more compact trucks than anyone. Are they the "best"? They certainly are for some. The Tacoma is a good package, no doubt, but I couldn't say definitely that it is "the best" all around for the majority.

The person I was replying to mentioned the Fronty, Ridge and taco only. Of those three, the Taco outsells, making it the best of the 3. Include the Ranger and it is best for the majority. I'll take the word of how many people buy a vehicle and how well it sells down the road as my gauge for determining what is the best vehicle. Ford is certainly the best cheap disposable truck on the market. It has a lower price (and considerably lower resale value) and an American name. It also has the advantage of being introduced when Toyota and Nissan were still making a real name for themselves, while the F series had already established Ford as the truck king. Just like the Toyota haters that say the reason they sell is repeat customers, the Ford owners are more likely to a Ford than a new customer.

sugarman1 · May 2006

My best gas mileage record is 22.46mpg US recorded today 5/7/06! Take 363.7 miles driven divided by 16.193gallons of gas it equals 22.46mpg US! On regular brand gas whats the competition got on that,and thats all around driving stop and go,highway,offroad too. If I clean my TRD airfilter could possibly get to 23mpg US! :shades:

sugarman1 · May 2006

At the risk of being cynical I dont believe you got 26.4mpg or that you even got 23.1mpg. How did guage your mileage recordings traveling at certain speeds and getting these great mpg's,based on odometer readings and how much gas consumed? Thats the only accurate way,and its not possible the way you explain it or not explain in which manner you got your results? You need to set trip odometer to zero at fillup,at next fillup take miles traveled divided by gallons replenished and that equals mpgs,how did come up with mpgs based on speed traveled? It doesnt make sense! :confuse:

ustazzaf · May 2006

Sounds to me like he is using the ScanGauge to measure at different speeds. I have it, and it gives a somewhat steady reading if the conditions are perfect, but as soon as you hit a tiny incline or (decline?) the numbers get diluted. I can go from 13 to 35 on a seemingly flat surface, although the numbers do stay fairly steady for the most part. It is a good gauge (no pun intended) if you use it right, but running at any speed needs to be monitored for variance to get a good average. The gauge has other good features like a more accurate speedometer, a very accurate indication of how much fuel has been used from the tank, how much is left in the tank, how many miles you can still get from the current tank of fuel. Also get info like the highest RPM achieved over 2 days, highest speed achieved, stuff like that to monitor my teenager's driving habits. Also can check the trouble codes, although I know my Toyota will never need that feature!!!!!! Ok, that may be a stretch. I think the gauge is worth the $125 I spent. With the current fuel costs, it won't take long to pay for it's self. Actually one trip for a code reading would pay for it too. Nice tool, and it fits perfect in the compartment in front of the 6speed shifter.

moparbad · May 2006

Midsize Truck Test Edmunds 2005

Here is the data.

An objectively comparable test.

Midsize Pickup Comparo

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles