New Tacoma vs Colorado vs Ranger

[85_Ranger4x4]

I'd just do a normal XLT Ranger with a rear locker. I go back and forth if a FX4 would really even be worth it. Use the pile of money I didn't spend on a Tremor to get better/slightly bigger tires and a small tanker worth of fuel.

 

[Buddha.]

I'd just do a normal XLT Ranger with a rear locker. I go back and forth if a FX4 would really even be worth it. Use the pile of money I didn't spend on a Tremor to get better/slightly bigger tires and a small tanker worth of fuel.

I wouldn’t bother with fx4. I had a locker and skid plates on my base XL. The only thing I didn’t have was the trail modes or whatever. The fx4 shocks on the old model where garbage I guess, but I didn’t like non fx4 shocks either. 33’s fit stock.

 

[Grassland]

Personally I just don't trust Nissan's past 160K Miles.
This is following a crappy experience with my old 2003 Xterra, my daughters old 2008 Altima Coupe and her boyfriends 2007 Pathfinder. They all fell apart at 160,000 miles / 200,000 kms. The engine in my Xterra actually grenaded with just over 200,000 kms on it.

My buddy had 280k on his 4.0 Pathy before he got an Armada. The tiny tank and his 8' wide trailer didn't do his range any favours with the pathy ?
To be fair he took care of it. Often it was as clean as my kitchen.

 

[Grassland]

Front/rear lockers and steep gearing options are what is be looking for, follows by the ability to fit larger tires with minimal lift.

Don't really need fancy bison level suspensions or Raptor suspension, tho the roads here might suggest otherwise.

Been finding more and more that to get a few offroad bits forces you into a bunch of luxury features and options I don't want nor want to pay for, and this is all brands.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I wouldn’t bother with fx4. I had a locker and skid plates on my base XL. The only thing I didn’t have was the trail modes or whatever. The fx4 shocks on the old model where garbage I guess, but I didn’t like non fx4 either. 33’s fit stock.

Bash plate for the front was kinda neat.

Not sure if the new ones still have it or how the package compares to a aftermarket options for that.

It's been a couple years since I seriously considered a midsize anything.

Rock Crawl mode is pretty legit in our Bronco though.

 

[Grassland]

So, is the rock crawl mode thing just to make life easier? Or does it do something better than a two foot pedal operator? It's not like there are manual transmissions in these things.
I don't like paying for something electronic that I can do manually if I can avoid it.

 

[Ozarker]

Yes, kinda, but with caveats.

The full size trucks do have better specs in almost every category, that is true. But in many cases, that’s a marginal improvement - 1900lbs payload vs 1500 lbs payload. Some full size even have less payload than the mid size because of the number of options. MPG and range are both better, as is power, but MPG and Range are easily addressed with more gas and that’s rarely truly necessary in North America — motorbikes do the most remote run in the continent all the time and almost every one has less range than a truck.

So, there are marginal improvements in payload, and the other improvements are there but not necessarily significant. The negatives are weight and size. For an extra few hundred pounds of payload capacity, the full size trucks are often over a thousand pounds heavier or more than their mid-size counterparts as a starting curb weight. Because they are bigger, they fit more stuff and the “better bring the kitchen sink” means that loaded up, they are even more significantly heavier (assuming the mid size is kept in spec; many are not). And the physical footprint is much bigger, which impacts turning and off road performance in the bush, and makes them a bit less easy to drive in populated areas.

I can find a way around most of the issues a mid-size presents — keep things light to stay in payload (400lbs is rather easily found in aluminum vs steel armour, or by taking a backpacker mentality to your kit). Have a way to bring Jerry’s for the occasional time more range is a nice to have. And as far as performance, they all go way faster than the speed limit and get to that limit…eventually — the newer gen ones quite quickly actually. But, I cannot make a full size truck more narrow, and that extra weight can be the difference between sliding off the weakened bank of the mountain road or not. So, I personally weigh the pros and cons of both, and end up preferring the mid size truck for my needs.

If I was going to go full-size, it would either be the f150 with the heavy duty payload package, or I’d skip right past the 1500 series trucks and go for a minimum of a 2500 series. Same relative footprint, but that’s when you start getting seriously impressive payload advantages over the mid size class.

If I have to be in an accident on the street or highway, I'd rather be in my F 150!

Another issue is towing, a 24' pontoon boat or a 14' V nose toy hauler.

Narrow trails is why we have the Jeep. Speed is from the bike/trike.

There are a few advantages to smaller, but not often.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

So, is the rock crawl mode thing just to make life easier? Or does it do something better than a two foot pedal operator? It's not like there are manual transmissions in these things.
I don't like paying for something electronic that I can do manually if I can avoid it.

Makes it more like a manual. Lightens up the throttle and tightens the trans and steering.

My main offroader is a manual and I felt more at home with it than without it.

I wish the rear locker wasn't mandatory on though, you have to do the hokey pokey 4wd range shift to get into normal mode to kill the rear diff lock to turn sharp and then do the hokey pokey range shift again to get back into 4lo.

Still learning the system, it is not gods gift to everything like some want to portray it.

I do like rock crawl though.

 

[Grassland]

I've never gone offroading in a manual. Just two pedals and torque converter to take the beating.
So the locker can't just be turned on and off while in low range?? That's unfortunate.
Kind of limits the use of an E locker.

 

[rruff]

IME 4wd with or without lockers kinda sucks. The axles aren't locked, but the driveshafts are... and if you are turning and the surface isn't loose enough, you'll get a lot of binding, and might break something. It's good for going straight, and when the surface is reliably loose. Unfortunately the stuff I encounter is too often a mix of steep loose dirt and rocky switchbacks... lots of turning and variable traction. It's the same issue in winter with patchy ice and snow. AWD with a low range option would be more useful...

 

[plainjaneFJC]

IME 4wd with or without lockers kinda sucks. The axles aren't locked, but the driveshafts are... and if you are turning and the surface isn't loose enough, you'll get a lot of binding, and might break something. It's good for going straight, and when the surface is reliably loose. Unfortunately the stuff I encounter is too often a mix of steep loose dirt and rocky switchbacks... lots of turning and variable traction. It's the same issue in winter with patchy ice and snow. AWD with a low range option would be more useful...

Like a landcruiser?

 

[rruff]

Beats me... I know a lot of 4wd vehicles have an AWD option now, but I don't know the details.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I've never gone offroading in a manual. Just two pedals and torque converter to take the beating.
So the locker can't just be turned on and off while in low range?? That's unfortunate.
Kind of limits the use of an E locker.

This is only in "Rock crawl mode"
If ours had a front locker it could be turned off in the mode. Rear is mandatory on in that setting.

Like a landcruiser?

Older domestics and rovers had it too, full time 4wd is nasty for fuel economy though.

 

[Todd780]

This is only in "Rock crawl mode"
If ours had a front locker it could be turned off in the mode. Rear is mandatory on in that setting.



Older domestics and rovers had it too, full time 4wd is nasty for fuel economy though.

When I ran my GM's in AutoTrac in winter, it would just engage the front diff when it detected slippage at the rear wheels. Really didn't impact economy too much as I would have been switching into 4WD anyway.

Personally, I would take the 1-2 MPG hit to have instant extra traction vs me realizing I need to engage the 4WD, the time it takes for me to put it in 4WD and then the time it takes for the vehicle to engage 4WD...

AutoTrac would engage the front diff in milliseconds. (Not sure if the Ram and Ford systems work the same.)

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

When I ran my GM's in AutoTrac in winter, it would just engage the front diff when it detected slippage at the rear wheels. Really didn't impact economy too much as I would have been switching into 4WD anyway.

Personally, I would take the 1-2 MPG hit to have instant extra traction vs me realizing I need to engage the 4WD, the time it takes for me to put it in 4WD and then the time it takes for the vehicle to engage 4WD...

AutoTrac would engage the front diff in milliseconds. (Not sure if the Ram and Ford systems work the same.)

The full time 4wd has a diff in the t case. Everything runs all the time. Some can lock that "center" diff, some can't.

Our Bronco has automatic 4wd, the front axle is live all the time, the shifting happens in the tcase. Like you said, it's smooth and seamless. It also gets like 10-15 more mpg than a full time 4wd truck.