# mid sized truck users?



## bonedoc98 (Sep 13, 2015)

Any midsized pickup truck users? What truck do you have and what do you use to haul your bikes? Im in the market for a midsized truck and right now have narrowed down to ridgeline, ranger and maybe canyon. I have a lot of bikes (but dont carry many at a time). Im kinda leaning toward a hitch rack especially in the winter, because of studs on the fatbikes. In the summer, maybe an xc mountain bike, a gravel bike or a tandem. Would really like to see pics of your setups and hear your suggestions/input. TIA.

Ed in Toronto


----------



## photonanc6 (Jul 9, 2016)

I have the same question, but also need to transport an adult tricycle.


----------



## plummet (Jul 8, 2005)

I have an Isuzu Dmax which is awesome. it my be called a something else in the US. 
Diesel economy is good, its reliable as ****, and can tow/carry a bunch of gear/people

My advice is get a canopy. Then you stash bikes inside, ontop and on a hitch rack at the back.

I'm currently in the process of building myself a 5-6 bike northshore style rack.


----------



## natas1321 (Nov 4, 2017)

Nothing special, have a pair of Tacoma's but I only have to carry my bike.









Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

Gotta say, I understand why folks like midsize trucks. But after owning both a Taco and, most recently, a Nissan Frontier, my mind is changing.

They’re incrementally cheaper, incrementally better mileage, incrementally easier to park if you live in the city as I do. But they really don’t have the flexibility or workhorse nature that a full-size truck has. That’s assuming you actually need a truck.

If I ever needed a truck again, I’d just buy a half-ton and be done with it.


----------



## jrm (Jan 12, 2004)

I used a bed rack but im not sure if that'd work if you have a shell installed.


----------



## minimusprime (May 26, 2009)

I have a gmc canyon. I like the truck quite a bit. the bed is small and some times I wish i had a full size, but overall this truck fits really well and parks/drives like a car and has the turning radius to match. 

At any rate, I have a thule T2, a dakine tailgate pad and I also have QR fork mounts mounted to the front bed rail right behind the rear window. I mostly use the dakine tailgate pad for local stuff as it's quick and easy. For road trips I tend to mount the bikes in the QR fork mounts (with through axle adapters of course) because it's more secure. I rarely use the thule t2... not because i don't like it, but because morons in socal tailgate and will rear end you while texting. 

FWIW, I lost a bike years ago when I got rear ended with my bike on a tailgate pad... it ended up breaking the fork and cracking the frame at the head tube. Also fwiw, the current crop of mid size truck beds can be too short for the QR mount option on some current geo L and XL 29rs.


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

Excellent point above about the small beds. If you're on a modern bike, particularly if it's a 29er and L or XL, forgot mounting upright in the bed.

On my Frontier, I built an over-the-bed rack system using Yakima Bedrock mounts and 66-inch load bars. Then mounted standard roof-rail racks on top of that. Bikes mounted easily and could still use the bed for hauling staff that was relatively flat.


----------



## bonedoc98 (Sep 13, 2015)

Thanks everyone for the feedback!


----------



## jjc155 (Aug 9, 2011)

natas1321 said:


> Nothing special, have a pair of Tacoma's but I only have to carry my bike.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Doesnt look like you have a cap, but do you think your bike would fit standing up in the bed under a cap ie; front wheel removed and fork mounted to 2x6 on the bed?

I have an f150 with a cap and this is how I carry my bike but looking at getting a tacoma with in about 6 months and would put a cap on it and would want to continue hauling my bike the same way since I camp in my truck under the cap several times a year while fishing and biking.

edit: like this?








Thanks
J-


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Like every other mountain biker in BC I drive a Tacoma (it is actually the law here).

To carry the bike I use a tail-gate pad.


----------



## natas1321 (Nov 4, 2017)

jjc155 said:


> Doesnt look like you have a cap, but do you think your bike would fit standing up in the bed under a cap ie; front wheel removed and fork mounted to 2x6 on the bed?
> 
> I have an f150 with a cap and this is how I carry my bike but looking at getting a tacoma with in about 6 months and would put a cap on it and would want to continue hauling my bike the same way since I camp in my truck under the cap several times a year while fishing and biking.
> 
> ...


Pretty sure it would, but you would definitely have to remove the front wheel.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk


----------



## jjc155 (Aug 9, 2011)

natas1321 said:


> Pretty sure it would, but you would definitely have to remove the front wheel.
> 
> Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk


Cool thanks.

J-


----------



## natas1321 (Nov 4, 2017)

https://forums.mtbr.com/cars-bike-racks/bikes-truck-bed-topper-991364.html

there are a few Tacoma's here


----------



## jjc155 (Aug 9, 2011)

natas1321 said:


> https://forums.mtbr.com/cars-bike-racks/bikes-truck-bed-topper-991364.html
> 
> there are a few Tacoma's here


Awesome thanks for the link, looks like its doable.

J-


----------



## minimusprime (May 26, 2009)

I just want to interject that there is absolutely no way a modern 29r in size large or xl will fit in the bed of a standard crew cab mid size truck bed. I have the gmc canyon as stated above, but my size large hightower will not fit in the bed like you're showing it with the front wheel off. I could see it fitting in the long bed version of this truck, but a standard crew cab sized bed (60-62") there is absolutely no way. 

That thread has nothing but old and smaller sized bikes in it. Modern bikes are longer, slacker and many are 29rs. They aren't going to fit in the bed standing up with the front wheel off. :nono:


----------



## One Pivot (Nov 20, 2009)

I might go as far as saying the tacoma is one of the best vehicles ever made. Not just trucks, just anything with 4 wheels that goes, the tacoma is one of the best ones *ever*. 

Not that I'm a fanboy, but a professional mechanic (I work for the germans anyway). The tacoma really is just that good. The only iffy one was the short run of 3.0's back in the 90's, otherwise they've always sucked 19mpg, and never broken down. 

Everyone makes a pretty decent truck these days, but not like a tacoma.


----------



## jjc155 (Aug 9, 2011)

minimusprime said:


> I just want to interject that there is absolutely no way a modern 29r in size large or xl will fit in the bed of a standard crew cab mid size truck bed. I have the gmc canyon as stated above, but my size large hightower will not fit in the bed like you're showing it with the front wheel off. I could see it fitting in the long bed version of this truck, but a standard crew cab sized bed (60-62") there is absolutely no way.
> 
> That thread has nothing but old and smaller sized bikes in it. Modern bikes are longer, slacker and many are 29rs. They aren't going to fit in the bed standing up with the front wheel off. :nono:


I ride a medium. Worse case scenario is I have to angle it but obviously wouldn't buy with out check it out in person first.

J-


----------



## SteveF (Mar 5, 2004)

If you want to use a hitchrack why buy a truck? If you don't want a hitch rack and want to haul your bike(s) in the bed, buy a long bed version. Short beds are useless. I routinely haul 1-3 bikes, wheels on, in the bed of my Canyon. It helps that I'm short and my bikes are small, 16-17" mtbs, 52-54 road bikes. I bought a bed rack that holds them by the wheels, but I don't often use it. I have a cap on the truck to keep the bikes reasonably secure, out of sight and weather. The best way I've found to haul them is: 1 bike day trip-just lay it down in the bed. 2 bikes, day trip-bungee them upright on either side of the bed. 2-3 bikes, extended road trip-cut the sides out of a bike or fridge box and lean the bikes all on one side of the bed, alternating front/rear and using the cardboard to pad between them. Strap them to the bed side with a ratchet cargo strap and/or bungees. Camping gear, coolers, luggage, etc, can go on the other side of the bed, secured with bungees or whatever. Works great! Here's my truck with three bikes and two weeks worth of gear from last summer. The 3rd bike is on the right with the front wheel off because it's my tall buddies bike, and we squeezed it in to shuttle a straightline trail.


----------



## VTSession (Aug 18, 2005)

Anyone been behind the wheel of the new Ranger? They are starting show up on dealership lots around here. 

I've got my eye on a mid-sized pickup this spring and the Ranger's powertrain and styling is enticing.


----------



## SteveF (Mar 5, 2004)

Here's a new comparo from MT: https://www.motortrend.com/cars/che...ger-honda-ridgeline-toyota-tacoma-comparison/


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Have a lifted 4x4 '18 GMC Canyon Denali diesel.

Love it and it fits my lifestyle well. For the money I have in it I could have purchased a well appointed FS truck, but after owning many, including a lifted Superduty on 37s for 13 years, I'm over it. I find them excessively large. Look I own a trucking company and can parallel park an 18 wheeler, but that doesn't mean I want to drive a land yatch to the grocery store.

I'll also add that I use it as a truck daily. I carry gear, tools, equipment, employees, and offroad daily.

Attached is a photo of the truck. My custom toolbox for hauling bike gear mostly. I use a tailgate blanket. There is also a picture of my cable that I use to lock bikes up when I run in for lunch or something. Also a picture of my mixed driving mpg over the last 15k miles or so. 










Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

One Pivot said:


> I might go as far as saying the tacoma is one of the best vehicles ever made. Not just trucks, just anything with 4 wheels that goes, the tacoma is one of the best ones *ever*.
> 
> Not that I'm a fanboy, but a professional mechanic (I work for the germans anyway). The tacoma really is just that good. The only iffy one was the short run of 3.0's back in the 90's, otherwise they've always sucked 19mpg, and never broken down.
> 
> Everyone makes a pretty decent truck these days, but not like a tacoma.


My experience has been dramatically different and I consider the Taco totally overrated.

I suppose it's anecdotal, but as my '09 Canyon went 183k miles (now at 220k with my friend's kid driving it) with 2 battery replacements, and 1 set of front brakes, and was tight, quiet, and averaging 21-22mpg every tank, my best buds new Taco (better looking truck at that time for certain) was getting his frame swapped, burning oil, going thru rear brakes, getting about 15mpg.

I just don't see the value beyond the admittedly fantastic looks of the Taco.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## adam728 (Jan 25, 2006)

Suns_PSD said:


> My experience has been dramatically different and I consider the Taco totally overrated.
> 
> I suppose it's anecdotal, but as my '09 Canyon went 183k miles (now at 220k with my friend's kid driving it) with 2 battery replacements, and 1 set of front brakes, and was tight, quiet, and averaging 21-22mpg every tank, my best buds new Taco (better looking truck at that time for certain) was getting his frame swapped, burning oil, going thru rear brakes, getting about 15mpg.
> 
> ...


And on the flip side my mom's 05 Tacoma got 20-21 mpg, as good as 23, and in 10 years and 190,000 miles needed tires, brakes, and a rust spot under the tailgate handle fixed. Truck looked great, and they got something ridiculous lik $12k trading it in on a new 2015. My dad loved the reliability on that truck, especially since his 07 F150 has left him stranded multiple times, and had all sorts of "well that's just a fluke" failures. Now it's the plow beater and failures are rust related.

The 2015 Taco had something like 60k on it when I was there at Christmas. New tires is all it needed so far. To be fair, they are super easy on vehicles.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

The resale on Tacos is truly, really high. Probaly the best in the auto industry. The problem however is that real new transaction prices are also very high. 
You can pick up a new Twin (Colorado or Canyon) at Laura Buick/GMC at around $8k off MSRP with no haggling if you don't mind the fly and drive. You can't even get $1k off the Taco anywhere that I have seen.
I'd rather have my $8k up front, then try and collect an extra $5k at trade in time. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Hurricane Jeff (Jan 1, 2006)

Im over the small truck thing, even the midsize trucks tend to slightly larger than those "mini trucks", but a lot smaller than fullsize.
Last year I bought a used 2015 GMC Sierra 1500 crew cab, 4x4 and couldnt be happier. It has all the room, all the power, super reliable and gets great mileage. On road trips, I get over 21 MPG, loaded.
The only thing I do miss is the ability to park in smaller spaces.

As far as reliability of most vehicles, I dont beleive the hype of "Toyotas run forever", sure they are great vehicles, but pretty much every vehicle is great if you do regular maintence.
Ive always owned( since 1979) American brands of vehicles, NEVER had problems with any of them. In fact the only vehicle that gave us problems was a Toyota Supra that my wife had when we got married.


----------



## twodownzero (Dec 27, 2017)

I have a full size pickup, but once I bought my Thule T2, I almost always use my SUV and carry my bike on the hitch rack. The SUV is smaller (109.5" wheelbase) to get into places where we ride. When I'm on vacation, I use my pickup since it also tows my camper.

My input is that if you need a pickup truck, then buy whichever one you like. If not, there's a ton of other options that you'll probably like more on a daily basis. I have been a pickup owner for nearly 20 years and the SUV is so much more fun to have a place inside to put things and still have the offroad capability.


----------



## eatdrinkride (Jun 15, 2005)

Suns_PSD said:


> Have a lifted 4x4 '18 GMC Canyon Denali diesel.
> 
> Also a picture of my mixed driving mpg over the last 15k miles or so. ]


26mpg??? That's awesome. I take it that's the 4cyl diesel? Crazy. That $3500 upgrade is a steep cost if one does not truly need a diesel engine.


----------



## jenren81 (Aug 17, 2010)

jjc155 said:


> Doesnt look like you have a cap, but do you think your bike would fit standing up in the bed under a cap ie; front wheel removed and fork mounted to 2x6 on the bed?
> 
> I have an f150 with a cap and this is how I carry my bike but looking at getting a tacoma with in about 6 months and would put a cap on it and would want to continue hauling my bike the same way since I camp in my truck under the cap several times a year while fishing and biking.
> 
> ...


I have a 2016 tacoma with a topper/cap whatever you like to call it that is cab high. I have a set of kuat dirtbag mounts bolted on to a 2x6, and my size medium bronson with 160 fork fits standing up no problem, but you have to tilt it while putting it in. And lower the dropper post helps as well. I probably have a pic somewhere but it basically looks like the one you posted. I have the 6ft bed though, might be tight with a bigger bike and a 5ft bed.


----------



## jjc155 (Aug 9, 2011)

jenren81 said:


> I have a 2016 tacoma with a topper/cap whatever you like to call it that is cab high. I have a set of kuat dirtbag mounts bolted on to a 2x6, and my size medium bronson with 160 fork fits standing up no problem, but you have to tilt it while putting it in. And lower the dropper post helps as well. I probably have a pic somewhere but it basically looks like the one you posted. I have the 6ft bed though, might be tight with a bigger bike and a 5ft bed.


cool thanks. Yea I was thinking the 6 ft bed anyways so that would work. I have to tilt it to get in the back of my f150 if I dont lower the dropper anyways so that would be no biggie.

J-


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

eatdrinkride said:


> 26mpg??? That's awesome. I take it that's the 4cyl diesel? Crazy. That $3500 upgrade is a steep cost if one does not truly need a diesel engine.


Yes, it's the 2.8 diesel.

And yes, that's 26.2 mpg, long term, mixed conditions, in a lifted 4x4. I can get 30 pretty easily for a while but 26.2 is realistic over lots of miles.

Don't know if diesels really 'pay off' but we buy lots of products, especially car engines, just cause we like them. Like every V8 ever put in a truck.

I like diesel passenger cars and have always had them, and now my wife is hooked on them too. They aren't really fast, but they have a lot of grunt and are cruise control and highway masters. Awesome in the mountains as well, as they lose no hp at altitude.

My wife's Grand Cherokee Eco-D goes about 550 miles a tank. My Canyon with an aftermarket larger tank on it goes about 850 on a tank which I find highly convenient. I think this saves me a fair bit of time. One less thing to think about.

The higher diesel fuel cost doesn't bother me because I run super unleaded in all my gassers anyways, so the fuel cost is a wash. Oil is the same as I run expensive Amsoil in all my vehicles.

Lastly, generally the resale value of diesel engines easily pays for the option cost with interest on top of it. In a VW tdi back when I had one. The diesel was an $1800 option new and brought about $4k extra on trade in.

I don't tow with mine but I'm seriously considering a bumper pull RV for the family, and this truck is a great fit for a 3500-5000# RV which is the largest I'd get. The gasser can tow it too but it's much more pleasant with the diesel as it runs lower rpms, gets about 2x the mpg when towing, and has an engine brake.

Good luck in your truck search.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## eatdrinkride (Jun 15, 2005)

Suns_PSD said:


> Yes, it's the 2.8 diesel.
> 
> .
> 
> ...


Pretty cool, I would love the diesel version but probably just don't really need one. I'm also leery of a turbo. Probably completely unfounded compared to today's cars but I had a Thunderbird turbo coupe back in the day and the turbo or wastegate or something took a crap and the car became pretty much useless after that.

I owned a 2005 Nissan frontier and sold it at 200k. Liked the truck a lot but it was only two wheel drive so that was a huge limiting factor when camping and stuff. I went truck shopping two years ago with the intent on buying a Tacoma but the price put me off since we had just purchased a brand new Subaru Outback the year before and after years of having no car payment it was just too much to double up like that. I ended up buying a 2016 Honda Accord Sport to get me by until I can get another truck. the outback works pretty well for minor off-road adventures and camping but I just miss the utility of a truck. I test drove a GMC canyon at that time and I seemed to like it quite a bit it's just that the styling in my opinion doesn't compare to the Tacoma. At least from the outside. Overall it might be a better truck for my needs. I'm not a hardcore off-roader at all. Just need to get where I need to go, when I need to get there... Off road or not.


----------



## amish_matt (Aug 18, 2006)

My tailgate pad lives on my truck, that's what I always use:


----------



## plummet (Jul 8, 2005)

I'm getting 30mph out of my Dmax pictured above. Its a 3lt turbo diesel. 
Modern diesels are sooooo fuel efficient!


----------



## Halfabrain (Jun 5, 2014)

Bump for the GMC Canyon.... I just bought a 2017 All-Terrain this last fall....was previously 20years with a GMC 1500 SLE full size. 

I drove the Tacoma, Canyon, and Colorado. For me, the GMC is a more comfortable ride than the Tacoma. A 2017 Tacoma with a similar trim and mileage was also $4000-6000 more....

The 2017 is an 8-speed V6 and have been getting 23.6mpg variable driving in the last 2000 miles... Pretty damn good for a V6 4WD. So much tech in these trucks now. 

As you probably know, the GMC and Chevy are exactly the same truck except for the body shape and trim packages....

I do miss having a full-size bed... I would have bought an extended bed but they are rare.


----------



## eatdrinkride (Jun 15, 2005)

Halfabrain said:


> The 2017 is an 8-speed V6 and have been getting 23.6mpg variable driving in the last 2000 miles... Pretty damn good for a V6 4WD. So much tech in these trucks now.
> 
> .


How is your truck off-road? capable enough with enough ground clearance? I'll have to look up what the all-terrain package includes.


----------



## Phillbo (Apr 7, 2004)

Go big or Go Home.....


----------



## mvray (Jul 26, 2007)

First generation Toyota Tundra. Have a canopy on it and sometimes use my hitch rack. But usually lock up in canopy. Perfect size with nearly the same dimensions as current Tacoma. I do like the new Ranger.


----------



## Chicane32 (Jul 12, 2015)

2014 Tacoma Sport with Thule T2 hitch rack. The 2016 Tacoma changed body styles and the MSRP increased 5-6k for the same package. 55K miles do far, great truck overall, but has some typical Toyota cab noise just like my Tundra had.

I just researched the new Ranger and only option now is the V6 2.3 L Eco boost. No V6 yet and not one model/XLT option 35k comes with a Tow Hitch. Pretty lame so far.


----------



## Halfabrain (Jun 5, 2014)

eatdrinkride said:


> How is your truck off-road? capable enough with enough ground clearance? I'll have to look up what the all-terrain package includes.


So far its just been ice/snow and some towing, so no 'off-road' yet. The Tacoma has few goodies ('crawl control' or something like that). From what I can see, the Canyon is otherwise equal.

Take a look at the Canyon Denali if you want the top end off-road package.


----------



## eatdrinkride (Jun 15, 2005)

Test drove a four-wheel drive Denali today. Nice truck on the road but I'm torn between my everyday driving needs and the more athletic and playful Tacoma.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

You guys that really offroad need to look at the Chevy ZR2, the most effective offroad truck made at this time. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

SteveF said:


> Here's a new comparo from MT: https://www.motortrend.com/cars/che...ger-honda-ridgeline-toyota-tacoma-comparison/


Kinda disappointing assessment of the Ranger. Still, I'll be test driving one when I'm finally in the market.

I'll be in the market for a midsize truck eventually. I have absolutely no need for anything full-sized. Hell, even the midsized trucks are bigger/heavier than what I really need. I'll probably be looking at extended cab/long bed versions. I want to be able to get a shell and haul bikes inside, out of sight and out of the weather.

Probably won't even bother looking at the Taco, though. Too damned expensive.

I once did a comparo of the V6 gasser vs the diesel colorado. JUST looking at fuel costs alone (at whatever they were at the time), fuel costs were a wash. Even though gasoline was cheaper, the hit in fuel economy almost exactly leveled with the economy/cost of diesel. And that didn't account for the premium of the initial purchase price of the diesel version. The time savings of fewer fuel stops is about the only unassailable benefit of the diesel version aside from the slight improvement in towing. I'll probably test drive both a gasser and a diesel if I can, but unless the actual purchase price difference winds up being a bit closer, I'd have a hard time justifying the cost of the diesel.

And the Honda...I just can't. I really like Honda as a brand, but there's just no way I'd drive the Ridgeline the way it is now.

3 things I want to do, in this order:
haul bikes
drive to rough trailheads or campsites (but not true off-roading)
tow a camper
haul mulch/landscaping materials/home improvement supplies


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

Harold said:


> Kinda disappointing assessment of the Ranger. Still, I'll be test driving one when I'm finally in the market.


I'm assuming it feels so unrefined and dated because it's been produced since 2011 for overseas markets. Ford will probably heavily revamp it in the next few years.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

jeremy3220 said:


> I'm assuming it feels so unrefined and dated because it's been produced since 2011 for overseas markets. Ford will probably heavily revamp it in the next few years.


Probably. Still, I don't expect (or necessarily want) a truck that feels like a comfy luxury vehicle in the city. Still, I'll be making my own assessments of the ride quality on anything I check out. I think that's a fairly subjective thing. Not to mention the looks thing. They kept going on and on in that article about the styling of the current Taco, which I honestly think is pretty fugly. Earlier generations of the Tacoma looked infinitely better, IMO.

What I like is that the Ranger's power is available at lower RPM's than its competitors. I like that it's got touch better fuel economy, at least in city driving scenarios. It also seems as though for a given spec, the Ranger is a good bit less expensive than the others.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Harold said:


> Kinda disappointing assessment of the Ranger. Still, I'll be test driving one when I'm finally in the market.
> 
> I'll be in the market for a midsize truck eventually. I have absolutely no need for anything full-sized. Hell, even the midsized trucks are bigger/heavier than what I really need. I'll probably be looking at extended cab/long bed versions. I want to be able to get a shell and haul bikes inside, out of sight and out of the weather.
> 
> ...


I'd recommend the gasser with a few exceptions: 1) you tow a significant amount, 2) you drive a lot of miles, 3) or like me, you have a diesel tank at your trucking company.

The 2.8 I4/ 6 speed combo is a turd compared to say the 3.0 V6/ 8 speed in my wife's Grand Cherokee Eco-D.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Suns_PSD said:


> I'd recommend the gasser with a few exceptions: 1) you tow a significant amount, 2) you drive a lot of miles, 3) or like me, you have a diesel tank at your trucking company.
> 
> The 2.8 I4/ 6 speed combo is a turd compared to say the 3.0 V6/ 8 speed in my wife's Grand Cherokee Eco-D.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


Fair enough. I won't be towing THAT much. A little bit. As for miles - I have a 12yr old car with fewer than 90k on it. The truck would get more miles on it than my old car (taking over most trailhead trips and all camping trips) but I wouldn't suddenly be putting 100k on it in a year.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk


----------



## Daxdagr8t (Jul 9, 2014)

08 2nd gen Taco long bed, i have a custom divider on the back for gears when shuttling. Shuttled 7 bikes several times. Only problem was i burned the fuel pump running the tank empty, other than that no problems in ten years of ownership. Gets about 15 street and 18highway but i have 2.5in lift, at tires and a lead foot. Next truck though would be a tundra, need the room for the family lol.









Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Chicane32 (Jul 12, 2015)

Harold said:


> Probably. Still, I don't expect (or necessarily want) a truck that feels like a comfy luxury vehicle in the city. Still, I'll be making my own assessments of the ride quality on anything I check out. I think that's a fairly subjective thing. Not to mention the looks thing. They kept going on and on in that article about the styling of the current Taco, which I honestly think is pretty fugly. Earlier generations of the Tacoma looked infinitely better, IMO.
> 
> What I like is that the Ranger's power is available at lower RPM's than its competitors. I like that it's got touch better fuel economy, at least in city driving scenarios. It also seems as though for a given spec, the Ranger is a good bit less expensive than the others.


I have the 3rd Gen Taco 12-15 (mine is 2014) and the only thing I agree with is the cramped cabin. I came from a Tundra, me being 6' 35 inseam, but I'm used to it. Mine also has the 4.0 V6 which has plenty of power. I also have the Sport which is less sprung compared to the off road package and gives a smooth ride. It's not under sprung like mentioned in the Ford review, but still sucks up bumps like they aren't there. My fully loaded Sport has almost zero options when I compared it to the Ford, so that's a negative for the Taco. No power seats on my loaded truck is a joke. The prices seamed similar to me on a loaded Ford vs Taco, around the 37k mark. My same truck was 31.6K back in 14 and tacos also hold their value better than the others. As you mentioned the new Taco is ugly compared to my 3rd gen. I like the Rangers look the best out of the 4, but I would probably go with the Colorado between the 4 if it were me, but I haven't test driven any of them.


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

Aside from the Ranger, which wasn't available when I was shopping, the most affordable and "truck-like" was the Nissan Frontier. Excellent little truck if mid-size is your thing. Dated looks, but excellent mechanicals.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Chicane32 said:


> I have the 3rd Gen Taco 12-15 (mine is 2014) and the only thing I agree with is the cramped cabin. I came from a Tundra, me being 6' 35 inseam, but I'm used to it. Mine also has the 4.0 V6 which has plenty of power. I also have the Sport which is less sprung compared to the off road package and gives a smooth ride. It's not under sprung like mentioned in the Ford review, but still sucks up bumps like they aren't there. My fully loaded Sport has almost zero options when I compared it to the Ford, so that's a negative for the Taco. No power seats on my loaded truck is a joke. The prices seamed similar to me on a loaded Ford vs Taco, around the 37k mark. My same truck was 31.6K back in 14 and tacos also hold their value better than the others. As you mentioned the new Taco is ugly compared to my 3rd gen. I like the Rangers look the best out of the 4, but I would probably go with the Colorado between the 4 if it were me, but I haven't test driven any of them.


lol. 37k? I've priced a bunch of these trucks out and it's not hard to get them over 45k, and that's not even totally loaded. Taco resale is just stupid. It might have made sense when the Taco legitimately was the best truck in its class, and the selection was so poor. But that isn't the case anymore.



Blatant said:


> Aside from the Ranger, which wasn't available when I was shopping, the most affordable and "truck-like" was the Nissan Frontier. Excellent little truck if mid-size is your thing. Dated looks, but excellent mechanicals.


I've looked at those in person on occasion and I agree. It could use better fuel economy, though. The 19/23 rating is with the 4cyl engine. The Ranger's I-4 beats that handily. Other trucks get that or beat it slightly with a v6. The Frontier V6 is 15/21, and ouch. That's full-sized truck territory. Some full sized trucks get notably better than that, too. Overall size and fuel economy is one of the reasons I'm not looking at full sized trucks. If overall size wasn't an issue for me, no doubt I'd be looking at a full sized truck over a Frontier.


----------



## Hurricane Jeff (Jan 1, 2006)

My full size GMC Sierra crew cab 4x4 with the 5.3L v8 gets better mileage than the tacoma, with way more room and more power. I get 15/16 on my short commutes where the engine never completely warms and get 23/24 on longer road trips.


----------



## Daxdagr8t (Jul 9, 2014)

Chicane32 said:


> I have the 3rd Gen Taco 12-15 (mine is 2014) and the only thing I agree with is the cramped cabin. I came from a Tundra, me being 6' 35 inseam, but I'm used to it. Mine also has the 4.0 V6 which has plenty of power. I also have the Sport which is less sprung compared to the off road package and gives a smooth ride. It's not under sprung like mentioned in the Ford review, but still sucks up bumps like they aren't there. My fully loaded Sport has almost zero options when I compared it to the Ford, so that's a negative for the Taco. No power seats on my loaded truck is a joke. The prices seamed similar to me on a loaded Ford vs Taco, around the 37k mark. My same truck was 31.6K back in 14 and tacos also hold their value better than the others. As you mentioned the new Taco is ugly compared to my 3rd gen. I like the Rangers look the best out of the 4, but I would probably go with the Colorado between the 4 if it were me, but I haven't test driven any of them.


You got a 2.5gen lol. 3rd gen came starts at 2016 and with 3.5L atkitson engine.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Chicane32 (Jul 12, 2015)

Harold said:


> lol. 37k? I've priced a bunch of these trucks out and it's not hard to get them over 45k, and that's not even totally loaded. Taco resale is just stupid. It might have made sense when the Taco legitimately was the best truck in its class, and the selection was so poor. But that isn't the case anymore.
> 
> Ya, I just priced out the Ranger Lariat and Taco Sport and both are around 39K. It just depends how much extras you want and 4x4 adds about another 4k which I didn't price. This makes me want a new truck after I just payed mine off with 2k left. I only get about 17 mpg in my ever day driving which is poor compared to the Chevy.
> 
> Carmax would probably give me around 20k for a almost 5 year old truck(June) with 56k miles on it. Carmax gave me 24k for my 3 year old Tundra 45k miles on it and it wasn't near fully loaded. It was the extra cab 6' bed, bench seat model.


----------



## Chicane32 (Jul 12, 2015)

Daxdagr8t said:


> You got a 2.5gen lol. 3rd gen came starts at 2016 and with 3.5L atkitson engine.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


Ya, You're right. The only body change on the 2012-15 Taco is the front end. Different lower front bumper fog light cutouts and hood/scoop.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Chicane32 said:


> Ya, I just priced out the Ranger Lariat and Taco Sport and both are around 39K. It just depends how much extras you want and 4x4 adds about another 4k which I didn't price. This makes me want a new truck after I just payed mine off with 2k left. I only get about 17 mpg in my ever day driving which is poor compared to the Chevy.
> 
> Carmax would probably give me around 20k for a almost 5 year old truck(June) with 56k miles on it. Carmax gave me 24k for my 3 year old Tundra 45k miles on it and it wasn't near fully loaded. It was the extra cab 6' bed, bench seat model.


For a few reasons, 4wd is on my required equipment list. I don't need a bunch of heavy duty offroad equipment like full skid plates and all that, but 4wd is nonnegotiable for me. Also don't need or even really want the crew cab, but I do want a longer bed (crew cab + long bed is totally out - makes a truck too big for me). If I go light on interior options, I get into low-mid 30's, but if I add a few, then the price disparity grows between models because you can only choose certain options if you add this "package" which includes thousands of dollars of options I don't really want. I think the Ranger is lower on that scale in part because with the truck being new for the US market, there are simply fewer options, so Ford has less opportunity to "upcharge" you by requiring a fancy package. I'm sure once it's been available for a couple years, Ford will have the same "option bloat" that everybody else does to be able to sell more $45k midsize trucks.

I've been driving the same car for 12yrs now, and it's been paid off for a long time (I bought it new). I'm not going to get a big trade-in price for it. A couple thousand tops, probably.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I'm skiing with the family in Angel Fire right now and 4x4 is just a requirement. 
The FS GM trucks do get great mpg, and that's 1 important consideration, but size is another for me. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## eatdrinkride (Jun 15, 2005)

Well just continue on this, I test drove a Tacoma TRD four by four off-road today.I expected it to feel much less refined on the inside then the canyon or Colorado I test drove but in all honesty I feel better in it. It feels more truck like, like my old Frontier but better. To be clear I really think they're two different trucks. The Tacoma is just ready to fly off-road and have fun with no worries as is. The Chevy Colorado Z71 I looked at would be more than capable in most situations but it does have a terrible approach angle and is not really built for off-roading per se. At least as built. The ZR2 or whatever the Chevy top of the line off road version of the Colorado is, is super cool but way overkill for my needs and the price is through the roof.

my dilemma continues. I know for a fact that Tacoma gets crappy gas mileage and the Chevy had a superior drive train from what I could tell. More horsepower and just drives better on the road whereas the Tacoma is very shifty. Still it's ready to rock and roll for pretty much any adventure you would want to get into your, short of rock crawling.

Whatever truck I buy I plan on keeping for a decade but who knows. Maybe I go with a Tacoma and after four or five or six years I find I'm not using it off-road it much anymore it will have killer resale value and then I can move to a more road orientated everyday truck.


----------



## Shartist (Aug 15, 2018)

Taco this, Canyon that, whack a Ranger with a whiffle ball bat... Let's stop playing around and get real here ladies and gentlemen. If you're looking for the ultimate in versatility and open air people / bikes / cargo capacity, there's really only one option, two words.... Pontiac Transvertible- Roomy, practical, versatile, CUS-TUM!!!!

Are you a DIY'er? All that's needed is a sawz-all, a six pack, and recent tetnus shot and this option becomes even more financially accessible...









"What's done is done are you gonna invest or not??"


----------



## eatdrinkride (Jun 15, 2005)

Awesome. Here's my buddies four-wheel drive Cadillac with a Duramax engine.

Bikes can fit in the trunk!


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Shartist said:


> Taco this, Canyon that, whack a Ranger with a whiffle ball bat... Let's stop playing around and get real here ladies and gentlemen. If you're looking for the ultimate in versatility and open air people / bikes / cargo capacity, there's really only one option, two words.... Pontiac Transvertible- Roomy, practical, versatile, CUS-TUM!!!!
> 
> Are you a DIY'er? All that's needed is a sawz-all, a six pack, and recent tetnus shot and this option becomes even more financially accessible...
> 
> ...


Maybe oughtta buy stock in Naugahyde, too.


----------



## dman_mb1 (Jan 19, 2007)

It’s not clear if the OP ever came back, but if people are using this thread for reference, don’t walk away from a short bed (5’) mid-size without measuring it first if you want to carry bikes in the bed with front wheels off and fork mounts. Our bikes admittedly aren’t long travel or latest long and slack geo, but both are FS 29-ers and my size L Tallboy2 and my wife’s size M Ripley fit easily in the bed of our DCSB 3rd gen Taco. I think the Ridgeline bed is a little longer, and definitely wider between the wheel wells so bikes could be kicked sideways if needed. The bigger problem is actually height, with a shell ... cab-high shells can be tight, especially if they have a sloped rear window. Using fork mounts at the front of the bed can address that, but then they’re hard to reach. Although our bikes do fit, I usually use either a tailgate pad or a hitch rack. Depending on your usage, pickup plus hitch rack can be a great combo despite what someone else posted.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

dman_mb1 said:


> It's not clear if the OP ever came back, but if people are using this thread for reference, don't walk away from a short bed (5') mid-size without measuring it first if you want to carry bikes in the bed with front wheels off and fork mounts. Our bikes admittedly aren't long travel or latest long and slack geo, but both are FS 29-ers and my size L Tallboy2 and my wife's size M Ripley fit easily in the bed of our DCSB 3rd gen Taco. I think the Ridgeline bed is a little longer, and definitely wider between the wheel wells so bikes could be kicked sideways if needed. The bigger problem is actually height, with a shell ... cab-high shells can be tight, especially if they have a sloped rear window. Using fork mounts at the front of the bed can address that, but then they're hard to reach. Although our bikes do fit, I usually use either a tailgate pad or a hitch rack. Depending on your usage, pickup plus hitch rack can be a great combo despite what someone else posted.


Yeah, my all-mountain bike doesn't really fit in the back of my short bed Taco with canopy unless I remove both wheels. OTOH, it's short enough to fit in my garage and park in tighter quarters. I use a Yakima hitch rack unless I'm towing the trailer, then I take the bikes apart to go into the back of the truck.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

eatdrinkride said:


> Well just continue on this, I test drove a Tacoma TRD four by four off-road today.I expected it to feel much less refined on the inside then the canyon or Colorado I test drove but in all honesty I feel better in it. It feels more truck like, like my old Frontier but better. To be clear I really think they're two different trucks. The Tacoma is just ready to fly off-road and have fun with no worries as is. The Chevy Colorado Z71 I looked at would be more than capable in most situations but it does have a terrible approach angle and is not really built for off-roading per se. At least as built. The ZR2 or whatever the Chevy top of the line off road version of the Colorado is, is super cool but way overkill for my needs and the price is through the roof.
> 
> my dilemma continues. I know for a fact that Tacoma gets crappy gas mileage and the Chevy had a superior drive train from what I could tell. More horsepower and just drives better on the road whereas the Tacoma is very shifty. Still it's ready to rock and roll for pretty much any adventure you would want to get into your, short of rock crawling.
> 
> Whatever truck I buy I plan on keeping for a decade but who knows. Maybe I go with a Tacoma and after four or five or six years I find I'm not using it off-road it much anymore it will have killer resale value and then I can move to a more road orientated everyday truck.


Considering how old my Taco is getting and the high miles on it, I'm halfway considering a newer truck. It does appear that the Colorado/Canyon would be more comfortable than a Tacoma, but the Z71 looks like it sits pretty low to the ground which wouldn't work for me. The ZR2 sits up higher, but is pretty damned expensive.

I have used the off-road features on my TRD Offroad on occasion and am leaning more towards the Toyota. I wonder about the amount of torque with the new 3.5 liter engine though.


----------



## Phillbo (Apr 7, 2004)

'06 F 250 Powerstroke.... 185000 miles and running and pulling strong. I am a maintenance freak though. I always said I would drive it until it falls apart under my ass, well, the drivers seat is the only thing that needs to be replaced


----------



## eatdrinkride (Jun 15, 2005)

Curveball said:


> Considering how old my Taco is getting and the high miles on it, I'm halfway considering a newer truck. It does appear that the Colorado/Canyon would be more comfortable than a Tacoma, but the Z71 looks like it sits pretty low to the ground which wouldn't work for me. The ZR2 sits up higher, but is pretty damned expensive.
> 
> I have used the off-road features on my TRD Offroad on occasion and am leaning more towards the Toyota. I wonder about the amount of torque with the new 3.5 liter engine though.


I test drove the current Taco and decided to wait for a new gen, hopefully with a new drivetrain. That thing is shifty as hell. For an everyday drive it would really bother me, as a weekend warrior truck then no biggie, but still....it kinda sucks imo. Loved the truck otherwise (power seats are coming as well, welcome to 1999 Toyota!)


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

eatdrinkride said:


> I test drove the current Taco and decided to wait for a new gen, hopefully with a new drivetrain. That thing is shifty as hell. For an everyday drive it would really bother me, as a weekend warrior truck then no biggie, but still....it kinda sucks imo. Loved the truck otherwise (power seats are coming as well, welcome to 1999 Toyota!)


Yeah, I think I read in Motortrend that it shifts a lot and generally keeps the engine out of its power band. That would bug the hell out of me. I can imagine it would suck for pulling my trailer.

I could do without power seats though. I'll probably just drive my truck into the ground.


----------



## Shartist (Aug 15, 2018)

Curveball said:


> Yeah, I think I read in Motortrend that it shifts a lot and generally keeps the engine out of its power band. That would bug the hell out of me. I can imagine it would suck for pulling my trailer.
> 
> I could do without power seats though. I'll probably just drive my truck into the ground.


I'm 95% decided on the Taco as my new / additional vehicle starting as a weekend warrior to ease up beating on my commuter (civic si) on the crappy access roads common to my many hobbies as well as providing greater ease of equipment transportation versatility.

I'm not particularly concerned with the shifting issues of the AT as I strongly prefer a MT and consider it a selling point given how rare it's becoming  . Only minor downside is that it's only available in TRD with the shorter bed, which I assume is because TRD is geared toward offroad and the longer bed would cause clearance issues when climbing? Aside from the AT shifting, any other major downsides to the current gen?

As trivial as it sounds I can't say I love the current grill on anything but the TRD Pro and I'm not sure the pro package is something I really need. Call me crazy but I prefer the look of the the second gen front end over the current look, but can't justify spending what most are asking for them given their age and likely unknown life / maintenance history. I also have a connection that can get a good discount on toyotas, but I must admit that the discount I can get through work on GM stuff this year makes it really tempting despite my distrust of brands not named Honda/Acura or Toyota/Lexus. Still debating that 5% uncertainty. Are we due for a new gen taco next year?


----------



## shakazulu12 (Jul 14, 2015)

Would it fit if you angled the bike a bunch on a fork mount? I'm still trying to figure out my next vehicle and a short bed truck would be a lot better in the city for me. Most of the time I would use a hitch rack, but being able to get it under the cap if I wanted to for a little extra security or simply to keep it out of the weather would be nice.



Curveball said:


> Yeah, my all-mountain bike doesn't really fit in the back of my short bed Taco with canopy unless I remove both wheels. OTOH, it's short enough to fit in my garage and park in tighter quarters. I use a Yakima hitch rack unless I'm towing the trailer, then I take the bikes apart to go into the back of the truck.


----------



## klatekin (Oct 13, 2017)

For the 3rd gen, If you are okay with Access Bed, you can get the TRD Sport Access cab 6' long bed with a manual transmission.


Shartist said:


> I'm 95% decided on the Taco as my new / additional vehicle starting as a weekend warrior to ease up beating on my commuter (civic si) on the crappy access roads common to my many hobbies as well as providing greater ease of equipment transportation versatility.
> 
> I'm not particularly concerned with the shifting issues of the AT as I strongly prefer a MT and consider it a selling point given how rare it's becoming  . Only minor downside is that it's only available in TRD with the shorter bed, which I assume is because TRD is geared toward offroad and the longer bed would cause clearance issues when climbing? Aside from the AT shifting, any other major downsides to the current gen?
> 
> As trivial as it sounds I can't say I love the current grill on anything but the TRD Pro and I'm not sure the pro package is something I really need. Call me crazy but I prefer the look of the the second gen front end over the current look, but can't justify spending what most are asking for them given their age and likely unknown life / maintenance history. I also have a connection that can get a good discount on toyotas, but I must admit that the discount I can get through work on GM stuff this year makes it really tempting despite my distrust of brands not named Honda/Acura or Toyota/Lexus. Still debating that 5% uncertainty. Are we due for a new gen taco next year?


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

shakazulu12 said:


> Would it fit if you angled the bike a bunch on a fork mount? I'm still trying to figure out my next vehicle and a short bed truck would be a lot better in the city for me. Most of the time I would use a hitch rack, but being able to get it under the cap if I wanted to for a little extra security or simply to keep it out of the weather would be nice.


It's a particularly long bike and won't fit. My son's Devinci will though.

I can fit my bike in on its side at an angle though. Just not upright and certainly no other bikes with it.


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

Shartist said:


> I'm not particularly concerned with the shifting issues of the AT as I strongly prefer a MT and consider it a selling point given how rare it's becoming  . Only minor downside is that it's only available in TRD with the shorter bed, which I assume is because TRD is geared toward offroad and the longer bed would cause clearance issues when climbing? Aside from the AT shifting, any other major downsides to the current gen?


I would love a MT, except that I can't really use one with our creeping traffic. I think you can get the TRD Offroad with a long bed now.

I think the manual trans would be perfect for the new Taco.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Got a really nice deal on a new 2019 Ranger XLT SuperCrew 4x4 with lots of options.


0414201329 by Nate, on Flickr

Contrary to the review shared WAY above that mentioned the Ranger being unrefined, I don't find that to be true. It's a super nice truck, and it drives very well.

I kinda wish it was available with the SuperCrew AND a 6' bed, but it isn't. Wife's bike will fit on a fork mount in the back, but mine is just about 2 inches too long. I'll have to work out an alternative.

Eventually I'll be getting some kind of setup that will allow roof loads. I will need to transport a canoe eventually, and I'd like the ability to carry small amounts of long lumber over the cab, too. Dunno yet if I want to get a topper with a roof rack or a full height bed rack (I kinda like the overland style ones). The rack is certainly less expensive, and while it'll give me a bit more flexibility with bed usage and ease of putting loads on top, I'll get a hit in weather protection and a bit less security. I have time to figure it out, at least.

On my test drive, I was really impressed with the engine/transmission. I've already been taking advantage of it and I haven't had it a whole week yet. So nice having a truck again. But it looks like it's going to be quite some time before I'm transporting bikes to trailheads, or pulling my little camper anywhere.


----------



## raaden03 (Nov 6, 2017)

Harold said:


> Got a really nice deal on a new 2019 Ranger XLT SuperCrew 4x4 with lots of options.
> 
> 
> 0414201329 by Nate, on Flickr
> ...


The truck looks really nice! Congrats! As for the racks, I know 4wheelonline carries utility racks like TracRac and Go Rhino Quick rack, though I'm not sure if they have one for the Ranger.


----------



## BujiBiker (Jun 7, 2019)

I think either rocky mounts or Kuat makes ranger specific systems.


----------

