Forums » Grassroots Motorsports » Good small/midsize truck 1 2 3

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 7:18 a.m. Teh E36 M3 HalfDork

  I have a commute of about 10 miles each way and a lot of home improvement to do. I was thinking about spending around 5k on a small/midsize truck. The pre '05 Dakota has my eye at this point but I don't know anything about their reliability. I'd like extended/quad cab if possible, and am unsure as to whether I need 4wd in the DC area (this will be my third winter here, and #1 was snowpocalypse).
  

  Any ideas/warnings etc? Ideally this thing gets 30+ MPG but I know that for v6+ power that I want, I'll be getting in the teens, which is ok, I guess.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 7:19 a.m. Raze Dork

  Oh lord, here we go again...

  I've said it once and I'll say it again, Ranger if fuel economy is on the list and towing won't happen much/ever...

  Let the 'real truck' bashers begin.......now

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 7:25 a.m. 93EXCivic SuperDork

  My dad's '99 Ranger is a 4 cylinder and it gets 21-22 city so I doubt the six cylinder will get the mpgs. Do you need V6+ power?

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 7:28 a.m. failboat HalfDork

  You dont really need 4wd around this area.

  We moved out to the sticks in central va, and though holy crap we are going to need 4wd.

  We did end up getting one as a spare vehicle, but in retrospect realized there was literally only 2 days this past year that we would have actually needed it. The day we had the worst snow this past winter (you know, the one where everyone abandoned their cars and started walking) I drove 45 miles home from work in my lowered subcompact and finally got stuck on my unplowed street 100 yards from my driveway.

  Even the year before during the snowpocalypse, I was primarily driving around a Grand Marquis with no issues. The accent was not lowered at the time and did fine too.

  I imagine with a 2wd truck just gotta drive smart and put some weight over the rear axle. And have some good tires.

  boosh.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 7:29 a.m. RossD SuperDork

  My thought would be to get the Ranger with the Duratec. Then bolt on Cosworth parts!!!

  00100001

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 7:40 a.m. belteshazzar SuperDork

  i don't think there are any really bad choices in a small pickup. I will say I sell an awful lot of dakota balljoints at work, fwiw.

  i'd just try and find the nicest example of any sort you can. Extended-cab 2wd's seem to be grandpa-owned specials more often than the other configurations.

  spending money I don't have to buy parts I don't need to impress people I don't know

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 7:46 a.m. foxtrapper SuperDork

  30+ mpg from any truck of any size is pretty much fantasy.
  

  Good snow tires will help you more than 4wd for dealing with DC snow.
  

  A 4x8 trailer is cheap and makes a darn handy faux truck when pulled behind just about anything. Being low to the ground they are a lot easier to load and unload.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 7:47 a.m. pinchvalve SuperDork

  Look for a 2WD with a cap on the back and running boards. They are the hallmarks of old people ownership, and they are usually pretty babied. JC Whitney cupholders, seat covers, and stick-on chrome are also good indications.

  "Don't Sweat the Petty Things." Yes, and Don't Pet the Sweaty Things.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 7:53 a.m. Woody SuperDork

  I had two Dakotas, both purchased new. The size was perfect, but the quality was low, especially the transmissions. I have a Tacoma now.

  Porsche. Everyday.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 7:55 a.m. Teh E36 M3 HalfDork

  Ok- check on the 2wd. I had the feeling I didn't really need it. My "truck" for the last 9 years has been the WRX wagon with 4x8 trailer. Just getting to be a pain in the ass to go back and forth to the Depot with it all the time (been doing fairly massive home construction like 16x20 two floor garage, basement finishing, kitchen remodel, shed construction...etc). The 30 mpg's was a joke... and wishful (mahindra) thinking. I don't need v6+ power now that I think about it.
  I like the slightly larger bed of the Dakota, but have had and was very happy with the Ranger I had in the late '90's.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 7:58 a.m. tuna55 SuperDork

  foxtrapper wrote: 30+ mpg from any truck of any size is pretty much fantasy.

  90 Nissan 2.4 hardbody got 33 mpg mixed.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 8:21 a.m. 914Driver SuperDork

  I just sold my 2001 Ranger; 2.3 litre five speed. I got ~20 mpg but I always had my foot in it. Dodges get lower mpg than a comparable anything else.
  

  I like Tacomas and that would be my first choice if I didn't live in the rust belt.

  Dan

  BMW -- You don't need a hibachi to cook rice.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 8:33 a.m. Zomby woof SuperDork

  You should be able to get a fairly new Ranger for that money. It's a good reliable small truck, and about 20 years behind the Canyon/Colorado which is bigger, nicer, better driving, with a lot more power and the same MPG.

  AngryCorvair wrote: and that right there is why 90% of the time i think ZW is a berkeleying douchebag.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 8:42 a.m. PS122 Reader

  foxtrapper wrote: 30+ mpg from any truck of any size is pretty much fantasy. Good snow tires will help you more than 4wd for dealing with DC snow. A 4x8 trailer is cheap and makes a darn handy faux truck when pulled behind just about anything. Being low to the ground they are a lot easier to load and unload.

  I had an '87 Toyota 2wd (22r, 5-spd) that averaged 31mpg for the 60k miles that I drove it. I bought it for $1400, drove it for two years, then sold it for $1200. I wish I had it back...

  "Sentiment plays a large role in the old-car hobby. And in most other forms of mental illness" - Jamie Kitman

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 8:43 a.m. Uncoiled New Reader

  They can get expensive but a Toyota pickup (pre-95) or a even an early Tacoma wont do you wrong. If you need a v6 aim for an early Tacoma since the 3.0 that was in the pickups wasn't that great. You may pay more but you get what you pay for and the have a high resale after you are done.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 9:00 a.m. 81cpcamaro New Reader

  The 97-04 Dakotas are pretty good. I get 16.5 mpg from my 00 R/T in back roads driving, a hair over 17 for highway. But that is the 5.9L (360) engine, never known for gas mileage. A 4.7L V8 or the V6 would be a good choice, 2wd will work. My dad drove his 92 Dakota 2wd in Minnesota winters with no issues, so 4wd probably isn't required.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 9:59 a.m. integraguy SuperDork

  If you go for the Ranger, get a POST '97 model, as they moved away from the Twin I-beam front end in '98.

  My father bought a mid '90s Dakota extracab a few years ago and while he thought it was okay he really took a bath at the gas pump (he somehow missed the bitty V8 badges on the front fenders when he bought it). I owned a '94 Ranger that he had driven a few times so he traded the Dakota for a Ranger with the 3 liter and manual. He never got 30 mpg, but he never complained as much about the mileage as he did with the Dodge.

  For gas mileage and reliability go with either the Ford or the Nissan. Why not a Toyota? Most folks who have owned them say the seats are a bit too low and make the driving position uncomfortable. I've only driven Toyota cars so can't confirm.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 9:59 a.m. motomoron HalfDork

  I had a 2001 Dakota Sport 2WD regular cab w/ the V6 and view the 2000 Toyota Tacoma 2WD Xtra cab SR5 - Prerunner - V6 to be a huge improvement in performance, handling, reliability and above all, build quality. It's a comfortable commuter ride and with a fiberglass bed cover carries all my race support stuff (I tow on an open trailer) without too much trouble. Gas mileage is high teens for mixed driving, 20+ hwy, and abysmal pulling a dual axle car hauler.

  Dakotas and Rangers are much less expensive, true. But sometimes you get what you pay for, and there's a reason why Toyota trucks hold their value so well - they're just really well made and solid. I sort of need more towing power and I'm looking at Tundras over anything else on the basis of personal experience.

  "All my tools are hammers except screwdrivers which are chisels and punches"

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 10:15 a.m. jrw1621 SuperDork

  The new Rangers you see on the dealer lots right no are the last. The long run of the same body style has come to an end. It seems that there is no immediate replacement but rather plans to sell 6cyl F150's in their place.
  

  This leads to the thought of what type of incentives will Ford put inplace to move the last of the Rangers?

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 10:19 a.m. 93EXCivic SuperDork

  jrw1621 wrote: The new Rangers you see on the dealer lots right no are the last. The long run of the same body style has come to an end. It seems that there is no immediate replacement but rather plans to sell 6cyl F150's in their place. This leads to the thought of what type of incentives will Ford put inplace to move the last of the Rangers?

  Say what? Are the Rangers not selling that well?

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 10:37 a.m. chandlerGTi Reader

  My 93 Dakota V8 got 22mpg. I loved thattruck but good luck finding a nice one now. I put 68k on it. I would say ranger or Tacoma are the way to go for most people though.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 10:56 a.m. jrw1621 SuperDork

  A little search of fueleconomy.gov show the following mpg for 2011.

  For light towing...
  16/18/22 Ford F150 6cyl
  15/17/20 Ford Ranger 6 cyl
  

  For light load hauling/delivery...
  21/23/26 Ford Transit Connect 4 cyl
  19/20/24 Ford Ranger 4 cyl
  

  http://www.carbuzz.com/news/2011/6/26/Official-Ford-Ranger-Discontinued-7703685/

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 12:28 p.m. Vigo Dork

  If you like the size of a dakota but want toyota quality, either buy a newer tacoma ($5k=HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA, NO) or buy an older t100.
  

  T100s are almost GUARANTEED to have been owned by fastidious people and not over-used. I ran across a really nice one a few months ago and instantly wanted it. But my 2 dakotas are much cheaper to modify, and to fix.

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 1:07 p.m. ultraclyde HalfDork

  I used to hear horroer stories about the V6 dakotas eating intake gaskets and all Dodges eating transmissions when I worked at the parts store in the late 90's.

  I'd go ranger, but I lean toward blue oval products. Around here, 5k will get you a nice 98-99 ext cab if you're patient.

  "It's hard to be a visionary in a world full of blind people." - JM

• 

  Sept. 7, 2011 1:29 p.m. Zomby woof SuperDork

  You can get mid 2000's rangers here for that.

  AngryCorvair wrote: and that right there is why 90% of the time i think ZW is a berkeleying douchebag.

1 2 3  

You'll need to log in to post.