toylandcruiser
Expedition Leader
The new truck is faster 0-60 than the old truck
Is the Tacoma enough truck?
- Thread starter leman
- Start date
The new truck is faster 0-60 than the old truck
bkg
Explorer
one of the reasons Ford gave for shuttering the Ranger plant in St. Paul, MN... the Ranger was only about 10% smaller than the f150...
Clutch
<---Pass
DaveInDenver
Middle Income Semi-Redneck
I can't say with any evidence but my intuition is that (1) you're going to lose money no matter what and (b) owning is better than renting or leasing over time. A vehicle is not an investment. The money you spend is for the convenience weighed against alternatives.
A lease would make sense from a cash flow aspect, it doesn't tie up capital in a depreciating asset. If you use the cash for other things that work better for you then go for it. But straight across even a lease with good terms still must cost something for the service. Then I think for a term longer than a few years ownership wins out. I mean, if you highly value a new car every 3 years then leases work in comparison. But beyond 3 years then ownership means you're sitting on a paid off car while still getting the utility.
If a Sprinter is so problematic that owning one can't be financially justified I'd personally pass.
Clutch
<---Pass
Yeah...the "new" midsizes don't make much sense. All these guy pleading their case that they are so much smaller....don't know about you, but I don't see it. Really no gains with them over a 1/2 ton. You loose a bit actually. down on power, less mpg, and less capacity...plus cost the same or even more than a 1/2. Not to say I don't like them...but at the end of the day they don't make much sense on the calculator or driving them.
If you really want something to run trails...buy a UTV, ATV, or Bike. Can only afford one vehilce? Buy a RCSB 1/2 ton...you can pick those up in the low $20's...dirt cheap by today's standards...as the cheapest Toyota Tacoma is closer to $30K now...
toylandcruiser
Expedition Leader
The new one will do 6.5 to 7 0-60
Clutch
<---Pass
I can't make a lease work on my calculator.
For the percentage of the time I would actually use the Sprinter, as I mentioned. Nice for changing clothes at the trail head, and camping. Maybe 10% of the time? Is it worth $600+/month for that convenience? More than that if you average in the money owed at signing. They'll probably nail you at turn in too. Haven't checked what it would cost to insure it either.
The old beater Tacoma averages me $200/month to run it before fueling. That is what it cost me for repairs/insurance over the course of year and before fuel.
DaveInDenver
Middle Income Semi-Redneck
It's not scientific, but even the 2nd gen Tacoma is still smaller than a full size. My garage faces an alley and I can still turn in and park my truck, get out inside the garage. It's more snug than it would have been in my '91 was (although I think my Tacoma turns tighter) but the doors on a full size are just longer enough that with her car in there too I wouldn't be able to get out.
I guess what I'd call it is the "mid" size probably pushes the limits on what you can still call a small truck. The older trucks really were compact and I liked that. But, as I keep saying, Americans seem to want even a truck that can tow their crap and manufacturers are trying to find the balance.
Bearing in mind that this was, what, 8 years ago now. The F150 is bigger so the old Ranger would have looked a lot smaller in comparison. That's really the problem. I'd consider a full size from 10 years ago against my Taco, they were closer in size. But in the reality of 2018 a Ranger/Colorado/Tacoma/Frontier are still smaller relatively than a F150/Silverado/Tundra.
I would consider an F150 sized truck from 2002 or a 1st gen Tundra against my 2008 Tacoma. But when comparing you have do straight across. A 2018 Tacoma is smaller than a 2018 Tundra.
phsycle
Adventurer
I put zero weight on those fellas. Good for some laughs, but as far as legitimate data, that channel is worthless. I mean, Gold Mine Hill? Ike Gauntlet? What does that really prove anyway? Just a goofy city slicker, over-the-hill headbanger, and a Russian putting on a show.
phsycle
Adventurer
Yup, there are several places where I had to do a 3pt turn in the fullsize, but the Tacoma makes it. Parking spots where it would be a squeeze, Tacoma fits right in.
Numbers play tricks in your head. Some people think an inch or two of extra leg room in the back seat doesn't amount to much. On paper, no, it doesn't. In reality, it's huge.
Clutch
<---Pass
I don't have the problem of trying to fit it in a tight garage or the city dwellers. I am also looking at value, what you can get for your dollars. The F150 seems like a better all around value to me.
As you have been telling me Dave, get the F150 and be done with it.
Midsizes are the fullsizes of yore.
Clutch
<---Pass
Well so do I....they don't even seem like "truck people" me. Don't think any of them have ever worked a hard [physical labor job] day in their life.
Was looking for a size comparison...and that is what I found.
phsycle
Adventurer
I don't have the problem of trying to fit it in a tight garage or the city dwellers. I am also looking at value, what you can get for your dollars. The F150 seems like a better all around value to me.
As you have been telling me Dave, get the F150 and be done with it.
Midsizes are the fullsizes of yore.
A friend of mine has a 2005 Tundra AC he bought new. Still loves it. Size is about the same as my DCSB, but a bit wider. That's a nice truck. I could own something like that, but the DC with the 6' bed is too big for me. But suffers the same flaw as the current Tundra.
F150, nice truck. Get a bare bones fleet model deal and be done with it. As long as you're ok with an auto
Clutch
<---Pass
A friend of mine has a 2005 Tundra AC he bought new. Still loves it. Size is about the same as my DCSB, but a bit wider. That's a nice truck. I could own something like that, but the DC with the 6' bed is too big for me. But suffers the same flaw as the current Tundra.
F150, nice truck. Get a bare bones fleet model deal and be done with it. As long as you're ok with an auto
Ya know...those new shiftable autos aren't that bad (did I just say that out loud!?)
Have been looking at the F150 XLT Sports...(did I just say THAT outloud!!??)
They really aren't that much more than an XL.https://www.mhautoranch.com/new/For...falls-id-7635a4aa0a0e0adf706162df98df1da8.htm
DaveInDenver
Middle Income Semi-Redneck
This has always been true, though. The reason the Hilux and compact trucks were ever popular is 95% of us do live in cities and towns. When I bought my Ranger and the 1991 later it was because I needed to park in town between MTB and 4WD trips. It's the same as it ever was. Full size trucks have been full size for their task.
The explosion of using trucks and SUV in place of cars is only in the past 10 or 15 years and the reason is there was a loophole in EPA laws that let the manufacturers continue to sell cars people wanted. These vehicles replaced the full size station wagons and sedans we all grew up riding in as kids, Impalas and Crown Vics and all of that. The market for compact and sporty Japanese and European cars has always been filled with compact Japanese and European cars.
Yeah, if I had the space and didn't need to parallel park an F150 would have made sense. Even in mid 1990s the cost between a Ranger and an F150 wasn't enormous and having the power and space would have been nice. If there's one thing car manufacturers are good at it's the up sell. They get you saying "Well it's not that much more to <this> or <that>."
And before you know it you leave with a XLT F150 with a bunch of options and a 6 year loan when you came in wanting a base level Ranger for cash or a 3 year loan. Then the marketing guys say "Look, everyone wants a full size heavily optioned truck and not poverty spec compact trucks, so make me more of those!" It's a self fulfilling circle that got us here.
With the closing of the CAFE loophole trucks may morph again back to their utilitarian uses, I dunno. I think this discussion is evidence the demand is still there for simple and appropriate sized trucks that don't cost so danged much (adjusting for inflation, remember!).
Last edited: