A "what truck" thread.. nice spin on an old classic

I feel like I have an handle on cars, I've read enough threads, created my own scoring system and spreadsheet, and endlessly fantasize about the cars that would end up in my dream or budget-dream garage.

Now that I've had a change in my life (married), I would like some additional flexibility in my car. She can't drive a stick, and frankly has no desire to learn especially not in my Porsche. My thinking has been that I should get a M3 with the SMG transmission and that would solve a lot of the problems. The issue with that is, M3's don't tow cars. My new thought is that a truck would fit the bill. It would give her a second car that she could drive if needed, we would have some additional utility (and not have to borrow a truck every time we needed it), the prices are reasonable, and most importantly it will facilitate my $200x Challenge project car. Gas mileage really isn't that big of an issue, I drive a lengthy 8 miles a day. So it seems to be the best choice.

I can't do a full size. I don't have room and I don't like driving "big" anything. So I am leaning towards a mid-size, crew-cab (4 door) truck. What is important is that it is comfortable, has good towing performance, purchase and upkeep costs, and generally a nice truck. I really know nothing about specific models of trucks, so any and all help would be appreciated. Here is my list of contenders (in current order of preference based on really nothing at all):

1. Nissan Frontier
2. Toyota Tacoma
3. Ford Explorer Sport Trac
4. Chevy Colorado
5. Dodge Dakota

Thoughts? Specific recommendations? Years? Options? 4 vs. 2 wheel drive?

Thanks, Brad

I personally like the Sport Trac and would consider it on my short list next time around, but many on here will tell you to add Ridgeline to your list. Nothing wrong with any of the imports, but in my experience they're $$$ by comparison (when I was shopping compact PUs 2 years ago). I don't know or pretend to know what the cross pricing is between your selection. I settled on a Ranger FWIW...

I'd stay away from the Canyon, it's junk, the I-5 blows, dunno about other options, but Chevy wanted more money for a used 60k mile 4door crew than a brand new base Ranger or F150...

Subaru Baja? I don't know anything about them, but I still want one for some reason.

BradLTL wrote: Thoughts? Specific recommendations? Years? Options? 4 vs. 2 wheel drive?

Given that it doesn't snow much where you live, I'd say 2 wheel drive unless you plan to do any off-roading. Cheaper, better mileage, and usually slightly more towing capacity.

How much do you want to spend? It's probably fairly hard to go wrong with any of those on your list. Conventional wisdom holds that Toyota pickups are bulletproof, but that affects their used prices, too.

I'd try to get one with the longest possible bed, the Sport Trac bed is so short it barely counts as one. I think you can get 6.5' beds in some of the Toyotas and Dakotas, that would be a big draw for me. Then again, I'm a full-size truck guy. Other than that, go check some out, see how you like driving them.

Raze wrote: I personally like the Sport Trac and would consider it on my short list next time around, but many on here will tell you to add Ridgeline to your list. Nothing wrong with any of the imports, but in my experience they're $$$ by comparison (when I was shopping compact PUs 2 years ago). I don't know or pretend to know what the cross pricing is between your selection. I settled on a Ranger FWIW... I'd stay away from the Canyon, it's junk, the I-5 blows, dunno about other options, but Chevy wanted more money for a used 60k mile 4door crew than a brand new base Ranger or F150...

I'm quite happy with my Canyon. The 4cyl version of that 5cyl motor makes good power, and gets great gas mileage (I can get 700km to a tank). The 5cyl is generally regarded as being an excellent motor. YMMV, but my Canyon was a little cheaper new than the Ranger/Mazda, which are not in the same league as modern trucks.

Tom_Spangler wrote:

BradLTL wrote: Thoughts? Specific recommendations? Years? Options? 4 vs. 2 wheel drive?

Given that it doesn't snow much where you live, I'd say 2 wheel drive unless you plan to do any off-roading. Cheaper, better mileage, and usually slightly more towing capacity. How much do you want to spend? It's probably fairly hard to go wrong with any of those on your list. Conventional wisdom holds that Toyota pickups are bulletproof, but that affects their used prices, too. I'd try to get one with the longest possible bed, the Sport Trac bed is so short it barely counts as one. I think you can get 6.5' beds in some of the Toyotas and Dakotas, that would be a big draw for me. Then again, I'm a full-size truck guy. Other than that, go check some out, see how you like driving them.

Given my brief role as a salesman for a couple of Dodge dealerships, IIRC some Dakotas were available with an 8' bed, but I think the last year that was an option was back around the turm of the century. So, if you're willing to go older you can get pretty decent utility and still have a compact truck.

Just because she can't / doesn't want to drive a stick doesn't mean that you can't. My wife hates driving manuals. For years, the solution was that she didn't drive my cars. She's decided that she likes driving the Jeep more than she doesn't like driving manuals, so now she drives the manual Jeep with some regularity.

As for trucks, I'm of the opinion that there's no point in having a small truck. It's still going to drive like hell, but have less utility. If I'm going to drive something that has all of the shortcomings of a truck, I might as well benefit by having something that will swallow an entire department from Home Depot and tow 10,000#.

Suzuki Equator? IIRC, it's actual price was alittle cheaper than the Nissan brother it's made from.

My problem with midsize (and compact) trucks is they do nothing well. They suck just as much gas (sometimes more than) as their full size counterparts. They are cramped inside, their beds aren't fully functional because they are so small and their tow/haul ratings are no better than a minivan.....

Bobzilla wrote: Suzuki Equator? IIRC, it's actual price was alittle cheaper than the Nissan brother it's made from. My problem with midsize (and compact) trucks is they do nothing well. They suck just as much gas (sometimes more than) as their full size counterparts. They are cramped inside, their beds aren't fully functional because they are so small and their tow/haul ratings are no better than a minivan.....

I agree on the loss of utility and such, but what about general size considerations? If you live in a city and can't physically park your car at your condo because you can't open your doors, it limits your options if you want a truck, that being said, I still agree on buying a small/compact, it's castrating, but alas, sometimes it's necessary, albeit temporarily until you have the space for a full size...

I agree with DILYSI Dave and Bobzilla. The size difference is not enough to justify as the full size will get about the same mileage while hauling more. Anyway, as I'm sure other would agree, if towing, the full size will do it better. And that Sport Exploder bed is too short to handle anything more than bags of fertilizer. Was disappointed in the bed of the Colorado, the outside dents very easy. All of the above reasons plus a few others is why I kept my former dd - 95 F150 XLT extended cab & sportruck package when it hit 200,000 miles and bought a Miata. Just use the truck for hauling and as backup wheels now.

Toss me in with wlkelley3, DILYSIDave and Bobzilla. Any truck that you'll buy that's capable of towing will get no better mileage than it's fullsize brethren. If you're skiddish about driving something large, then give up wheelbase, not width. As I've said before, I can park my full-size Bronco in places I'd never dream of being able to put my Celica.

My opinion is that diesels are the way to go. You just can't beat the combination of torque and fuel economy you get with a turbo diesel. If you're not towing a lot, the additional buy-in price combined with the extra cost of fuel may not be worth it to you... until the first time you're towing something at the upper edge of your towing capacity. Then it all becomes very worth it, hahaha. My personal preference is for the 7.3L Powerstroke.

ReverendDexter wrote: Any truck that you'll buy that's capable of towing will get no better mileage than it's fullsize brethren.

I would add that a 3.0L ranger 4x4 with auto trans won't do better than 20-21mpg on the highway, not towing. I think you can find full size 4x4 trucks that will do that depending on the tires and driving style.

If you want a midsize truck, and I do like them a whole lot versus a full size, I'd look at the latest generation Nissan. The folks on www.expeditionportal.com rave over them. They have a Dana 44 rear end I think, and are rather stout. One of the main benefits of a midsize over a full size, for me, is the ability to wheel them on the same trails as jeeps. Full size rigs just can't go a lot of places without major body damage.

I'd stay away from short wheel base vehicles. Wheelbase wins in towing.

I had a '00 Dakota 2wd extended-cab with the 4.7 V8 for several years. It got a consistent 19mpg on the highway & towed my Colt on an open trailer with no problem. Other than a tranny failure while it was still under warranty & the warped front rotors that Dodge refused to acknowledge(a common gripe on those trucks)it was a great truck....and still continues to be for my Ex. Last I knew she was well over 100k on it with no problems. It also drove much better than most trucks.

That said, I used it once to haul a slate-top pool table, then later hauled the same pool table in the '88 1/2-ton Chevy I have now. We had to strap it on it's side in the Dakota & it squatted the truck 4" front & rear. On the Chevy, it slid between the wheel wells & I couldn't even tell it was back there - even though they're both rated as 1/2-ton. Of course, the best milage I can get from my Chevy is 17mpg with the 305.

On the space issue... I have a house with 2 car garage. It is under my house and shares space with my "man-cave". So is isn't very big, plus has supports for the house in the middle. It is something that isn't going to change.

Mileage is not a concern. Short drives don't cost a lot. Besides, I can work from home on most any occasion.

I started the search looking at the Frontier mostly because I read a column in GRM about towing with an Xterra. The Crew Cab tows 6300lbs, that is should be good.

It's the one I am probably leaning towards. Any thoughts on 2x4wd?

If you are going to get a truck, get a full size. Dont waste your time with those little toy trucks. Even a modern 1/2 ton is years ahead in utility of any of the light trucks.

If you are not getting a fullsize truck just save yourself the expense and get an Astro van. They could be had with a manual transmission or AWD, just not both at the same time.

My Dad recently traded in a 06' Ram 1500 for an 06' Frontier 4x4. The ram was lacking in quality, cost more to own/operate, and sucked gas - the frontier improved upon all of those. The only complaint I heard out of him was that the radio didn't have a line-in for his music. The truck is comfortable and gets around 18-19mpg, and if you are looking at a 2wd version that should jump another 1-2mpg.

BradLTL wrote: On the space issue... I have a house with 2 car garage. It is under my house and shares space with my "man-cave". So is isn't very big, plus has supports for the house in the middle. It is something that isn't going to change. Mileage is not a concern. Short drives don't cost a lot. Besides, I can work from home on most any occasion. I started the search looking at the Frontier mostly because I read a column in GRM about towing with an Xterra. The Crew Cab tows 6300lbs, that is should be good. It's the one I am probably leaning towards. Any thoughts on 2x4wd?

If space isn't an issue, go full size, period, I wish I had the space

Test drive what you like, some trucks ride choppy. I loved my '92 Dakota V8 for all the brawn and power but the ride empty was back breaking.

I now drive a Ridgeline, it rides like an Accord. The cons are: it's missing the V8 brawn. The gas mileage is not all that much better than a new V8. The seating position is kinda weird if you're tall. Other than that it's a really nice and well thought out truck as with most Hondas.

I also started a similar thread late last year if you search that'll give you some more ideas.

The Ridgeline is not a truck, its an AWD minivan with the hatch removed.

93gsxturbo wrote: The Ridgeline is not a truck, its an AWD minivan with the hatch removed.

I sense some sour grapes.... You're jealous aren't you.

Ridgeline is a great truck for someone that thinks they want a truck, but really don't, and certainly don't need a truck. It's a truck for people who buy trucks to be seen in a truck.

I might have one, but there's too issues that I just can't get past: 1) When you're not in 4x4, it's FWD. I'm not gonna tow with a FWD. 2)Because of the nature of VTEC, the hp/tq numbers are misleading, and it doesn't have nearly the power that it's specs suggest unless you're winding out the motor.

Now, those two things aside, a Ridgeline would be a fantastic only vehicle for someone: it seats 4 comfortably, it handles well, it gets acceptable mileage, has typical Honda reliability, and has the recreational functionality of a pickup (just not the true-work functionality). It's a great compromise of a lot of needs and wants.

But if you can have 2 vehicles, you'd be better off with a F-250 and a Civic or Miata..