Who has a recent vintage "smaller" 4x4 pickup truck and what has been
your experience with it in terms of durability, fit and finish, small
boat towing capabilities, gas mileage, et cetera.

By smaller, I mean pickups like:

Ford Ranger
Toyota Tacoma
Chevy Colorado
Nissan Frontier

On 12/26/10 3:49 PM, Gene wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 15:06:57 -0500,
wrote:


Who has a recent vintage "smaller" 4x4 pickup truck and what has been
your experience with it in terms of durability, fit and finish, small
boat towing capabilities, gas mileage, et cetera.

By smaller, I mean pickups like:

Ford Ranger
Toyota Tacoma
Chevy Colorado
Nissan Frontier

I had a 4WD Colorado with the I-5. Limited carrying capacity and even
my son's 17 foot aluminum G3 felt like towing an anchor. It got 20 MPG
on the highway, unless towing the boat and then it got about 14 MPG. I
think, even with the new V8, they just aren't designed to tow that
much.

I now have a 4WD Silverado with the 5.3L V-8 and can tow anything less
than the Grady effortlessly. I get 20MPG in the winter on the highway
and 18.5 MPG towing my MC trailer and the G3. I think I can tow about
9,700#.

I had owned a Chevy big block dually that got 8 MPG, regardless...
then an S-10 and the Colorado... so, I thought the increase in mileage
was worth it.... I won't own another mid size truck, I don't think.





Thanks, I don't think I'll be buying another trailer boat of any
substantial size. I had a nice Ford Ranger Splashtruck in the 1990's
that was adequate for short tows of my 18' Sea Pro to the ocean ramps.

I haven't looked at the new Rangers, or the Chevy, Nissan or Chrysler
offerings. I have seen the Tacoma, a 4x4 model that apparently has a
6500 pound tow capacity.

Mostly I'll need the truck to haul around garden stuff, or tow my
tractors to the shop, and stuff like that. I have a lot of miles on my
4Runner. Might just get another 4Runner.

The new "full size" pickups seem humongous to me.

Gene wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 15:06:57 -0500,
wrote:


Who has a recent vintage "smaller" 4x4 pickup truck and what has been
your experience with it in terms of durability, fit and finish, small
boat towing capabilities, gas mileage, et cetera.

By smaller, I mean pickups like:

Ford Ranger
Toyota Tacoma
Chevy Colorado
Nissan Frontier

I had a 4WD Colorado with the I-5. Limited carrying capacity and even
my son's 17 foot aluminum G3 felt like towing an anchor. It got 20 MPG
on the highway, unless towing the boat and then it got about 14 MPG. I
think, even with the new V8, they just aren't designed to tow that
much.

I now have a 4WD Silverado with the 5.3L V-8 and can tow anything less
than the Grady effortlessly. I get 20MPG in the winter on the highway
and 18.5 MPG towing my MC trailer and the G3. I think I can tow about
9,700#.

I had owned a Chevy big block dually that got 8 MPG, regardless...
then an S-10 and the Colorado... so, I thought the increase in mileage
was worth it.... I won't own another mid size truck, I don't think.






The Colorado was not a favorite in the automotive press. The V8 should
be a huge improvement.

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.

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.

On Jan 4, 5:15*am, Harryk wrote:
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.

Yep.

When I think of small trucks I'm thinking of GM- SW15's Chevy S-10's
Ford Rangers and Dodge rams. The little ones.

Granted today's average 'heavy half' ton truck is build a lot larger
than the 'heavy 3/4' ton trucks from 20 years ago.

So when I think of small trucks, I do mean "small" They may get a
bit better economy but their overall usefulness is lacking compared to
their larger counterparts.

Obviously, I'm not a slave to fashion and never was, but I'd take an
early 2000's Dodge diesel or a 7.3 Ford power-stroke over any new
models of the smaller v-6's offered by almost anyone.

On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 16:12:35 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote:

On Jan 4, 5:15*am, Harryk wrote:
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.

Yep.

When I think of small trucks I'm thinking of GM- SW15's Chevy S-10's
Ford Rangers and Dodge rams. The little ones.

Granted today's average 'heavy half' ton truck is build a lot larger
than the 'heavy 3/4' ton trucks from 20 years ago.

So when I think of small trucks, I do mean "small" They may get a
bit better economy but their overall usefulness is lacking compared to
their larger counterparts.

Obviously, I'm not a slave to fashion and never was, but I'd take an
early 2000's Dodge diesel or a 7.3 Ford power-stroke over any new
models of the smaller v-6's offered by almost anyone.

If I didn't pull a trailer which required something on the bigger side, I'd go
for a Tacoma like the one I showed Harry, with the V6.

Something like this: http://tinyurl.com/366njfn

"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.

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.

In article ,
says...

"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.

With all due respect, little buddy, you drive a chick car.....it's NOT a
truck and never was.