User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 6:57:27 AM EDT
Any body with experience with these vehicles, give me your opinion.
Both are 2003 and have relativley the same amount of miles on them. Help a brother out making the call.  Poll inbound Update: So I didn't have time to drive them however I got some additional information on the vehicles. Ranger 1999 4.0l 5 speed manual 110k $5900 Frontier 1999 6 cyl (liters unknown to seller) 5 speed manual 130K $5900 So now what say you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:01:59 AM EDT
[#1]
Ford.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:03:20 AM EDT
[#2]
Nissan has an incredible track record in regards to reliability and longevity. Ford... not so much..
Although, ford rangers seem to do alright. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:04:20 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted: Nissan has an incredible track record in regards to reliability and longevity. Ford... not so much.. Although, ford rangers seem to do alright. We have an escape and I like it, but I'm not in love with Ford overall. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:10:32 AM EDT
[#4]
The two motors in the Ranger are known dogs...3.0 and 4.0. They are geared improperly and and prone to more problems overall. The Frontier is a typical Nissan product, tough and long lasting. Mileage proba sucks on both honestly.
I am a true American fan but bought a nissan Xterra recently because there are no true truck based midsixed SUVs in the American lineup. Go Nissan. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:10:46 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Nissan has an incredible track record in regards to reliability and longevity. Ford... not so much.. No way. The post-2000 model year Rangers are some of the best trucks on the road today. Yes, I'm aware that they're now discontinued from production. That's largely because they get 16-18MPG, which isn't very marketable when there's full-size trucks that get 22-23 (i.e. ecoboost). Ford essentially pushed themselves out of the midsize truck business, which is somewhat odd to say the least. That said, as long as you don't mind the loss of fuel economy, you'll be hard-pressed to find a better truck than a Ranger. The Nissan is a car with a bed that looks like a truck. If that's what you want, you're better off with a Honda. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:12:02 AM EDT
[#6]
Tacoma.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:13:55 AM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: Tacoma. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Thank you for your input. While I would gladly take a tacoma over ther two options before me, it is not financially possible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:19:18 AM EDT
[#8]
I have a Ranger 2003. I bought it new. It gets about 20 miles per gallon. It is a 6 3.0. I have had no trouble with it to speak of. Except with the milage I am very pleased with it. I have aboug 95K on it now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:20:55 AM EDT
[#9]
I ran my Nissan 280,000 miles before the headgasket failed. Factory clutch, starter, alternator, etc.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:21:46 AM EDT
[#10]
What models are we talking about here ?
The 4 cylinder Frontier is not that reliable, grossly underpowered and very thirsty. Repairs and parts are quite expensive ( I think I paid $120 for the cam cover gasket ), and the EGR system was a constant PITA. When the front end wears out it will cost in the thousands to replace things like lower control arms, shocks and tie-rod ends. No serpentine belt on that truck either. 3 fan belts that make noise and constantly need replacing. I would never buy another Frontier. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:23:41 AM EDT
[#11]
Test drove both back to back a year ago. Nissan was much better.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:26:11 AM EDT
[#12]
If rangers were so good why were they Discontinued?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:27:31 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: If rangers were so good why were they Discontinued?  Just not for Americans. Yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:28:18 AM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
If rangers were so good why were they Discontinued? Well we will have to see if the Frontier has a 29 year run. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:30:43 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Tacoma. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Thank you for your input. While I would gladly take a tacoma over ther two options before me, it is not financially possible. Taco - $20k Ranger - $15k Nissan - $18k The Ranger and the Taco have the better 4WD components and the better engines. Ranger has the best transmission (manual). Taco probably has the best automatic transmission, but what retard would buy an automatic truck? Nissan and Taco have more luxury items; the Ranger is "just a truck." Even with all the comfort options, Rangers offer pretty much zip on creature comforts. You get air conditioning, and that's about it. Which, again, why do you need that stuff in a truck? I don't mean to poo on the Nissans, but your money isn't going into the things that matter on a truck. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:37:10 AM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
If rangers were so good why were they Discontinued? Fleet mileage standards, I would guess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:38:00 AM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Quoted:
If rangers were so good why were they Discontinued? http://www.carspeedo.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/2011-Ford-Ranger-T6.jpg Just not for Americans. Yet. The other issue is more obvious. F-150 with ecoboost = 23MPG and 315HP Ranger with 6cyl 4.0 = 18MPG and 215HP The Ranger can't compete with the F150 in terms of demand, and it wasn't worth tying up the factory space to make Rangers. International sales are still good because mid-size trucks are still used as midsize trucks in other countries. Here, everyone wants a toy hauler, daily driver, and status symbol all rolled into one. Plus we're all fat. That's F150 territory. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:42:47 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nissan has an incredible track record in regards to reliability and longevity. Ford... not so much.. No way. The post-2000 model year Rangers are some of the best trucks on the road today. Yes, I'm aware that they're now discontinued from production. That's largely because they get 16-18MPG, which isn't very marketable when there's full-size trucks that get 22-23 (i.e. ecoboost). Ford essentially pushed themselves out of the midsize truck business, which is somewhat odd to say the least. That said, as long as you don't mind the loss of fuel economy, you'll be hard-pressed to find a better truck than a Ranger. Yeah, I owned a 2003 Ford Ranger with the 3.0L V6 for a little over half a decade. Great truck, really reliable, but the mileage SUCKED, especially for the lack of power the vehicle had. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 8:03:30 AM EDT
[#19]
Well I am going to go look at them an maybe test drive them on my lunch in an hour. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 11:29:35 AM EDT
[#20]
Went to the dealer, more info in OP
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 11:32:21 AM EDT
[#21]
The Ford Ranger is one hell of a truck
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 11:33:58 AM EDT
[#22]
Frontier. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 11:34:09 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nissan has an incredible track record in regards to reliability and longevity. Ford... not so much.. No way. The post-2000 model year Rangers are some of the best trucks on the road today. Yes, I'm aware that they're now discontinued from production. That's largely because they get 16-18MPG, which isn't very marketable when there's full-size trucks that get 22-23 (i.e. ecoboost). Ford essentially pushed themselves out of the midsize truck business, which is somewhat odd to say the least. That said, as long as you don't mind the loss of fuel economy, you'll be hard-pressed to find a better truck than a Ranger. The Nissan is a car with a bed that looks like a truck. If that's what you want, you're better off with a Honda. This. Go with the Ranger. I've owned them and they have an excellent record. Most of them will have the Vulcan 3.0L V6. Not a power house, not great on mileage, but it will last you for a loooooong time if properly taken care of. If not for having a child, I would be driving one today without hesitation. And for the Rice lovers, , the Frontiers do not have a rating as good as the Rangers.
CMOS |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 11:36:35 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Nissan has an incredible track record in regards to reliability and longevity. Ford... not so much.. No way. The post-2000 model year Rangers are some of the best trucks on the road today. Yes, I'm aware that they're now discontinued from production. That's largely because they get 16-18MPG, which isn't very marketable when there's full-size trucks that get 22-23 (i.e. ecoboost). Ford essentially pushed themselves out of the midsize truck business, which is somewhat odd to say the least. That said, as long as you don't mind the loss of fuel economy, you'll be hard-pressed to find a better truck than a Ranger. The Nissan is a car with a bed that looks like a truck. If that's what you want, you're better off with a Honda. This. Go with the Ranger. I've owned them and they have an excellent record. Most of them will have the Vulcan 3.0L V6. Not a power house, not great on mileage, but it will last you for a loooooong time if properly taken care of. If not for having a child, I would be driving one today without hesitation. And for the Rice lovers, , the Frontiers do not have a rating as good as the Rangers.CMOS This unit has the 4.0L any known issues with those that the 3.0L doesn't have? Should the 4.0 scare me? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 11:57:40 AM EDT
[#25]
My vote goes to the Toyota Tacoma, Nissan gets the second vote.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 12:09:00 PM EDT
[#26]
When I bought new in '09, I looked at all of the mid/compact trucks including ranger, tacoma, frontier, dakota, and the badge-engineered offerings from mitsubishi and...I think there was one other.
I went with the Tacoma, but everything I read about the Frontier was good, including the previous generation truck. The only serious warning I saw was about the auto tranny heat exchanger leaking and mixing ATF with coolant, but your truck is a manual so I don't see that as a problem. The ranger is often used for fleet vehicles where they take a lot of abuse...but I'd give the reliability nod to the Nissan, based on what I remember from when I was in the market. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 12:14:17 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nissan has an incredible track record in regards to reliability and longevity. Ford... not so much.. No way. The post-2000 model year Rangers are some of the best trucks on the road today. Yes, I'm aware that they're now discontinued from production. That's largely because they get 16-18MPG, which isn't very marketable when there's full-size trucks that get 22-23 (i.e. ecoboost). Ford essentially pushed themselves out of the midsize truck business, which is somewhat odd to say the least. That said, as long as you don't mind the loss of fuel economy, you'll be hard-pressed to find a better truck than a Ranger. The Nissan is a car with a bed that looks like a truck. If that's what you want, you're better off with a Honda. My sarcasm meter must need recalibration I havent seen many rangers on offroad trails while Nissan pickups are all over the place. They are a proven design and have been for some time dating back to the old Hardbody line. WIth a combined history of 27 years it will easily surpass 29 as their compact pickup isnt going anywhere any time soon. Nissan has generally put a little extra into their SUV's and pickups but to call them "cars with a bed that looks like a truck" is either wilfully ignorant or you havent ever been around them for any ammount of time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 12:21:08 PM EDT
[#28]
I don't have experience with the model in question, but I'll definitely be replacing our Xterra w/ another Nissan when the time comes (if it ever comes!). Reliability-wise I couldn't be happier.
I have yet to run into anyone who had bad things to say about Nissan. And I have it on word from more than one trusted automotive professional that the positive experience I've had w/ the brand is typical. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 12:39:54 PM EDT
[#29]
I have a ranger. I would not get another. Too many problems for a brand new truck, and I've heard bad things about vacuum lines for the 4wd, etc.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 12:53:00 PM EDT
[#30]
I work for a dealership that sells Ford, Lincon, Mercury, Mazda, Chevy, Cadilac, Nissan and Hyndai. Also has a bodyshop. I would not buy a Ranger.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 12:55:14 PM EDT
[#31]
If you get the Ranger make sure if it has 4WD that you get the 4.0L. I have owned two and have never had one single issue with either one. I also owned a 4WD 3.0L that I traded for an Explorer, it just didn't have the power.
Gas milage is not great 18 max. for me. I thought of buying a F150 Eco but I'll wait a little longer. I have no payments on this truck so I'll keep it a few more years. It's a 2006 with 34,000 miles. If I'm not mistaken the Rangers basic design hasn't changed since 1992 so it's proven. The only reason I would think of selling it is to get more room. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 1:01:36 PM EDT
[#32]
2007....70k, not a single issue.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 1:03:40 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nissan has an incredible track record in regards to reliability and longevity. Ford... not so much.. No way. The post-2000 model year Rangers are some of the best trucks on the road today. Yes, I'm aware that they're now discontinued from production. That's largely because they get 16-18MPG, which isn't very marketable when there's full-size trucks that get 22-23 (i.e. ecoboost). Ford essentially pushed themselves out of the midsize truck business, which is somewhat odd to say the least. That said, as long as you don't mind the loss of fuel economy, you'll be hard-pressed to find a better truck than a Ranger. The Nissan is a car with a bed that looks like a truck. If that's what you want, you're better off with a Honda. This. Go with the Ranger. I've owned them and they have an excellent record. Most of them will have the Vulcan 3.0L V6. Not a power house, not great on mileage, but it will last you for a loooooong time if properly taken care of. If not for having a child, I would be driving one today without hesitation. And for the Rice lovers, , the Frontiers do not have a rating as good as the Rangers.
CMOS This unit has the 4.0L any known issues with those that the 3.0L doesn't have? Should the 4.0 scare me? No...and there were two 4.0L available....a push rod engine and a SOHC engine...mine has the SOHC |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 1:22:21 PM EDT
[#34]
I am on my third Ranger.
Had an 85 with the 4-banger and a 5 speed stick, it died at 190K. Bought it used with 110K. Great truck to own, who gave a shit if it was dirty or it was rusting. Bought a 92 Ranger brand new, had the 3.0 V6 and a 5 speed stick. 3.0 sucked and the transmission sucked. It sucked as a toy hauler and it sucked as a commuter. I bought a brand new '11, 4.0 4x4 with auto. Nice truck, has cruise, tilt, A/C, MP3 jack. Not the best gas milage, not the best power. Does what I want it to do. Bought it for under $20K after taxes and charges. Find me a fucking turbocharged F-150 equipped like that for under $20K out the door and I will buy it. 
I also owned a 98 Nissan Frontier 4-banger with a 5 speed stick. I owned it for 13 years, it had 110K, the only issues I had with it was the dash went out (everything died) and I had to replace two alternators. If I were the OP I would buy either of those two trucks he listed as long as they were sound.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 1:28:07 PM EDT
[#35]
Both trucks are in very good shape physically.
What do you guys think of the pricing? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 1:30:41 PM EDT
[#36]
Nevermind, reread the OP.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 1:31:13 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
Nissan has an incredible track record in regards to reliability and longevity. Ford... not so much.. Although, ford rangers seem to do alright. Rangers are alright but the 4.0L Cologne V6/5 Speed combo is kind of a fuel thirsty dog. I'd look for a later one with the ZETEC I4 and 5 Speed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 1:38:19 PM EDT
[#38]
Between those 2, get the Ranger. Nissan's 3.3L V6 is a thirsty dog. Also, parts are plentiful for the Ford and dirt cheap since it basically had zero changes from 1998 to 2011.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 2:03:46 PM EDT
[#39]
Get that timing belt changed if you get the Nissan. Every 105k
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 2:17:15 PM EDT
[#40]
I had a 1999 ( 10/98 production date ) Nissan Frontier XE king cab 2.4l 5spd. Bought it new and it had 20 miles on the odometer when I picked it up. Had over 12 years &150K trouble free miles. Only reason why I got rid of it was I was tired of driving a stick ( okay flame suit on ) day in and day out. The 4 bangers are pigs on fuel when running the AC. Didn't haul much in it other than my dirt bike and a quad. I miss the truck and wish it was in the cards to keep it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 2:18:42 PM EDT
[#41]
Ford.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 5:39:13 PM EDT
[#42]
My 2001 Nissan Frontier has 109,000 miles on it and never had a problem .My last Nissan 1989 Hard body pick up had 250,000 miles on it and never been in the shop once .I sold it to a co-worker and it is still going strong
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 6:25:48 PM EDT
[#43]
Nissan, hands down.
DP |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 6:33:03 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
Nissan, hands down. DP See, even Detroit tells you to buy a Nissan |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 6:50:45 PM EDT
[#45]
Research transmission fluid/coolant fluid intermingling; failed transmissions; leaking radiators, etc. re: your Nissan candidate.
Ours is a Nissan Pathfinder that apparently shared a penchant for burning up its own transmission with Frontiers and Xterras. The radiator would develop a leak, radiator coolant would leak into the transmission fluid or vise versa, and the transmission would seize from overheating and burn up. +$4k in repairs and never knew about the issue till it was too late, because I researched recalls, not warranty services performed for this year, make, and model. I can't speak for or against the Ranger, no experience with that. Knowing what I do now, I'd google recalls, warranty services for year/make/model, and visit internet brand forums using your cars as a key search word. Good luck. :) |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:07:40 PM EDT
[#46]
I can't speak for the automatic Frontiers, but my '02 5-speed crew cab was the most reliable vehicle I've ever owned. I sold it earlier this year with over 200k miles and it ran like new, except the front end was getting a little loose. The only real problem at that time was a leaking rear seal (1 quart every 2000 miles, max). I sold it because I got tired of 16mpg in a small truck. It will drink gas like crazy and likes premium to keep from knocking. If you don't mind gassing it up, get the Frontier. I did all my own maintenance from day 1 and it never let me down. I beat the hell out of it on a regular basis. I hauled way too much in it, I drove it too hard off road and I used it like a old farm truck. It was never babied and never broke down.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:07:41 PM EDT
[#47]
00 Ranger XLT Super Cab here
- 4.0L Engine - 4x4 Off Road - Auto Transmission (I know I know but its what they had) - 112k miles Looks great, runs great, drives great. I work at NAPA so I get the best parts for cheap but other than routine maintenence, my Ranger hasn't really needed anything. As far as the 4.0L being a dog? derp derp 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:08:51 PM EDT
[#48]
I bought a 2007 Ranger, standard cab, no 4x4, 5 speed with the 4 cyl. I get an average of 30 mpg to work and back. My worst ever was 27 mpg and my best was 36 mpg. Not a single problem in 5 years with it. Sucks they don't make them any more but mine does everything I need it to.
Dave |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:10:07 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted:
00 Ranger XLT Super Cab here - 4.0L Engine - 4x4 Off Road - Auto Transmission (I know I know but its what they had) - 112k miles Looks great, runs great, drives great. I work at NAPA so I get the best parts for cheap but other than routine maintenence, my Ranger hasn't really needed anything. As far as the 4.0L being a dog? derp derp edit: incidentally, thanks to this thread I conducted an informal poll at work. Parts guys said 100% Ranger Once I included regular customers, the ratio dropped to 80% still in favor of the Ranger. The Frontier will prolly look better parked in front of Whole Foods and Casual Male, however. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/21/2012 7:10:55 PM EDT
[#50]
Quoted:
I have a ranger. I would not get another. Too many problems for a brand new truck, and I've heard bad things about vacuum lines for the 4wd, etc. The vacuum hubs are an easy fix. You either break the little spring tab to convert them to live axle, or you disconnect the vacuum lines and cut out the plastic star to make them push-button manuals. Or if you're feeling spendy, you can buy the manual conversion hubs. |
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
