Nissan Frontier V.S. Toyota Tacoma

Nissan Frontier V.S. Toyota Tacoma

Here are my two options that I am looking at

2010 Toyota Tacoma 4X4 TRD 6 speed Manual Nice truck but has 80k miles Is in okay shape, will have to replace the radio

2013 Nissian Frontier SV 4X4 6 speed Manual 21k miles Faster then the Toyota, more options, but they drive nearly identical.

They are the same price, I am limited to these options because they are both in my price range and the only manual's with 4 doors in a reasonable distance. I won't be towing, it will be mainly used for hauling a kart,kayaks,occasional house items, and a DD.

Buy the Taco, drive up here, and sell it for $5000 more?

I'd go with the Nissan, but they're both good trucks.

Is there still rusty frame problems with the Toyota in 2010? Did Nissan have any similar problems?

i would have a hard time deciding between those 2. if it where me i would probably just pick the one that felt better to me. the toyota will have a bigger aftermarket but there will still be plenty available for the nissan.

I would lean towards the Toyota mostly for it's ability to retain value/resist depreciation.

This thread is useless without pictures. Two stock photos:

I think i'd go with the nissan.

My dad has a Nissan in that body style. 170k miles. CEL has been on for several years due a funky exhaust sensor reset issue. He beats the snot out of it, I'm for real. That thing is ABUSED, banged up, busted, dented body panels, and driven like it was stolen.

But it keeps right on running and taking everything he dishes out. I've actually been very surprised with the amount of abuse that thing has taken.

I have no experience with the Taco

clutchsmoke wrote: I would lean towards the Toyota mostly for it's ability to retain value/resist depreciation.

around 2000 it seemed like the nissan suv's and truck's started holding there value pretty well, pretty close to toyota equivalents from what I have seen on craigslist (more real world then KBB).

Also I had an xterra I sold recently with 265k on the clock for $2800, ran and drove great and everything worked. I imagine thats pretty on par with the toyotas.

I'd go for the Taco. Maybe your area is different, but around here the 4x4s for sale never seem to asking less than $5000, regardless of mileage or condition. Also, I'm pretty sure the frame rot issue was fixed by then.

Usually I am a big Taco proponent but if you can get a three year newer Frontier for the same amount, it's a no brainer. Taco's are priced as if they dipped in gold (they are good trucks nonetheless).

The Toyota will have better resale, but that only matters if you plan to sell it.

If you plan to keep it for 100 years and drive the snot out of it, go for the newer truck with lower miles.

The three years older will help negate the Taco tax over the Nissan. If they are the same price, I would go with the Nissan. I am biased.

I'm biased too. Taco.

Another vote for nissan, newer with way less miles for the same price.

I've driven both, they're both great. But like several have mentioned, the Tacos have ridiculously good resale value.

Idk if someone can confirm or not but do the newer nissans have transmission issues like I've heard? I ask because some one at my previous work traded his frontier for a taco because of losing 3rd gear and they were both manual transmission.

Like the Taco ball joint issues? Granted, these usually happen through neglect, but I've heard of a few that cut loose with low miles while off-roading.

Of those two, I agree with the others who say: go with the newer, lower mile truck. The VQ is a good engine, most of the transmission problems I heard with Nissans (granted, they were Xterras) were automatic transmission failures related to radiator failures.

Here is a weird thing, though. The Tundra crew cabs seem to go for LESS than a comparable Tacoma (at least around me). I blame it on everyone who wants to go wheeling in Uwharrie. Have you looked at those?

The Taco is a better truck, but that generation frontier was a huge leap forward vs the older trucks.

If the conditions with both vehicles are the same, I'd go taco. If the Frontier is in better shape do it.

Brett_Murphy wrote: Here is a weird thing, though. The Tundra crew cabs seem to go for LESS than a comparable Tacoma (at least around me).

Agreed.

In reply to Brett_Murphy: I don't think they made a Tundra as a Manual.

I've had my 2005 Tacoma Double Cab V6 4x4 since December 2004. It has 125,000 miles on it. I've had to replace the front hubs and the alternator. Toyota replaced the frame under warranty, even though I didn't think that it needed to be done. When they did that job, they also replaced the rear springs, front lower control arms and front half shafts, along with a bunch of other stuff. The interior has held up very well and the body has zero rust. I've used it to plow snow and haul car trailers. Mine is a long bed. Plowing would be easier with a short bed, but I'd have a harder time hauling motorcycles with one. I'd buy another in a heartbeat.

One of the guys that I work with has a four door Frontier and I get to see the trucks side by side all the time. The Toyota is a much bigger truck.

I have no complaints with our Xterra and would totally add a frontier if I needed that class truck. The TACO tax is too high for a vehicle that isn't all that much better in any way. Dare I say I almost thing nissan has caught up to it on quality.

I think the only way to decide is to hitch bumpers. Sometimes, the old ways are the best ways.

Lesley wrote: the Tacos have ridiculously good resale value.

Right up until they rust in half.

I have a 2008 2wd frontier crew cab w/ the 6 speed. 148,xxx miles similar usage as op describes that I bought new. Originally shopped Toyotas but they didn't do 2wd with manual. Most of my miles are highway but driven hard. Nothing but basic maintenance and tires so far. Still on the original brake pads even. Interior hasn't held up too well (kids). Plan to drive into the ground.