"Harryk" wrote in message
...
On 1/6/11 3:13 PM, YukonBound wrote:


"Harryk" wrote in message
...
On 1/6/11 11:00 AM, YukonBound wrote:


"Harryk" wrote in message
...
On 1/3/11 11:49 PM, Tim wrote:
I haven't seen where smaller trucks are really that great of a
savings
compared to their bigger counter parts, Especially if you plan on
really using them.

It depends on how you plan to use a truck. I no longer have a trailer
boat so I don't need a full-sized truck to tow a heavy boat. The
smaller trucks are...smaller...and therefore easier to park, easier to
maneuver, a little easier on the gas. Most of the time the "stuff" my
wife buys at the garden shops and other stores will easily fit into a
smaller truck. The other times, the "stuff" is too large for even a
full-size pickup truck.

I happened to park next to a new Toyota Tundra the other day, and
thought that truck was just humongous. I owned a Tundra some years
ago; it was significantly smaller than the current models.

The new trucks do seem way too big for a city dwelling weekend warrior.
I did have the Ranger for three years , but I have mixed feelings about
them.
I could never claim to be tall in a newsgroup where every second poster
claims to be 6' 4" and weighing 230 or so .................... but on
the other hand, if you stood me next to Scotty..................
anyway, they jack the Rangers up.. even the 2WD versions and seem to
compress the cab height so you have to sit in a lower seat that say, a
mini-van or even a RAV4.
I found the seat of firm foam uncomfortable for a couple of months and
even called the salesman to see if I could unload the Ranger and move
up
to a F150.
He told me to wait and the foam would conform to my shape.. and he was
mostly right.
If I was in the market today, I'd take advantage of the great sales
Ford
has been offering and try to find a short wheelbase regular cab F150.
(6.5 foot box).
That's all I would need the vast majority of the time and I could
always
put a cap over the box to accommodate the dog.


I had a Ranger and an F150. Both were good trucks, as was my Tundra.
I've eliminated the Chrysler and GM small trucks; they don't do much
for me. That leaves Toyota and Ford, I guess. I need to take a test
drive in the Toyota Tacoma 4x4 small truck.

I sat in the Tacoma cab while having my RAV4 serviced and found that the
windshield cut off too low. I felt like the roof was caving in on
me..... and the seating is low, similar to the Ranger. Too bad that
Honda Ridgeline is so expensive. It might be a good choice for a light,
mid-sized pickup.

Hmmm. I haven't looked at a Honda or its pricing... :)

Consumer Reports seems to like it...
here's some of their online report...

"Honda RidgelinePhotosVideo

Base MSRP price range:$28,900 - $36,830 HighsRide, handling, powertrain,
rear seat, access, in-bed trunk, dual-action tailgate, crash-test results,
composite bed, reliability. LowsRoad noise, towing capacity, turning circle.
See our user reviewsAlready own it? Write a reviewCar Type: Compact pickup
trucksCR overall score
Honda's pickup truck has agile handling and a ride that's supple and
steady. The tailgate opens vertically or horizontally, and beneath the bed
is an all-weather, lockable trunk. The 3.5-liter V6 is quiet, smooth, and
responsive. Road noise is pronounced. The roomy crew cab is nicely detailed
and easy to access. The five-foot-long cargo bed has no wheel-arch intrusion
and is made of composite material. While not designed for serious
off-roading, the Ridgeline is capable in mild off-road conditions and it can
tow 5,000 pounds

Realibility, ride, owner satisfaction and acceleration are all better than
average but fuel economy is worse.