2005 Frontier V6 vs 2005 Tacoma V6
#21
Contributing Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Piedmont, North Carolina
Posts: 827
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ElwayLite
The iforce is outdated and due for replacement or upgrade, we'll see how the new v8 from toyota performs.
#22
Registered User
Originally Posted by MvCrash
I only have one question: Is Numnuts one word or two? and if two would it not be Numb Nuts?
MvCrash
MvCrash
#23
Originally Posted by Sac State
Smoothest engine/tranny combo I have ever driven! Outdated?!
it is outdated and underpowered thats why the 05 the iforce will have vvti and although i cant remember but somewhere from 40 to 70 more HP.....
#24
Registered User
i think nissan dropped the ball when they discontinued the hardbody. how many companies have had a single body style span 10 years? the last i checked, a late 80s hardbody usually fetches more in the resale department than a late 80s toyota
#25
Registered User
Originally Posted by CynicX
it is outdated and underpowered thats why the 05 the iforce will have vvti and although i cant remember but somewhere from 40 to 70 more HP.....
#26
Originally Posted by kyle_22r
i think nissan dropped the ball when they discontinued the hardbody. how many companies have had a single body style span 10 years? the last i checked, a late 80s hardbody usually fetches more in the resale department than a late 80s toyota
However, I can tell my Tacoma has a better suspension. The Nissan 3.0 was rated at 154 h.p. and 180 ft lbs, about the same as my 2.7L (150-180) . It would light the 32's up from a Stop. My 2.7L won't even think about spinning the tires, so the torque from the Nissan 3.0 was far superior although the ratings are the same. My Tacoma would easily outrun the Nissan after 60 mph though. My Nissan wouldn't even go 100 mph, but my Tacoma goes 105 pretty easy.
#27
Contributing Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(back on topic)
Some pics to compare...
Long bed
No long bed Frontier?
Short bed
Tacoma:
Vehicle Stability Control w/ Traction Control (VSC+TRAC) is available on all except X-Runner. 245 horsepower and 282 lb-ft. No mention of side bags or rear disc brakes? Will it still have an available rear locker?
Frontier:
265 horsepower and 284 lb-ft of torque
Available side bags. Standard 4 wheel disc brakes. Available advanced off-road traction systems and substantially enhanced overall off-road capability. (4-Wheel Limited-Slip (ALBS)?, just like TRAC). No mention of stability control.
Front seat
Rear seat
Dash
I'll take a Tacoma for the quality. Have to wait and see what the market/prices are like. But for a similarly equipped truck ... I guessing the Toyota will have a much higher demand and price.
Some pics to compare...
Long bed
No long bed Frontier?
Short bed
Tacoma:
Vehicle Stability Control w/ Traction Control (VSC+TRAC) is available on all except X-Runner. 245 horsepower and 282 lb-ft. No mention of side bags or rear disc brakes? Will it still have an available rear locker?
Frontier:
265 horsepower and 284 lb-ft of torque
Available side bags. Standard 4 wheel disc brakes. Available advanced off-road traction systems and substantially enhanced overall off-road capability. (4-Wheel Limited-Slip (ALBS)?, just like TRAC). No mention of stability control.
Front seat
Rear seat
Dash
I'll take a Tacoma for the quality. Have to wait and see what the market/prices are like. But for a similarly equipped truck ... I guessing the Toyota will have a much higher demand and price.
Last edited by Bluto; 09-08-2004 at 05:08 AM.
#28
The exterior shot of the Nissan above looks all kinds of wrong. And the back seat area looks too small for a double cab. Except for quality issues, I like the Titan over the (current) Tundra. But I'd take the new Tacoma over the new Frontier any day.
#30
Contributing Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 5,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No mention of side bags or rear disc brakes? Will it still have an available rear locker?
toyota cheaped out and gave the new tacoma rear drum brakes.
I would rather have disc brakes... :pat:
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nissan looks like amateur hour compared to the Taco- but it always has been that way.
I cringe at how cheap the Frontier interior looks- and that's a publicity photo.
I cringe at how cheap the Frontier interior looks- and that's a publicity photo.
#33
Contributing Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by kickaha
... And the back seat area looks too small for a double cab. ...
The Frontier cargo area looks much smaller also. Total length is 205.5 inches, 125.9 wheel base.
Tacoma is about 207? 127.2-inch wheelbase with a 60.3-inch cargo bed.
#35
Contributing Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bluto
(back on topic)
No mention of side bags ....
No mention of side bags ....
Edmunds state "crew cab models also offer optional full-length head curtain and front-seat side airbags. "
#36
Contributing Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Mobile, Alabama
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All i know is generally you try and make the vehicle look better, the "new" frontier front end looks like the one of a few years back, fugly. The tacoma will be the best looking truck out their still, because the only other new model for 2005 is the dakota and its really ugly.