Best Small Truck...
- Thread starter Jim Cissell
- Start date
- Status
I would not call the V6 in the Ranger and now in the base Mustang a good V6! It is at best an ok V6. The GM Stovebolt six was durable but I would not want to finance anything with it in it either! It has average durability. That thing was derived from the Colgne V6 and had more then it's fair share of problems. It is about as refined as a stone hatchet! Truth be told they needed to update that truck and it's power train years ago but they can not afford to!!! Ford has to put their money where it will do the most good and make the most return for them.
Ford engines are seldom a problem in terms of long term durability. It is usualy electrical gremlins that get you in the end if you own a Ford! I think it is very bad advice to talk someone into a Ford Ranger at this point in it's product lifecycle. Better to get a Colorado or Tacoma. These two have modern powertrains, modern interiors, much better NVH, better chasis, and better electrical systems!
Ford engines are seldom a problem in terms of long term durability. It is usualy electrical gremlins that get you in the end if you own a Ford! I think it is very bad advice to talk someone into a Ford Ranger at this point in it's product lifecycle. Better to get a Colorado or Tacoma. These two have modern powertrains, modern interiors, much better NVH, better chasis, and better electrical systems!
I agree, the Colorado/canyon would make a viable option to the Taco if budget is a deciding factor. Do not drive one of these on a test drive and ever expect to be happy in a Ranger afterwards. There is ~ a quarter century in progress in the Toyota/GM offerings compared to the neglected Ranger. What's the point of buying a new truck that is already old?
It's comparable to buying a new computer with Windows 95 installed and an original celeron processor and one of those huge monitors with the tube in it! Probably can get a good deal on one, and hey, it's brand new and will do the job. But it's not the same as current design.
It's comparable to buying a new computer with Windows 95 installed and an original celeron processor and one of those huge monitors with the tube in it! Probably can get a good deal on one, and hey, it's brand new and will do the job. But it's not the same as current design.
I have an 07 Colorado and love it. It may or may not be a better truck than a Tacoma but it cost less and imo looks much better. pics:http://rides.webshots.com/album/556884019NXaheI
I am not talking about the Cologne 4.0L. I am talking about the Vulcan 3.0L. He said that durability was his main concern. The 3.0L is the most durable engine available in any small truck right now.
My Ford is approaching seven years in age and has never had an electrical problem ever. Not one. Even after the cap was left off the trailer light hookup and it became filled with dirt and grime, I just cleaned it up and all was well. #@$%!, the only reason I replaced the original battery when it was over five years old was because I figured it had been in there long enough.
What is wrong with suggesting the Ranger? It is outdated as far as refinement and technology goes, but it is possibly the most durable small truck out there because its design has been proven time and time again. The original poster said he wanted a durable truck that would last #@$%! near forever...that has Ranger written all over it. The current Tacoma is a nice truck, but it is expensive, relatively unproven, and as far as use for a work truck, it does not offer anything over the Ranger.
It is funny that you bring up interiors. While most of the Ranger's interior dates back to 1995, it still can be optioned out better than the Tacoma. Ford offers leather and some excellent Pioneer sound systems (two of them with factory subs). Toyota has a very car-like interior in the Tacoma, but still no leather or really high end sound systems.
This is a topic (a smaller AFFORDABLE basic work truck) that, while it seems to be of more than passing interest to us, is largely ignored by current manufacturers. I realize the profit on these are thin, but if you multiply it out as if you did produce one of these you would have the market cornered and you would be in the green. I did not own one of the 1970-1980s Toyota trucks, but anyone who did expresses great love for these utilitarian vehicles. I see a great opporunity for a company like Hyundai to break into the mini truck world with a 4 cyl long bed, pretty much bare bones version, sort of like the Chevy W/T option grouping, yet designed with easy maintenance as this would establish them in this segment for years to come??
I'm on my second Ranger, the first had 180000 when I traded it in, never did any work but the usual maintenance. My new one is a stripped down 04, 4 cyl. 5 speed, vinyl floor,... Paid 12k for it brand new. It gets 30 mpg. The vinyl floor is great, never want carpet again. Get in there with some soapy water and it looks like new. When you look at total cost of ownership over the lifetime of a vehicle, the Ranger is hard to beat.
If you require brand spanking new there really is only one "small" truck left and that is the Ranger or it's Mazda twin.
If you are willing to settle for just a few years old (pre-2005) my recommendation would be the Tacoma. Not that the newer Tacomas are necessarily bad, just that they really aren't "small" anymore. They are just as bloated as the Dakota and Colorado and still can't get a sheet of plywood between the wheelwells.
I have owned a '91 Ranger, '94 S-10, and a '99 Tacoma for comparison in case anyone is wondering.
I've got an 05 frontier and have had no problems. Then engine is pretty peppy for a 4cyl. I average 23-24 in mixed driving. Mine is a 5 spd.
I still don't get calling the colorado mid-sized. A single cab Colorado is a pretty small vehicle and I promise it's equally or more tossible into corners....
Comparing extended cab versions, the Colorado is 4 inches longer but almost two inches narrower and shorter...
Comparing extended cab versions, the Colorado is 4 inches longer but almost two inches narrower and shorter...
I bought an 06 Mazda B2300 because it was the cheapest truck ($10900) I could find. The 5 speed auto took a little getting used to but it has been a great truck for the past 7 months. It gets 25-26 mpg at an average 70-80 mph. So far no problems in 15,000 miles. Before this truck I drove a toyota 4X4, 4cyl, 5-speed for 17 years-230,000 miles. still have it too.
My daughter has a '96 Mazda B4000 with 96XXX trouble free miles. Good little pickup.
Jim,
Here is my $0.02 worth...
I had similar requirements in 04 when I bought my Ranger. The current 4cyl Duratec is NOT an old outdated design.
http://www.escortfocus.com/html/2_3_duratec.html
I think it is on par with similar offerings from the Toyota, GM, etc. The auto trans is a newer, ( not sure when it actually came out ), design being a five speed with adaptive learning yada-yada. So while the body style may be long in the tooth, the power train your interested in is very up to date.
I got a great deal on mine which I order because all the 4cyl Rangers in dealer stock were very stripped down. I got it for under invoice and then another $3k off that. It's a good little home-owner weekend-warier type truck. Outside of tire pressure sensors, I don't see where a 4cyl Yoda, Canyon, etc. is any more modern?
Good luck with whatever you decide on!
01rangerXL, You just do not get it! The age of a design has nothing to do with it's durability. If you look at the Tacoma for example all of the drivetrain is basicly a continueing evolution of the HILUX pick. So their is not really anything new to the axles,transmission,transfere case just slight changes and improvements. The interior is probably the best it has ever been in the Taco right now. The chasis and sheet metal componets have continued to improve in terms of materials and design. The computers software used in conjunction with newer types of steels allowed the chasis to be made more stiff and torsional rigid then the previous HILUX model along with a 500lbs. weight saveings! You just can not do that type of thing with a 13+++ year old design. Toyota's axles design is the best on any small pickup and has been since day one. THeir transmission automatic or manual tend to last the life of the truck or at least as long as the engine! Look at the I4's that are available in the two wheel drive Tacoma's! A lot of the Rangers that we had at AutoZone had transmission problemes.
The Colorado and Canyon are really nice trucks as well. I will admit I am biased toward the Tacoma but if I could not afford a Tacoma the GM compact pickups would be my next choice. I test drove them as part of captured fleet and they are nice in terms of fit,finish,NVH etc....The only think I wish they would have done differntly was kept the 4.3 as an optional engine and given it a 5 speed automatic instead of the old and outdated 4L60E. An additional gear and some newer shift algorythms would have made they available engines much more dynamic in my opion!
The Colorado and Canyon are really nice trucks as well. I will admit I am biased toward the Tacoma but if I could not afford a Tacoma the GM compact pickups would be my next choice. I test drove them as part of captured fleet and they are nice in terms of fit,finish,NVH etc....The only think I wish they would have done differntly was kept the 4.3 as an optional engine and given it a 5 speed automatic instead of the old and outdated 4L60E. An additional gear and some newer shift algorythms would have made they available engines much more dynamic in my opion!
Base model prices are very close.
Check this link out for comparisons with Edmunds.
2007 Chevrolet Colorado
Work Truck 2dr Regular Cab SB (2.9L 4cyl 5M)
2007 Ford Ranger
XL 2dr Regular Cab Styleside SB (2.3L 4cyl 5M)
2007 GMC Canyon
WT 2dr Regular Cab SB (2.9L 4cyl 5M)
2007 Nissan Frontier
XE 4dr King Cab 6.1 ft. SB (2.5L 4cyl 5M)
2007 Toyota Tacoma
2dr Regular Cab 6.1 ft. SB (2.7L 4cyl 5M)
change | remove change | remove change | remove change | remove change | remove
Manufacturer Info Colorado Ranger Canyon Frontier Tacoma
Search Dealer
Inventory
Special Info from
Ford
Search Dealer
Inventory
Special Info from
Nissan
Pricing Colorado Ranger Canyon Frontier Tacoma
MSRP $13,910 $13,860 $13,910 $16,050 $14,180
Invoice $13,145 $13,325 $13,145 $15,179 $13,140
Check this link out for comparisons with Edmunds.
2007 Chevrolet Colorado
Work Truck 2dr Regular Cab SB (2.9L 4cyl 5M)
2007 Ford Ranger
XL 2dr Regular Cab Styleside SB (2.3L 4cyl 5M)
2007 GMC Canyon
WT 2dr Regular Cab SB (2.9L 4cyl 5M)
2007 Nissan Frontier
XE 4dr King Cab 6.1 ft. SB (2.5L 4cyl 5M)
2007 Toyota Tacoma
2dr Regular Cab 6.1 ft. SB (2.7L 4cyl 5M)
change | remove change | remove change | remove change | remove change | remove
Manufacturer Info Colorado Ranger Canyon Frontier Tacoma
Search Dealer
Inventory
Special Info from
Ford
Search Dealer
Inventory
Special Info from
Nissan
Pricing Colorado Ranger Canyon Frontier Tacoma
MSRP $13,910 $13,860 $13,910 $16,050 $14,180
Invoice $13,145 $13,325 $13,145 $15,179 $13,140
And base price can be decieving.
Rebates and user ratings from MSN auto:
07 Ranger rebate > $2000, User ratings 9.4
07 Colorado/Canyon rebate > $0, user rating 9.5/9.9
07 Nissan Frontier rebate > $1750, user rating 6.4
07 Toyota Tacoma rebate > $0, user rating 6.5
Rebates and user ratings from MSN auto:
07 Ranger rebate > $2000, User ratings 9.4
07 Colorado/Canyon rebate > $0, user rating 9.5/9.9
07 Nissan Frontier rebate > $1750, user rating 6.4
07 Toyota Tacoma rebate > $0, user rating 6.5
The age of a design does have an important role with durability. When a design is proven over years of use, it is generally a safe bet. With a new design you are taking a bigger gamble. That does not mean that the new design will not hold up, but you are not taking a gamble with the proven design. The original poster said he wanted durability. The Ranger has been PROVEN to be a durable truck through decades of use.
Do you have some evidence to show that Toyota's axles are better? Even the small 7.5" axle on Rangers seems to hold up well if you do not swap in a V8 or put on huge tires. The 8.8" axle on 4.0L and most 4WD Rangers is practically bulletproof and can handle big tires and high HP motors.
The M5OD transmission in the Ranger is durable as well. It will last as long as the truck as long as it does not get filled with gear oil. The original A4LD OD automatic was not known for stellar reliability, but later variations of it (4R44E, 4R55E, 5R44E, and 5R55E) have significant improvements made and can last as long as the truck if cared for. Not sure what kinds of reliability problems you have experienced, but I know the 5R44E in my parents truck shifts flawlessly and always has since day one.
Just because the 4.0L is available in the Hilux (in a very small number of markets) too does not mean it is proven. It is still a fairly new engine. The 2.7L has been around a while, but I am not sure what its reliability track record is like. Most Hilux trucks get diesel engines.
Also, be careful comparing the Hilux frame to the Tacoma frame. They are no longer built on the same platform. They are not twins anymore. Really, any comparison between the current Tacoma and Hilux is not really valid unless you are talking about an identical part.
I will agree that the interior of the new Tacoma is much better than the one in the previous generation. 2004 and older trucks were cramped and it resulted in questionable crash test results. New trucks are greatly improved. Ford still does offer many more material and feature choices though. You are stuck with cloth and carpet in a Tacoma.
As far as fit and finish, NVH, etc... The Ranger has been beating the Tacoma in JD Power initial quality surveys since the 2005 redesign of the Tacoma. I think that is something worth noting.
The Ranger is an oudated truck in need of a redesign, but that does not mean that it should not be considered. For a lot of people out there it is still the best truck for their needs. Just because the Tacoma is newer, more expensive, etc... does not mean that it is always going to be the better choice for every person.
So far the Ranger intrigues me the most, as that design has been around for some time now, BUT, I recently found out Ford uses a composite (plastic!) intake mainifold on their 4-banger engine (which I was interested in).
The idea of a plastic component directly on an engine doesn't sit well with me. I've poked around and found out there has been some problems indeed associtaed with these composite components. I was also disturbed to hear that GM uses this production as well, and many other companies are looking into that material usage.
I just can't imagine that being a durable part - and I bet it won't last 20+ years like I'm used to!
Jim
The idea of a plastic component directly on an engine doesn't sit well with me. I've poked around and found out there has been some problems indeed associtaed with these composite components. I was also disturbed to hear that GM uses this production as well, and many other companies are looking into that material usage.
I just can't imagine that being a durable part - and I bet it won't last 20+ years like I'm used to!
Jim
My wife had the GM plastic manifold...total #@$%!...rest of car #@$%! as well. Avoid!
John
John
Toyota's axles design is the best on any small pickup and has been since day one.
I completely disagree with that statement. I think they have the worst design. The gaskets have a tendency to leak where the housing bolts together and can be an expensive PITA to replace the gasket. GM has the best design, with oil bath bearings and the rears will last the life of the truck if maintained.
I completely disagree with that statement. I think they have the worst design. The gaskets have a tendency to leak where the housing bolts together and can be an expensive PITA to replace the gasket. GM has the best design, with oil bath bearings and the rears will last the life of the truck if maintained.
- Status
