I bailed

[GypsyDaenger]

Actually my 2024 Lariat is $7,250.00 MSRP more than my 2023 once ordered….

doesn't change my point. Take a look at the Tacoma's if you want some sticker shock. Nissan is about the cheapest option currently.

Sponsored

 

[MJE]

Update time. The deed is done, new truck is home. Ford shit the bed on Ranger and this is actually a better option for MY needs I think: 2024 Nissan Frontier King Cab SV. Standard 310 hp naturally aspirated V6 and extremely smooth 9 speed auto that actually has a manual shift mode I can use in specific situations. Runs on 87 octane too.

Looks awesome! Figured you might head that way since really Nissan is the only game left in the midsize segment for a longer box with rear suicide doors. Enjoy it!

 

[slobkrieg]

Nissan is the narrowest of the mid size trucks . Can't haul a sheet of plywood . Looks good .

 

[jdlapointe]

The Nissan just didn't check the boxes for me personally. The ranger 4x4 gets better fuel economy than my AWD 2018 ford Taurus, and can tow my 7000 lb tractor/trailer when needed.

Everyone is scared of turbos, but they have been using them overseas just fine for many years. You just can't be cheap/skimp on maintenance intervals.

 

[NASSTY]

Update time. The deed is done, new truck is home. Ford shit the bed on Ranger and this is actually a better option for MY needs I think: 2024 Nissan Frontier King Cab SV. Standard 310 hp naturally aspirated V6 and extremely smooth 9 speed auto that actually has a manual shift mode I can use in specific situations. Runs on 87 octane too.

Congrats....the new Frontier looks nice. The older Frontiers were good trucks but they were one of the ugliest trucks on the road.

 

[fordtrks4ever]

The Nissan just didn't check the boxes for me personally. The ranger 4x4 gets better fuel economy than my AWD 2018 ford Taurus, and can tow my 7000 lb tractor/trailer when needed.

Everyone is scared of turbos, but they have been using them overseas just fine for many years. You just can't be cheap/skimp on maintenance intervals.

Ford has been using turbo's since the early 80's in Mustangs, Thunderbirds and Mercury Capri's

 

[Ranger#5?]

Nissan is the narrowest of the mid size trucks . Can't haul a sheet of plywood . Looks good .

Nissan is a little short of 48" BETWEEN the Wheel wells, otherwise fine carrying 4x8 size.

 

[Ranger#5?]

The Nissan just didn't check the boxes for me personally. The ranger 4x4 gets better fuel economy than my AWD 2018 ford Taurus, and can tow my 7000 lb tractor/trailer when needed.

Everyone is scared of turbos, but they have been using them overseas just fine for many years. You just can't be cheap/skimp on maintenance intervals.

the Ranger is also 40hp short of the Frontier in stock trim. There's no replacement for displacement. Frontier is 87 octane recommended too and gets 18/24 21 combined MPG. My Maverick was 91 for "best overall driving performance" and I'm guessing Ranger is too, especially when towing that 7k you're talking about. Ranger needs the tow package to get there too. My Frontier 2wd tows 6500 stock. There's trade offs for sure and it is personal based on intended use case.

 

[Ranger#5?]

Looks awesome! Figured you might head that way since really Nissan is the only game left in the midsize segment for a longer box with rear suicide doors. Enjoy it!

Thanks. I actually liked the looks & side profile of the Ranger better, except for the front-end view. Frontier wins there to me. My Maverick had a face only a mother could love! Really don't like the whole C-Clamp thing or squinty side eye designs of some. Frontier looks a little more old skool with the 2 wide eyes that look more like actual headlights than Geordi La Forge star trek googles. lol.

 

[jdlapointe]

the Ranger is also 40hp short of the Frontier in stock trim. There's no replacement for displacement. Frontier is 87 octane recommended too and gets 18/24 21 combined MPG. My Maverick was 91 for "best overall driving performance" and I'm guessing Ranger is too, especially when towing that 7k you're talking about. Ranger needs the tow package to get there too. My Frontier 2wd tows 6500 stock. There's trade offs for sure and it is personal based on intended use case.

The 2.3l is also rated on 87 octane. It is readily available to look up. I also prefer the turbo torque and horse power curves. 1500ish rpm and you have quite a bit of grunt on tap already. Look up the engine curve of the Nissan. I don't need power at 5.5k+ rpm

 

[Ranger#5?]

doesn't change my point. Take a look at the Tacoma's if you want some sticker shock. Nissan is about the cheapest option currently.

Yes, they were, however, there is price creep constantly on MSRP and destination charges and that helped me pull the trigger. For example, looking at in transit inventory I could claim, my truck and an identical in every way twin were both headed to Albuquerque dealers in same market. There was a $160.00 price difference between the 2 on destination charge WTF? Waiting the 12 months or so I did on 6G coming to US market it cost me several thousand $ in MSRP, Destination and factory added option packages you had no choice on.

 

[Ranger#5?]

The 2.3l is also rated on 87 octane. It is readily available to look up. I also prefer the turbo torque and horse power curves. 1500ish rpm and you have quite a bit of grunt on tap already. Look up the engine curve of the Nissan. I don't need power at 5.5k+ rpm

not in the Maverick I owned. In the manual it states 91 is recommended for best overall performance, not just extreme use or towing as some claim. Many arguments over this on Maverick forum, but it's clearly stated (in small print).

 

[jdlapointe]

not in the Maverick I owned. In the manual it states 91 is recommended for best overall performance, not just extreme use or towing as some claim. Many arguments over this on Maverick forum, but it's clearly stated (in small print).

Well for the ranger, the power numbers shown are on 87 octane. The MPG was also on 87. I have never looked at the maverick though. Best performance may be on 91, but I am going by everything else that stated 87.

 

[GypsyDaenger]

Yes, they were, however, there is price creep constantly on MSRP and destination charges and that helped me pull the trigger. For example, looking at in transit inventory I could claim, my truck and an identical in every way twin were both headed to Albuquerque dealers in same market. There was a $160.00 price difference between the 2 on destination charge WTF? Waiting the 12 months or so I did on 6G coming to US market it cost me several thousand $ in MSRP, Destination and factory added option packages you had no choice on.

You talking about the Nissans?

 

[R3G]

Dealer emailed me earlier this week, and also called me and left about 6 voicemails during a work day asking for a $1000 non-refundable deposit on the Ranger Raptor order (dealer stock not retail) it had been about 2 weeks since i “ordered”and they had never mentioned requiring a deposit, let alone a non-refundable one only that they would call me me when it came in. Who puts down non-refundable 1K in a dealer stock order? Definitely not me. Guess if I want one I’ll probably have to shop around some more. But i bet these get marked up a bunch anyway. After a year they will start to get easier to order. I’m not in a rush.

Sponsored