Trucks: Smallish 4-dr 4x4, Tacoma or Frontier or ?

Didn't want to go off-topic in the other trucks thread but I'm in the market for a 4-5yr old 4-dr 4x4 pickup.

How are the newer generation Nissan Frontiers? The Tacoma's are too expensive, heck, they're about the same price as the Tundras these days - sheesh. This will be the adventure/camping vehicle so I want it to be reliable as well as easy to work on (if there is such a thing anymore). I like the 2003 Tacoma shape and size the new ones are too big.

I don't have a fixed buget but around $14k with 50-60k miles on the truck sounds reasonable.

Its the new body style you don't want and 2wd, but I love my Tacoma. If it wasn't so much more money and worse gas mileage I would have jumped on the 4x4.

the guys at expedition portal like both trucks. do some searching there. www.expeditionportal.com

Oooh, I like that site, thanks!

Skierd, I want a one-car-that-does-it-all for my daily driver that's the reason for four doors and 4x4. As for the new shape it seems almost as big as the Tundra with a V6. I'm sure it's geared properly to haul and tow fine but considering the fact I'll be driving the truck solo most of the time I just want a smaller truck. The previous shape fits the bill perfectly.

the frontier si a great truck, I had a 99 for 90k trouble free miles, replacing the 150k miles I put on a harnbody, both 4x4, I've not been so lucky with my cheby

Frontier with a blower! Factory supercharged V6 mmmmhmmm

What is your reason for wanting a smaller truck as opposed to a full sized truck?

The Tacos are the same price as the Tundras because they have the same amount of stuff inside. A bit more sheetmetal outside, sure. But material cost isn't the main expense. Tacos are good trucks. And while they can't do the same amount of work as a Tundra, they're less expensive to run and easier to live with on a day-to-day basis.

But I found the Tacoma size wasn't burly enough for my needs, so I run a Tundra.

Well I have a '92 Dakota V8 that I bought recently as my first truck and I love the idea of having a truck. The Dakota works fine for a 4th vehicle but I'm considering consolidating it and my daily driver into one car. Smaller trucks are easier to park, easier to pull inside the garage to work on etc. - as Keith said it's just easier to live with on a daily basis.

I found a 2000 Frontier (4dr, 4x4) with 51k miles on it, for $10 - that's the cheapest I've seen but it's got a long bed which doesn't look that great to me and ends up being the size of my Dakota.

I love my frontier. It is an 08 though, from what I understand the 04 back were a little dogish on the drivetrain, but the 05+ are great...My nismo has 270hp (for now) and I have gotten 26mpg on the highway on a long trip up I-81. (I have the 6 speed manual)

OTOH my dad has a taco, he likes it doesnt seem to have the power or mileage...

Another thing is alot of tacomas say around 04 and back have the rusty frame thing going for them

I'm not certain you really can go wrong with either of them

I've had three 86 Toyotas. Two 2wd one tons, and one 4x4. All smaller trucks. I crowed their wonderfullness for years, or at least until I got the 4x4. Then I shut up. To say I was not impressed with a 22re in a 4x4 would be an understatement. The 4x4 also turned huge compared to the 2wd models, and drank gas at an almost embarassing rate. especially for such a worthless pulling vehicle.

I carefully ignored the comments of the full size truck crowd.

Then I fell into a 3.8 T100 (7/8's a full sized truck) 4x4. It has the rear seat, which with a family was really necessary. The truck has three times the power of the little truck, a full width bed which I've come to love, and gets precisely 1mpg less than the little truck model. It's certainly a pig to turn, but not much more of a pig than the mini truck 4x4 model was. Doesn't fit in the garage well, especially for repairs.

As a bonus, everyone wants mini trucks, so the bigger ones are way down on price. With a bigger truck you get a lot more capacity and working force, with a very nominal decrease in fuel mileage. In fact, if you're working the truck, the mileage will likely be better with a bigger truck as it's not working hard.

Just say'n, don't slam the door too hard on the full size truck notion.

What makes you insist on having a truck over say, an Outback? Do you need the bed? Will you be towing?

And I do mean Outback - Foresters represent all that is wrong and evil with Subaru these days, and I will hear nothing to the contrary.

My family has owned a pair of nissan trucks with a sonoma in between, all 4x4s.

97' Hardbody 4cyl/5spd 4x4, Gutless and very utilitarian, couldn't kill it without trying for days.

00' Sonoma HiRider (ZR2) V6/AT, Torquey, Killed two transmissions, blends in with general populus better.

00' Frontier V6/AT 4x4, Much more car-like in terms of interior quality and drive. Not the same go anywhere do anything feeling as the hardbody. Still dead nuts reliable. Very good gearing, gets every ounce of power out of the 3.3L. Never gets better than 17mpg.

Thinking about it none of these trucks never got much better than 17-18mpg, regardless of how hard you tried. Almost worth stepping up to a fullsize..

Have you given any consideration to the Colorado? My old roommate just bought one to replace his Titan when gas prices soared, and hasn't regretted it since. He does tile work, so the bed is loaded with tile and equipment constantly. He still gets 22mpg on the highway, and 18 around town, in a 250hp truck. My '96 full size Chevy with the 350 only makes 260hp!

His truck is a 2wd 4dr, so the 4x4 mpg is probably a little less, but still should be pretty good.

The Colorados look nice but seem overpriced to me, they look like the tacomas and frontiers in size but have the lowest tow rating. They're quite different from the S10s from what I understand so the reliability and longevity still needs to be proven. I hear they're coming out with a new engine soon which is supposed to be better.

Another option that came to mind was the Explorer SportTrac...any experience or opinions on them?

If I could have found a I5 5spd ZQ8 Colorado regular cab when I got my truck, I wouldn't be driving my Tacoma. There was one at a local dealer, but it sold before I could make the purchase.

Thought I'd update this thread. Just bought a brand new Ridgeline - and a (used) matching camper.

Now I have 6 cars/camper/motorycles to park in my two car garage...needless to say wife (as well as I) is not super happy about what she calls a 'used car lot'

If anyone wants to buy a H4/ITA Integra, a 1982 NightHawk 450cc or a '92 Dodge Dakota V8 let me know

Nitroracer wrote: My family has owned a pair of nissan trucks with a sonoma in between, all 4x4s. 97' Hardbody 4cyl/5spd 4x4, Gutless and very utilitarian, couldn't kill it without trying for days. 00' Sonoma HiRider (ZR2) V6/AT, Torquey, Killed two transmissions, blends in with general populus better. 00' Frontier V6/AT 4x4, Much more car-like in terms of interior quality and drive. Not the same go anywhere do anything feeling as the hardbody. Still dead nuts reliable. Very good gearing, gets every ounce of power out of the 3.3L. Never gets better than 17mpg. Thinking about it none of these trucks never got much better than 17-18mpg, regardless of how hard you tried. Almost worth stepping up to a fullsize..

I had a 96 Hardbody and agree that stock, the truck was gutless, I added Doug Thorley headers (from a 95 and swapped them for smog inspections) and a Flowmaster Muffler with 2.5" exhaust and it woke up the truck a lot.

The mileage on the Frontier, I would just get a Titan v8 and be done with it. I was supprised to see the 08 Nismo get the mileage claimed in another post. If that is true, I would love to have that truck.