After 8 years in a full size, moving back to a mid-size - Recommendations?

[2025 deleted member]

It's funny that I see a lot of people saying this, as if they think the F-150 just lugs along at low RPM when towing up a steep hill?

Uh, yeah, that'd be a no, for sure. The engine screams at ~ 5000 RPM when topping an 11,000 pass, just like the Suburban did.

The difference is that in the Suburban I was in 1st gear and going at most 25 mph. In the F-150 I'm in 3rd gear and going 55+. But it still revs very high and fuel consumption is terrible, in the single digit range.

In fact, I get excited if I'm able to get 11 MPG towing. It usually only happens when I'm doing most of my travel on relatively flat roads. In the mountains, 7 - 10 is more where I see my MPG at. And that's burning 91 octane premium (the highest you can get here in Colorado.)

You had the 3.5 eco? I’ve never towed with it but can compare the 2.7 eco to the 3.5 in the Tacoma and the 2.7 eco pulls 10x better- the torque curve on a ecoboost is much more enjoyable for towing.

 

[calicamper]

I've never sat in a Ranger or driven one but I do like the look of them. The piddly gas tank is a huge turn-off though. It's unfortunate that manufacturers seem to not take fuel capacity into consideration when they design a vehicle (especially a compact truck.)

Fuel capacity is literally the only reason I crossed the Silverado off my list when shopping for a new truck in 2019. It's also the primary reason I went with the F-150, for its 36 gallon tank.

My F-150 gets 8 - 11 MPG when pulling the trailer through the Rocky Mountains. With my 36 gallon tank that means I generally have 300 miles between fuel stops. Assuming similar mileage on a Ranger I'd be stopping twice as often, basically every 150 miles or so. In my mind that's unacceptable for a vehicle that is being used in the Rocky Mountain West.

I’m pretty sure the modifications Ford made to the Australian frame for crash test results impacted the fuel tank size.

The new Ranger is on a all new frame likely with na purpose. It won’t surprise me if the fuel tank is larger.

 

[calicamper]

You had the 3.5 eco? I’ve never towed with it but can compare the 2.7 eco to the 3.5 in the Tacoma and the 2.7 eco pulls 10x better- the torque curve on a ecoboost is much more enjoyable for towing.

The current 3.5 is very different than the 3.5 of say 2017. Even my 19 Platinum stock 400hp is dramatically different than my neighbors 17 3.5 with an 8spd.

Mine feels like a diesel gobs of power 1800rpm 2500. You never see 3000rpm unless your in tow haul mode and dragging a heavy pig of a trailer and flogging the truck like hell, even then 4000+ rpm is rarely seen.

My neighbors 17 3.5 is shockingly quite different and I’d say a current 2.7 is probably more gutsy below 2500rpm than the older version of the 3.5

 

[llamalander]

Another fan of Nissans here, pushing 180k miles in mine and still enjoying it. Probably closer to any of the trucks you used to drive. Not too much is fancy, but with a good seating position, really reliable engine, low maintenance costs and surprising off-road ability off the lot might all be welcome. I don't often tow, but I always drive heavy, and it does well at altitude, well in snow, happy in the dirt, seldom in the shop. Go drive a few of the trucks on your list and you'll know better what suits you.

 

[ChasingOurTrunks]

It's funny that I see a lot of people saying this, as if they think the F-150 just lugs along at low RPM when towing up a steep hill?

Uh, yeah, that'd be a no, for sure. The engine screams at ~ 5000 RPM when topping an 11,000 pass, just like the Suburban did.

The difference is that in the Suburban I was in 1st gear and going at most 25 mph. In the F-150 I'm in 3rd gear and going 55+. But it still revs very high and fuel consumption is terrible, in the single digit range.

In fact, I get excited if I'm able to get 11 MPG towing. It usually only happens when I'm doing most of my travel on relatively flat roads. In the mountains, 7 - 10 is more where I see my MPG at. And that's burning 91 octane premium (the highest you can get here in Colorado.)

That’s not what I’m saying - totally get the f150 will rev too, but that’s not what I’m trying to tell you about the canyon. It’s not just the fuel consumption - that’s just a matter of cash, in terms of this metric on its own. But as you previously said, your f-150 has a 136 litre tank. My Canyon has half that. So, towing with a Canyon in hilly country means your range is functionally only about 200kms between fuel ups, whereas when not towing I can do around 450-500 kms in mixed city and highway, more if I’m easy on the throttle - that’s pretty suitable for most North American trips, but 200km is pretty light. The shop I take my trailer to is an hour and 10 minutes away from where I live in it, and I am unable to do a round trip without stopping for gas.

That poor range might be a deal breaker for the type of trips you take, because as you know you won’t have a ton of extra payload for extended range tanks or jerries, and keeping fuel in the trailer is likely not ideal. But the diesel fares much better in this regard, giving you much better range between fuel ups when towing as compared to the gasser.

So, if you are looking at one of the Twins (and I would - they are pretty great!) I’d say consider the diesel in your case - if you were just looking for a touring rig that wouldn’t be towing much, the gasser is really good.

 

[Gravelette]

Last summer I went from an F150 5.0 to a Frontier. My trailer is only 17', under 3500# with a tongue weight of 400#. You have reasons for going with a mid-size but I think you'll experience some compromises when towing. You'll likely need some clunky clip on mirrors to see past the trailer. While the unloaded mpg is significantly better, towing mpg is about the same and the 36 gallon tank is missed. The tongue weight squats the truck enough that I'm considering the aggravation of a WDH. Limited payload pretty much rules out a bed cap, which I found useful on the F150. On the plus side, the Frontier has plenty of power, a useful tow/haul mode and some nice safety features.

 

[2025 deleted member]

Last summer I went from an F150 5.0 to a Frontier. My trailer is only 17', under 3500# with a tongue weight of 400#. You have reasons for going with a mid-size but I think you'll experience some compromises when towing. You'll likely need some clunky clip on mirrors to see past the trailer. While the unloaded mpg is significantly better, towing mpg is about the same and the 36 gallon tank is missed. The tongue weight squats the truck enough that I'm considering the aggravation of a WDH. Limited payload pretty much rules out a bed cap, which I found useful on the F150. On the plus side, the Frontier has plenty of power, a useful tow/haul mode and some nice safety features.

If you went back in time would you do it again? Any regrets?

 

[Gravelette]

I liked the F150 better but I was having trouble getting good service. I wanted a new truck that I hopefully wouldn't have to worry with for awhile. The Frontier was one of the few trucks actually available at the time. It's a nice vehicle in many ways but a compromise for towing. I've decided that at my age I don't need to squeeze every dime from a purchase so I'll likely only keep it 2 or 3 years. If I'm still towing then I may go back to a full size truck or large SUV.

 

[dstefan]

Current Tacoma is unacceptable to me given the odd seating position. Some people don’t mind it, but you see it in most reviews.

This

I loved my 2nd Gen, but the seats killed my back. Had to use an insert. Likely depends on your height — I’m 6’3”. One of the two big reasons I ended up in Tundra.

 

[PirateMcGee]

Will an extended cab truck work? My full size king cab Titan would fit in your garage at 228". 400hp Simple V8, 26 gallon tank, rear locker, great stereo, comfy interior, 9 speed auto, plenty of towing capacity.

Otherwise I would be looking at Frontier or the GMC or the ranger when Ford offers the 2.7.

 

[phsycle]

There is a misconception all midsize will tow 4K lbs. Well, not comfortably anyway.

If you must park in the garage, and you’re limited to 19’, I’d look at a full-size SUV:

2nd Gen Sequoia w 5.7 (205”)
Yukon w 6.2 (204”)
Armada (209”)

 

[calicamper]

The misconception all midsize will tow 4K lbs is not correct. Well, not comfortably anyway.

If you must park in the garage, and you’re limited to 19’, I’d look at a full-size SUV:

2nd Gen Sequoia w 5.7 (205”)
Yukon w 6.2 (204”)
Armada (209”)

My 2019 Expedition 400hp 10spd is 210” long. It can almost match my Subaru in Uturn space talking literally just a few inches more vs the Subaru. Its also a very solid 2mpg less than my old CVT 175hp Outback . Which is just nutz. Heavy tow pack 9200lb max tow with full 4x4 capability also. Unless the new generation mid sized trucks see a dramatic improvement in mileage, towing power (gearing) etc I just can’t see me ever going from a really good full sized SUV to a midsized pickup. I would be giving up a huge amount of performance, capability, safety and comfort.

 

[MotoDave]

... Current Tacoma is unacceptable to me given the odd seating position. Some people don’t mind it, but you see it in most reviews. Give one a good test. Supposedly they changed it with the coming 2024.

The current GX will easily tow your trailer but it needs a lot of mods go off road. And its styling is very Lexus. But it’s capable and legendary for reliability. I find the current 4Runner to be unacceptable for daily driving - slow, lumbering, feels much bigger than it is. I’d take a used GX over a 4Runner and live with the styling.

I'm pretty sure the Tacoma, 4runner and GX all have the same seating position issues. The GX might be a little easier to deal with because the seats are more adjustable. But for sure I don't find my GX as comfortable after long drives as my Tundra was.

I'm excited for the new Land Cruiser and/or GX550 ... in 10 years when I can afford to buy one used from the investment bankers and doctors who want to pay new vehicle prices these days

 

[nickw]

I like the new Hard Body Frontier - not sure what the specs are yet, but it's a cool, simple rig that Nissan is typically known for.

Nissan brings back the Hardbody truck with a tribute model - Hagerty Media

Our favorite things about the 1980s-throwback, special-edition Frontier are the wheels, nearly identical to those of the OG Hardbody.

www.hagerty.com

I LOVED my 19' Ranger for what it was, but small bed that I had sucked but overall it was a really great rig except the fuel tank which was dismal.

 

[gatorgrizz27]

Surprisingly, with all of these answers, I haven’t seen anybody mention this one yet…

For towing a camper well + fitting in a garage restriction, for a retired couple…

Why not get an extended cab F-150 rather than a crew cab?

Still works fine for luggage/groceries/tools out of the weather, grandkids (assuming they aren’t in the giant infant car seats or 15/16) can still fit in the back seat comfortably, no real trade offs to speak of.