Opinions Solicited......Another Head Scratching Mid Size Truck Choice Thread

[spectre6000]

It also uses the same rear locking axle in the Rubicon, so you know it's stout.

Interesting data point, because I'm 99% sure the Colorado does too!.

Googled to confirm: all three share the Dana M220, while the Gladiator has a Dana 44 (possibly the same thing?). Whoever up there said they're all substantially similar was really on the nose!

 

[nickw]

I always thought a new tacoma would be nice until I spent a couple hundred miles in one. I am average American size ie 5'10ish 180lb. too cramped for my tastes. I want to like the rangers as I am a ford first guy. Just am not loving the look and they have been out long enough to be getting used to them but not happening. I would rather walk than drive the Frontier even if it were a great truck, just don't like the looks (looks are a personal taste no doubt). that leaves the ZR2 and that to me looked really good when it first came out but I am already over it and does not even turn my head. I guess bottom line is there really is no smaller trucks that look worth a damn to me. I have owned a Jeep Wrangler since 2012 and still never get tired of looking at them. So for me if I were going truck in this class it would be a Gladiator altho that is not what the OP wants.

Fair. I do think the Rangers look a bit cooler with some narrow tires and steel rims in base spec:

 

[nickw]

Interesting data point, because I'm 99% sure the Colorado does too!.

Googled to confirm: all three share the Dana M220, while the Gladiator has a Dana 44 (possibly the same thing?). Whoever up there said they're all substantially similar was really on the nose!

My understanding is the D44 is the same as the M220...I'm guessing the Marketing stuff calls out "D44" since that's the common name Jeep guys can relate too.

JL Wrangler AXLES - Dana M186 & M210 Front / M200 & M220 Rear

When it comes to building up a Jeep, bigger tires are typically a big part of that equation and the bigger you go, the more concern there is regarding axle strength. Because of this, there have been a lot of questions regarding what axles will be coming on the all new Jeep JL Wrangler and the...

wayalife.com

 

[jadmt]

My understanding is the D44 is the same as the M220...I'm guessing the Marketing stuff calls out "D44" since that's the common name Jeep guys can relate too.

JL Wrangler AXLES - Dana M186 & M210 Front / M200 & M220 Rear

When it comes to building up a Jeep, bigger tires are typically a big part of that equation and the bigger you go, the more concern there is regarding axle strength. Because of this, there have been a lot of questions regarding what axles will be coming on the all new Jeep JL Wrangler and the...

wayalife.com

according to my build sheet my 2018 JK rubicon has a Dana44/M226 rear axle front is D44/M216

 

[jadmt]

Trailer Tow w/4-Pin Connector Wiring Driver Height Adjuster Seat Accent Stitching Matching Spare Wheel Rear Seat/Wheelhouse/Cargo Carpet Red Trail Rated Badge Air Conditioning w/Auto Temp Control 5-Speed Auto W5A580 Transmission Dana 44/226MM Rear Axle Remote Keyless Entry Chrome/Leather Wrapped Shift Knob

 

[spectre6000]

My understanding is the D44 is the same as the M220...I'm guessing the Marketing stuff calls out "D44" since that's the common name Jeep guys can relate too.

JL Wrangler AXLES - Dana M186 & M210 Front / M200 & M220 Rear

When it comes to building up a Jeep, bigger tires are typically a big part of that equation and the bigger you go, the more concern there is regarding axle strength. Because of this, there have been a lot of questions regarding what axles will be coming on the all new Jeep JL Wrangler and the...

wayalife.com

That's what I was thinking as well. Without going down the Dana-Spicer catalog rabbit hole, it looks like the Dana 44 is something of a series, where MXXX refers to the ring gear diameter (bigger is heavier duty). So, I guess everyone just went to Dana and said, "axle please!" and they all got the "mid-size" spec. Actually, that's not true, because I'm only looking at the top spec models; lesser models get lesser axles.

Notably, the link above shows the JL(U)R gets an M210 front where the Colorado gets an M200. I'm guessing the delta is due to either the more robust nature of the solid axle design being able to take a heavier load or Jeep's expectation that the user will beat on it harder or fit bigger tires or something. I doubt 10mm is a huge difference, but it's there. I can't find what the Ranger has for a front axle... Toyota makes their own axles last I checked.

I don't know how or if this would hold any weight, but GM has made a bid for a military vehicle contract that's essentially a diesel Bison with no emissions and a different body. They haven't won the contract yet, but if they do, that seems like a vote of confidence. They're definitely getting the most press of all the entrants. I'm pretty sure I read that Jeep made an effort with a Gladiator-based design; very little appeared to have been changed from what you'd buy as a civilian, but it also doesn't appear they made it to the current round. It's sort of just a "neat" data point, but what it means long term if you know where to look is a bunch of really cheap lightly used parts down the road. On that same note, I don't know what it's like in your neck of the woods, but around here, nearly every commercial and municipal vehicle is a Summit White extended cab 4v4 Colorado WT. If it's similar around you, that means a ton of spare body parts down the road should you need them. They're all gas, so there's some significant drivetrain parts as well since that's your intended route. If you get yours in Summit White, you don't even need to bother with paint! Between the military truck spares and the work truck spares, you would be able to stay on the road for a long time very inexpensively.

 

[jadmt]

That's what I was thinking as well. Without going down the Dana-Spicer catalog rabbit hole, it looks like the Dana 44 is something of a series, where MXXX refers to the ring gear diameter (bigger is heavier duty). So, I guess everyone just went to Dana and said, "axle please!" and they all got the "mid-size" spec. Actually, that's not true, because I'm only looking at the top spec models; lesser models get lesser axles.

Notably, the link above shows the JL(U)R gets an M210 front where the Colorado gets an M200. I'm guessing the delta is due to either the more robust nature of the solid axle design being able to take a heavier load or Jeep's expectation that the user will beat on it harder or fit bigger tires or something. I doubt 10mm is a huge difference, but it's there. I can't find what the Ranger has for a front axle... Toyota makes their own axles last I checked.

I don't know how or if this would hold any weight, but GM has made a bid for a military vehicle contract that's essentially a diesel Bison with no emissions and a different body. They haven't won the contract yet, but if they do, that seems like a vote of confidence. They're definitely getting the most press of all the entrants. I'm pretty sure I read that Jeep made an effort with a Gladiator-based design; very little appeared to have been changed from what you'd buy as a civilian, but it also doesn't appear they made it to the current round. It's sort of just a "neat" data point, but what it means long term if you know where to look is a bunch of really cheap lightly used parts down the road. On that same note, I don't know what it's like in your neck of the woods, but around here, nearly every commercial and municipal vehicle is a Summit White extended cab 4v4 Colorado WT. If it's similar around you, that means a ton of spare body parts down the road should you need them. They're all gas, so there's some significant drivetrain parts as well since that's your intended route. If you get yours in Summit White, you don't even need to bother with paint! Between the military truck spares and the work truck spares, you would be able to stay on the road for a long time very inexpensively.

that is correct M is for metric ie a 220M would have a ring gear= to 8.66" rear ring. bigger is generally better but smaller could be made of better material so who knows lol.

 

[nickw]

according to my build sheet my 2018 JK rubicon has a Dana44/M226 rear axle front is D44/M216

It's all very confusing....according to this the 2018+ JL's at least have a 220 but your build sheet is probably the most accurate reflection of what ya got:

https://media.spicerparts.com/cfs/files/media/wHhXZerZ8gKuArNya/DTP-AMG-2018_LR.pdf?store=original

 

[nickw]

That's what I was thinking as well. Without going down the Dana-Spicer catalog rabbit hole, it looks like the Dana 44 is something of a series, where MXXX refers to the ring gear diameter (bigger is heavier duty). So, I guess everyone just went to Dana and said, "axle please!" and they all got the "mid-size" spec. Actually, that's not true, because I'm only looking at the top spec models; lesser models get lesser axles.

Notably, the link above shows the JL(U)R gets an M210 front where the Colorado gets an M200. I'm guessing the delta is due to either the more robust nature of the solid axle design being able to take a heavier load or Jeep's expectation that the user will beat on it harder or fit bigger tires or something. I doubt 10mm is a huge difference, but it's there. I can't find what the Ranger has for a front axle... Toyota makes their own axles last I checked.

I don't know how or if this would hold any weight, but GM has made a bid for a military vehicle contract that's essentially a diesel Bison with no emissions and a different body. They haven't won the contract yet, but if they do, that seems like a vote of confidence. They're definitely getting the most press of all the entrants. I'm pretty sure I read that Jeep made an effort with a Gladiator-based design; very little appeared to have been changed from what you'd buy as a civilian, but it also doesn't appear they made it to the current round. It's sort of just a "neat" data point, but what it means long term if you know where to look is a bunch of really cheap lightly used parts down the road. On that same note, I don't know what it's like in your neck of the woods, but around here, nearly every commercial and municipal vehicle is a Summit White extended cab 4v4 Colorado WT. If it's similar around you, that means a ton of spare body parts down the road should you need them. They're all gas, so there's some significant drivetrain parts as well since that's your intended route. If you get yours in Summit White, you don't even need to bother with paint! Between the military truck spares and the work truck spares, you would be able to stay on the road for a long time very inexpensively.

I've seen arguable info on the front diffs of the Colorado's, according to this it's a 186mm:

Nitro Gear Package

2015+ Chevy Colorado/GMC Canyon 4.10 or 4.56 Nitro Gear Package. Nitro Gear & Axle strives to provide the highest quality differential components available. To make it easier for everyone the experts at Nitro are introducing an industry first- “Gear Packages” for many popular 4x4 applications...

www.justdifferentials.com

On further review - looks like the above is incorrect....

 

[spectre6000]

Non-ZR2? I don't have the manual yet, so I honestly can't say for sure.

 

[Martinjmpr]

[Q

It’s this simple....I’m 6 feet tall....I cannot sleep with my wife next to me in a SB. But it’s a sucky trade off.

Can you really sleep two adults comfortably in a compact truck though? I'm 6'1", wife is 5'4". We tried it in my old Tacoma. Wife lasted two nights and said "never again." That's why I was happy to go with a CCSB on my current truck. Because I know there's no way I'm ever going to get her to sleep in the back, so that eliminates the need for a long bed.

One person? Sure, works fine. Did it many times in several different trucks (Mazda B2000, Ranger, Tacoma.)

But trying to sleep two average American adults in the back of a compact truck - even with a 6' bed - is for the young and flexible. Us older people need our space.

It's not a question of length, BTW, it's a question of width.

 

[nickw]

It's not a question of length, BTW, it's a question of width.

So I've been told

 

[AbleGuy]

[Q


Can you really sleep two adults comfortably in a compact truck though? I'm 6'1", wife is 5'4". We tried it in my old Tacoma. Wife lasted two nights and said "never again." That's why I was happy to go with a CCSB on my current truck. Because I know there's no way I'm ever going to get her to sleep in the back, so that eliminates the need for a long bed.

One person? Sure, works fine. Did it many times in several different trucks (Mazda B2000, Ranger, Tacoma.)

But trying to sleep two average American adults in the back of a compact truck - even with a 6' bed - is for the young and flexible. Us older people need our space.

It's not a question of length, BTW, it's a question of width.

While that’s a valid observation, I’m being an optimist and keeping my fingers crossed about that.

This combo will really be used for shorter trips, 2-5 days, with most all of our time spent outside. Longer trips will involve alternating stays at hotels every 3rd or 4th night. That worked out pretty well for us on our first big trip 35 years ago...21 days touring the US and Canadian Rockies in a little red 4 banger Nissan king cab 4x4 with a 6’ bed and cab high shell.

Fortunately neither of us are too wide, so a full width and length mattress set on the wheel wells in the long bed at nighttime should work. And having the extra room of a popup shell will be a heck of a lot better than that old Nissan with the cramped cab high topper. We may even decide that sleeping up in the top bunk is the better option.

 

[spectre6000]

Here's an interesting take on the Taco/Colo comparison:

Toyota-4Runner.org

The Largest 4Runner Community in the World

www.toyota-4runner.org

This is a thread I stumbled on the other day. It's a Toyota 4Runner forum, and they're going to have a hard Toyota bent. There's plenty of the expected tribal GM bashing, but the prevailing attitude toward the Tacoma in a Toyota model forum caught me a bit by surprise. I didn't expect any negativity toward the Tacoma, but there is just about zero love there, and for a lot of the reasons I've expressed (here and elsewhere). Toyota may be in bigger trouble than I thought.

Also, on the Nissan front, I said in my thread that I didn't think Nissan would be in the US much longer given recent SEC filings. It was in the news in the last day or so that they're forcing all US employees to take a 2-day furlough in January... That's a ~10% payroll cost reduction. That is NOT something you do if things are going any way other than very very badly... It'll be interesting to see if they're around to bring the new Frontier to market, and if so just how much is pinned on it (and whether or not it is enough to bail them out).

 

[AbleGuy]

Wow! That bad news about Nissan is very sobering! It could help create the final death spiral for US sales. Why would you buy a vehicle from a company when you’re worried it won’t be around much longer? If the continued negative corporate news results in further scaring potential buyers away from the brand, by by Nissan.

Anyway......Thank you all very much for your helpful, insightful, interesting input and opinions, and advice.

It's pretty much down to Ranger vs. Colorado for me at this point. I’ll be planning on some test drives, further mods studies and a bit more research on each (doing that suggested spread sheet) for after the holidays.