Which of the following vehicles would you

Status
Not open for further replies.
quote:

Originally posted by 59 Vetteman:
We all have our likes and dislikes. This is getting personal, so time to let it sleep.

Thanks


Sorry, not aiming to make it personal. Just curious where labman's line of questioning was coming from, in regards to savings and college education and what it has to do with the purchasing of a family truck for a family that truly uses/needs a truck.

So, the 2002 Tundra's, if I'm understanding correctly, would be a bit too small for a growing family??

Not exactly sure if we'll rid of the '85 Toyota p/up completely, or keep it around for an emergency vehicle - not worth trading in honestly.

Yes, I'd hate to buy a vehicle only to outgrow it in 3-4yrs.
 
I think Labman made a valid point. I kinda regret getting a fullsize p/u 'cause I could have easily gotten by with an S-10 or Colorado, Ranger, etc. Now I'm paying the price for fuel. I think the point he was trying to make was to make sure your priorities are straight. BTW the Dodge 4.7 is easy to work on. That's probably not going to be the case with an Asian import.
 
I understand the priority concern, I too have had to learn my lesson more then once, and I don't need a full size daily driving truck, I do agree they use WAY too much gas and that's just way more then I need.

Just need a compact size truck, BUT it must hold a family of 4 comfortably and not cramped. There are not many compact pick-up trucks that are suited to this - Frontier had the tall son's feet smashed under the front seat; the Colorado wasn't too much bigger; Ranger is definitely out; Tacoma is an iffy for size comfort but gets the highest rankings for overall reliability.

And I mentioned the Tundra because it has the bigger cab - though not by a whole lot, thinking the gas mileage is roughly the same as the Tacoma, but I may be off in that thinking. That's the only reason why I questioned the V8 in this sense.

The Xterra is the only SUV I'm interested in because it's built on a truck frame, and can take the daily pounding.
 
I purchased a 2006 Xterra two weeks ago and I'm still in awe of it's performance and luxury car ride. Anyone who thinks these things are "junk" (as posted above) should take one of them for a test drive. Road handling is incredible. I highly recommend one considering they are several thousand less than a Tacoma or Tundra (although the new Tacomas are nice).

As far as the cost of keeping a Nissan running....I don't think they are more expensive
than any other car. We have 2 Nissan's in the family now and they have my business until they produce inferior or unreliable products.

BTW, 59Vetteman....I thought you were closing this thread??
cheers.gif
 
I am getting about 25 mpg with my taco and I believe the 3.4 gets around 19-20. The Tundra is about 15.

Also, the tundra and tacoma are not imports. They are built here.
 
Hands down the Tundra!!!! I am a member of a long term Toyota owner family. I also work in the auto industry with mostly domestic manufactures. I can say hands down that normaly Toyota's are the lowest maintence especialy the newer ones (say after about 1996). My mother has a 2002 or 2003 Tundra that is paid off and all it gets are oil changes and trany fluid changes.
 
quote:

Originally posted by ScottB:

quote:

Originally posted by ex_MGB:
Flame suit on! The Ridgeline.

Wellllll, nice, but *****!
smile.gif


we are talking about trucks. not a car with the trunk lid ripped off.
lol.gif
. also you pay over 35 grand for one.

in the end get what you want. after all you will have to drive it everyday. every truck listed has their strong and weak points. be it price, maintance, reliablity, so on. what ever you choose have fun with it. as long as its a dodge
lol.gif
J/K
 
quote:

Originally posted by Amkeer:
I am getting about 25 mpg with my taco and I believe the 3.4 gets around 19-20. The Tundra is about 15.

Thank you for the gas mileage info, it really helps the deciding factor. If that's the standard for the Tundra, it's not bad for that size of a vehicle. Not exactly what I wanted to hear though; I'd like something with at least 18-19/city, but that may be wishful thinking.

Thanks for all the responses.
 
Why not any other choices?

Like other late model Chevrolet or Fords?

I really don't know what your after, but a crew Cab S10 or Sport trac sounds like they could be right up your alley.

FWIW you can get crew cab 1/2 ton trucks from ford or chevy that are 3-4 years old and get just as good mpg as a Tundra for 18K or so depending on options and milage. 15 mpg, out of a Tundra is nothing to write home about. Dodges Hemi 1/2 ton gets at least that, and would run rings around a tundra.

My '04 F150 5.4L 4x4 has been known to knock down 20 mpg at 55 mph (you can call ** all you want, I've got the logs to prove it). I average right around 15 or so with speeds over 70 mph. My F150 is no slouch either.
 
my dakota QC gets about 16 to 17 city and up to 24 HWY. but this seems to vary with other dakotas. some gets what mine gets and others gets barely 20 HWY. this is the 4.7 V-8.
 
02,

There clearly is a reason why he hasn't listed your choices which is probably why I wouldn't either.
 
offtopic.gif


A good place to start:

EDMUNDS "True Cost to Own" (see Directory). Based on first five years and 60,000-miles of driving:

Tundra: .61 cents-per-mile
Tacoma: .53 cpm
Dakota: .60 cpm
Xterra: .57 cpm

A spread of about $1,000 annually between highest and lowest.

I bought a 4-yr old Dodge 1/2-ton in late 2004 with 85,000 on it; my cost per mile is below .42 cpm (Edmunds site estimated .47 cpm), and my actual cost is .30 cpm due to business deduction, or, cheaper than owning a TOYOTA Prius over the same period. (I in no way skimp on maintenance, insurance or repairs).

Buying used kills the depreciation, the highest cost of all.

The above post (by 02) is on the mark. My 13/17 mpg is practically irrelevant. Based on extensive reading and practical experience with car maintenance I have no reason to doubt my outside projection of use (at 180,000-miles) will be practically trouble-free.

Likely the thread originator has considered this issue; I had to have a truck and was happy to find this one at 40% off of retail value. Motivated seller and buyer.

Were I to sell today (no more business use) I'd go find a nice 2004 Crown Vic at half the cost of new, and still be able to carry most of what I need or use a trailer. Edmunds estimates .44 cpm.

That would be a 5-year, nearly $6,000 savings over even the Tundra.
 
Actually, the Ridgeline is a Pilot with the hatch "ripped off" and a new '06 4wd goes for $27,977 around here...

This could be a very comfortable vehicle you won't likely outgrow for a decade or so, has some really neat storage options, ought to pull/carry anything within reason. Great engine, moderate size, gas mileage s/b decent... It's a Honda!

If you do want to shift for yourself, the 6-speed Xterra does sound like a nice way to go.

Cheers!
 
quote:

Originally posted by Amkeer:
02,

There clearly is a reason why he hasn't listed your choices which is probably why I wouldn't either.


Because he want's to spend more money on some thing that is smaller and gets just as poor mpg as a Full size?

I bet that's it.
 
quote:

Originally posted by 02supercrew:
Because he want's to spend more money on some thing that is smaller and gets just as poor mpg as a Full size?

I bet that's it.


I would! I, for one, can't stand driving vehicles that, for lack of a better word, feel "tankish".

My 94 Nissan truck and the wifes 05 Mazda3 are about as big of vehicles as I'd ever want to drive on a daily basis, regardless of MPG.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top