Colorado ZR2 and Tacoma TRD Pro compared

[DaveInDenver]

Pretty sure the f150 wasn't boxed until the 2000 something.
dodge didn't use a boxed frame until 2003. Chevy after that.

The F150 first received a fully boxed frame in 2004. It was also when they started using hydroforming to make part of the frames, which isn't possible with an open profile or anything with a lot of voids. To be honest I think the marketing of fully boxed frames is a way of selling it as better when in fact it's just about being easier to manufacture. Back when the Toyota trucks we got pre-1995 were fully boxed they were stamping two halves and welding them, so that really was a design decision as a way to stiffen and strengthen with thinner material (the reason for boxing any frame really). I dunno what the current production technique Toyota uses for the Hilux but the Tacoma frame on mine appears still built with a welded seam on the boxed section and has a double wall through the 'C' profile back to the roughly above the rear axle. I think the rust issues of the 95-04 Tacoma (which was open only over the rear axle) probably had something to do with the current design.

 

[calicamper]

I bet boxed sections go directly to US standard crash rating. Notice that the boxed sections on boxed frames are always under the passengers. Plus any current full size 7-8 pass SUVs body on frame sit on boxed frames.

I bet the Mog and the Hilux are lousy machines to be in when a drunk clips you head on.

Boxed frame sections exist for many reasons but US frames are more likely boxed for passenger compartment rigidity and yes lend to designing very stiff platforms.

 

[Clutch]

I bet boxed sections go directly to US standard crash rating.

I disagree, they started boxing frames so people would endlessly argue about them on the intergoogle machine. The engineers and marketing teams are having a laugh...

 

[Martinjmpr]

holy ****.

Chevy released LITERALLY the exact truck everyone and their mother has been begging toyota to make for YEARS and it's too expensive plush and fluffy. Oh, sorry you can't row your own, I can't hear you crying over the sound of the 4 cylinder diesel and front and rear lockers. I wish I could buy one, I'd be all over it. Same thing happened with the BRZ/FRS. Everyone cried for a RWD back to basic sports car, it comes, and no one buys them. Again, I'd buy one in a heartbeart if I could. If someone told me to pick a brand new car and truck those would be the two in my driveway. As far as cost goes... ALL VEHICLES ARE EXPENSIVE NOW. You wan't a basic work truck? Ok, $25k please. It isn't 1993 anymore.

/rant

.
:agree: [golf clap]
.
Yes, it's called "cognitive dissonance", or more simply, what people SAY they want to buy is actually very different from what the WILL buy.
.
I've seen it happen in the motorcycle world for 30 years. Manufacturers and motorcycle magazines poll readers and ask them "what do you want?" Then the manufacturers introduce exactly what the "research" shows that people want ... only to see those bikes sit on the showroom floor and gather dust until they're finally sold at a loss.
.
I think there's two problems here: The first one is that the community that is being "polled" about what they want is a tiny, tiny, tiny, microscopic fraction of the people who actually buy vehicles. They may be loud, but they only represent a very small percentage of the market.
.
The second is that many of the people in this community simply don't buy "new" vehicles (and I'm definitely in that camp. The last new vehicle I bought was in 1999 and I'll likely never buy a new vehicle again.) As much as I'd like Toyota, Chevy, Nissan, etc, to listen to my preferences, it would be a stupid thing for them to do because they'll never see so much as a dime of my money.
.
Manufacturers need to cater to those people who will buy new vehicles, and those of us who buy used exclusively basically have to suck it up and understand that we're going to get what the new buyers buy, whether we want it or not. I'm not going to ********** about what Chevy or Toyota offers because they have no reason to cater to me.

 

[Dalko43]

Pretty sure the f150 wasn't boxed until the 2000 something.
dodge didn't use a boxed frame until 2003. Chevy after that.

I did say early 2000's, so I don't know what your disagreement is here.

Your ignorance of military trucks is very apparent. EVERY SINGLE MILITARY TRUCK with the exception of hmmwvs are c channel. The 2.5 ton, lmtv, and up. They can wheel. Maybe you should actually experience it before you comment on it.

I've spent plenty of time in all types of military trucks. Most of them cannot really wheel, at least not in the same fashion and down the same trails as something like a LC 70 or jeep. Generally-speaking, they're too big, too heavy, have limited suspension articulation, and horrible turning radius. They're HD transport vehicles designed to carry troops and gear over main avenues of approach (usually roads) with varying degrees of protection. They're capable vehicles in their own right, but their overall purpose is vastly different from the 3/4 ton and midsized pickup's and SUV's that we use in the civilian world. I've plenty of experience with HD military trucks....you obviously don't otherwise you wouldn't make such outlandish claims about their capabilities.

I was just using your failed logic when I said that about the Colorado and f250. At least you see how stupid it is.

Funny you didn't consider the f250/f350 off-road worthy until it received a box frame. You are so blinded by your list for that style of frame you can't see how illogical you are.

I've never made the argument that c-channel vehicles can't wheel. Nor did I ever say that a mid-size pickup with a boxed frame is more heavy duty than a 3/4ton with a c-channel frame. I simply said that all other things being equal, I'd rather have a boxed (read more rigid) frame in my vehicle than a more flexy c-channel one. The Unimog would be one of the few exceptions to that rule.

Like I said, people box their factory c-channel frames all the time for offroad project rigs...they do that for a reason. And there is a reason most manufacturers of 3/4 ton trucks and below use boxed frames.

Thanks for keeping the conversation polite though

 

[p nut]

Dude! Floval!

It is refusing to die, and running like a champ!

Just had the carrier bearing replaced last week, must of been shot longer than I thought...running very smooth now, almost feels like a new truck again. Which got me thinking...betcha I can squeeze another 100K out of it.

Yeah, I bet you can, too! Did you get a new bike, at least??

 

[METT-TC]

All of this C channel vs boxed debate has actively tried to lower my IQ...thanks :/

Toyota has a bit of corporate inertia going on--hopefully they can become more nimble in this market. Says the guy that JUST bought a 16 Colorado Z71 4x4 w/Duramax as a tow vehicle (and replacing the Jeep as a DD). I didn't consider the ZR2 ONLY because of its reduced tow rating and Toyota got zero love because of no diesel option.

 

[p nut]

...hopefully they can become more nimble in this market...

Agility or innovation seems to be lost in those board meetings. Both Tacoma and Tundra have gone unchanged for over a decade now. I have a couple of friends who jumped the Toyota ship, because of their reluctance to compete. Seems like they're getting fat on the throne, almost oblivious to what's going on elsewhere. GM, Ford, Dodge--they've all continued to innovate and move forward (ironic, eh?) Never thought I'd be driving a Ford after years of Toyota trucks only.

 

[Dalko43]

Agility or innovation seems to be lost in those board meetings. Both Tacoma and Tundra have gone unchanged for over a decade now. I have a couple of friends who jumped the Toyota ship, because of their reluctance to compete. Seems like they're getting fat on the throne, almost oblivious to what's going on elsewhere. GM, Ford, Dodge--they've all continued to innovate and move forward (ironic, eh?) Never thought I'd be driving a Ford after years of Toyota trucks only.

The Tacoma seems to be Toyota's last firm foothold in the 4x4 market. Tundra sales have remained fairly stagnant over the last decade and are nowhere close to matching domestic sale #'s. 4runner and Tacoma sales have grown over the last few years, but those mid-size 4x4's represent a very small piece of the automotive market pie. If Toyota loses its dominance in the mid-size category, I don't know what incentive they will have to stay in the 4x4 market (at least in North America).

And I'm with you on that last statement. I'm a huge Toyota fan and love my current vehicle. But if Toyota can't bring something new and competitive into the market, I might soon find myself jumping into a domestic pickup or SUV.

 

[Clutch]

Yeah, I bet you can, too! Did you get a new bike, at least??

I did! 2017 Beta 300RR.

Agility or innovation seems to be lost in those board meetings. Both Tacoma and Tundra have gone unchanged for over a decade now. I have a couple of friends who jumped the Toyota ship, because of their reluctance to compete.

Some of us think they have innovated too much.

It's weird, I like the bikes advancing in technology...KTM/HUsky just release fuel injection on their 2-Strokes, finally! Would of gotten one of those but couldn't wait until mid summer/fall to buy one. Would of missed most of the riding season. So I bought the Beta, which has oil injection...not that I minded mixing gas...it is kinda cool.

Don't really care for too much fluff on the cagers though, not sure what that is all about. Like a little bit...but a lot of the new vehicles just have waaay too many gee-gaws for my taste.

 

[Martinjmpr]

Did Toyota drop the Sequoia? It's funny that the 1st gen Sequoias are as common as weeds and the 2nd gens are very, very rare. Meanwhile you can't swing a dead cat without hitting 10 Suburban/Tahoe/Yukons, 8 Expeditions and 4 Nissan Armadas. By all accounts it seems like the full size SUV market is booming. Why is Toyota not competing harder there?
.
I guess I don't understand the car business very well. Seems like there are markets that companies could compete in but for some reason they don't. It's a head scratcher.

 

[Clutch]

Did Toyota drop the Sequoia? It's funny that the 1st gen Sequoias are as common as weeds and the 2nd gens are very, very rare. Meanwhile you can't swing a dead cat without hitting 10 Suburban/Tahoe/Yukons, 8 Expeditions and 4 Nissan Armadas. By all accounts it seems like the full size SUV market is booming. Why is Toyota not competing harder there?
.
I guess I don't understand the car business very well. Seems like there are markets that companies could compete in but for some reason they don't. It's a head scratcher.

They still have Sequoias.

Isn't the Camry their cash cow here in the States? So they don't have to try very hard with their trucks. Since they do so well Globally, believe they don't make much [or need to] profit on their US trucks.

400K+ sales of the Camry in recent years. (2016 dipped under 400K to 388K which is still impressive)

Tacoma has been 150-190K.

Tundra barely broken over 100K units.


As said earlier, nothing much on the US market excites me...Colorado diesel is very close...but don't want to have to pay $40K+ to get it. At that price rather have fullsize that can actually haul stuff.

Dunno, just disgruntled at the whole US market, I'll just keep on fixing my old crap. At this point it would have to be wrecked or rusted out for me to give it up.

 

[Dalko43]

.
I guess I don't understand the car business very well. Seems like there are markets that companies could compete in but for some reason they don't. It's a head scratcher.

I won't claim to have any amazing insight into that industry as well, but I suspect it comes down to brand recognition and Toyota's inherently conservative market strategy. People are more familiar with F-150's, GM Yukon's, Denali's, Escalades, ect. so that's what they're inclined to buy, despite Toyota's long presence in the North American market. The only area where Toyota has a decisive market advantage is with its Tacoma in the midsized pickup market.

And Toyota has been putting out slight variations of the same platform for a while now (in some cases for nearly 15 years now), whereas there have been massive changes in the model lineup's offered by domestic companies

 

[p nut]

Some of us think they have innovated too much.

It's weird, I like the bikes advancing in technology...KTM/HUsky just release fuel injection on their 2-Strokes, finally! Would of gotten one of those but couldn't wait until mid summer/fall to buy one. Would of missed most of the riding season. So I bought the Beta, which has oil injection...not that I minded mixing gas...it is kinda cool.

Don't really care for too much fluff on the cagers though, not sure what that is all about. Like a little bit...but a lot of the new vehicles just have waaay too many gee-gaws for my taste.

There's more to innovation than just tech/gizmo's, though. Main reasons I chose the F150 over the Tundra is some of the bold, risky, but forward thinking moves they've made. Aluminum body, gas efficient V6 turbo (or very inefficient ), improved payload, etc. Yes, the interior layout seemed better as well, but Tundra's looks good, too--this wasn't a deciding factor. In fact, I'd have gone with an XL, had it not been for the wife and kids "needing" some of the nicer amenities.
_
Whether Toyota is just too cocky, or just unwilling/disinterested in giving us something new (in their trucks), I'm not interested. Even the Tacoma. Nice truck. But most other full-size trucks get better MPG, more payload, etc. What's this mean? Keep that crusty ol' truck.

Nice bike, by the way. I'm still looking for a TW200 to romp around in. So many moto trails around me, it'd be nice to have one for my off-days from cycling.

 

[calicamper]

They still have Sequoias.

Isn't the Camry their cash cow here in the States? So they don't have to try very hard with their trucks. Since they do so well Globally, believe they don't make much [or need to] profit on their US trucks.

400K+ sales of the Camry in recent years. (2016 dipped under 400K to 388K which is still impressive)

Tacoma has been 150-190K.

Tundra barely broken over 100K units.


As said earlier, nothing much on the US market excites me...Colorado diesel is very close...but don't want to have to pay $40K+ to get it. At that price rather have fullsize that can actually haul stuff.

Dunno, just disgruntled at the whole US market, I'll just keep on fixing my old crap. At this point it would have to be wrecked or rusted out for me to give it up.

Sequoias are still around several new ones are in my area. The issue is they sit in the Escalade realm today regarding price but lack the Stupid Bling factor. So in the land of $1,250,000 1800sqft 1950's Ranchers the Sequoia is still doing fine. But Mercedes suvs and Escalades seem to be the dominant choice.

I like my first Gen Sequoia it's narrower and far easier to park in our packed parking lots