Size matters, part 3

[bob91yj]

The newer GM 1/2 ton trucks use drum rear brakes as well. <baffled>

[Hilldweller]

The U-turn radius is exactly one more entire lane for my Power Wagon than it was for my JK 2-door....

And the breakover angle is terrible.

But like you said, it's tow-licious.

[Ridge Runner]

The only thing certain is Toyota has an anemic powerplant and DRUM brakes still on a 2012 vehicle. WTF

Meh, it could be worse. I used my dad's '09 double cab 4WD to tow my '70 Blazer (roughly 3700 pounds + a heavy trailer + no top and backwards, so it had the drag coefficient of a sail) last summer across Tennessee. I admit, I usually kept it out of overdrive, but I still did 13-15 MPG and wasn't lacking too bad for speed. More power would certainly be nice, but I wouldn't call it anemic. More like right at sufficient.

[haven]

The four door pickups like the Power Wagon and Raptor are built on a longer wheelbase than the Dodge single cab I chose for this comparison. Longer wheelbase means larger turning circle and lower breakover angle.

Next year, Dodge is using the Pentastar V6 and 8? 9? speed transmission in the Ram 1500. That should be an interesting combination.

[Buliwyf]

If you're not into hardcore offroad trails or rockcrawling. The fullsize trucks are far better machines. It's very rare that I take my truck camping and it's too big to fit. In fact my truck(s) have never failed to get me to a destination. I just need them to get me to the trail head. I have no intention of driving them on REAL trails.

There is a huge difference beteween trying to get to an offroad destination, and driving around offroad trying to get stuck in mud and challenge yourself. One avoids the tough spots, one seeks out those spot. The fullsize is better for the first, the Jeep is superior for the second.

I save the real hardcore offroad trails for my Honda CFR450r or mountain bike. Both of which fit easy in my truck. The worlds absolute best trails still require "Mark I Tennis Shoes" anyways.

My YJ was great for local trails. It was like a 4 wheeler toy. I often accidentally found myself on 4 wheeler and dirt bike trails. It still fit with some trail stripping. It stunk for camping or any kind of destination travel. And hauling a dirtbike was terrible. A Jeep deosn't work too well on most trails up here anyways, unless it's modified to the point where you have to tow it to the trail. So if I have to tow something, I'd rather tow a bike(s), not a Jeep. My Jeeps loaded fuel economy was far worse than a fullsize gas F250.



My new ride is still being built:

[Hilldweller]

Next year, Dodge is using the Pentastar V6 and 8? 9? speed transmission in the Ram 1500. That should be an interesting combination.

I read a rumor of a turbo on it for truck use.

And they've also got the 2.4L multi-air (turbo?) rumors floating. There's a tuner getting 360 hp from a 1.4L multi-air turbo already; sick.

[KaiserM715]

Toyota Tacoma 4x4 Access Cab
Wheelbase... ...127.4

The four door pickups like the Power Wagon and Raptor are built on a longer wheelbase than the Dodge single cab I chose for this comparison. Longer wheelbase means larger turning circle and lower breakover angle.

As a side note, the Super Cab Raptor has a wheelbase of 133", just 5.5" longer than the Tacoma.

[bjowett]

Good comparison. Full size rigs will fit a lot more places than many folks think.

I recommend looking at a 07 and up Tundra. Much beefier in key areas.

[Kytann]

Good comparison haven.

The turning radius being shorter in the ram is probably due to the fact that it is a short bed single cab. For proper comparison you should probably use the tacoma short bed single cab as well. That being said the unlimited version of the jeep probably shouldn't be used either. I think that would make it a fair comparison.

I disagree. I think comparing a regular cab full size to an extended cab mini is just about perfect. Both give space for gear in the cab of the truck. Both are about the same length with very similar turining circles. The full size gives the main occupants vertical room, whereas the Tacoma has very limited legroom but allows you to lean the seat back farther. The Tacoma can carry two more people for very short distances in the back, where as the Ram can carry three across in comfort.

I used to own a regular cab Tacoma. I am now shopping for another truck, and I am trying to decide between just this, a full size regular cab or an extended cab Tacoma. I really want the extra room in the cab of either of those options. I also owned a JK Rubicon, though not the unlimited.

A regular cab Tacoma is so small (in the cab) as to not really be comparable to anything else. The seat is practically on the floor with your legs out in front of you, as opposed to under you like they should be in a truck. And no way to lean the seat back. It does get tiring after while.

And the extended cab full size trucks have just grown into full behemoths. Too large and ungainly for tight trail use. Granted a regular cab full size is only usable on tight trails if you do not mind a little pin striping of the paint down the sides.

Also, contrary to everyone's opinion, I haven't had good luck with Toyota reliability. My Tacoma I had really wasn't very reliable. Towards the end I was fixing on it about once every two week, with a laundry list of problems that ended up unresolved. Couple of other Toyota products (cars) I have had in the 50k mile range were just starting to get a few niggling little issues and requiring spare parts to stay on the road.

Also gas mileage in my old Tacoma sucked. It was pretty much what other people at the time were getting with big full size rigs, so the advantages of the small and maneuverable truck were starting to wear thin.

However I have to wonder if the point of the post was rather to point out that (what used to be) the smaller vehicles have all become so bloated out now that it's almost like what's the point of even having them anymore. Since Ford killed off the Ranger there's no practical smaller option in a true 4WD vehicle left.

In my particular case a fullsize truck definitely would not be practical, it won't fit down many of the trails I use to get to remote camping spots in California's Sierra mountains, at least not without some new character along the sides lol (I've knocked in the mirrors a few times on my 67" wide Bronco II squeezing it through some of the rocks and/or trees up there). With these so-called "mid-sizes" being nearly the same size as the big trucks, it looks like I'll probably be buying used for awhile if something should happen to my BII.

Actually what I have seen over the years is that as the vehicles get wider, so do the trails. Through improvements and such.



Anyway, Here is a little table I made comparing some of the vehicles on my shortlist, the ones applicable to this discussion anyway.
Requirements: Newer to be reliable. My daily driver in the winter. Able to either haul home improvement projects or haul a trailer with those projects on them. Enough room for two people to comfortably go camping in Colorado for a week at a time. Maybe enough room for a dog or a kid someday in the future. Havens information contained more details, like payload area size and capacity. But this one is in easy to read table format.





. . . . . . . . . . . .09 Jeep . .08 Toy. . .2009. . . .2008 Ford .2007 Toyota
. . . . . . . . . . . .Wrangler. .Tacoma. . .Ram . . . .F150. . . .Tundra
. . . . . . . . . . . .Rubicon . .V6 4x4. . .V8 4WD. . .V8 4WD. . .V8 4WD
. . . . . . . . . . . .4 Door. . .X-Cab . . .Reg Cab . .Reg Cab . .Reg Cab

. . . . .Width (in) . . 73.9 . . . 74.6 . . . 79.4 . . . 78.9 . . . 79.9
. .Front Track (in) . . 61.9 . . . 63.0 . . . 68.1 . . . 67.0 . . . 67.9
. . Rear Track (in) . . 61.9 . . . 63.4 . . . 67.5 . . . 67.0 . . . 67.9
. . . . Length (in) . .184.4 . . .208.1 . . .209.0 . . .211.1 . . .209.8
. . .Wheelbase (in) . .116 . . . .127.8 . . .120.0 . . .126.0 . . .126.8
Grnd Clearance (in) . . 10.1 . . . .9.4 . . . .7.7 . . . .8.7 . . . 10.8
. Curb Weight (lbs) . .4419. . . .3965. . . .4893. . . .4960. . . .5100
Turning Cirlce (ft) . . 41.2 . . . 40.7 . . . 39.5 . . . 41.8 . . . 39.2
.Approach Angle (°) . . 44.4 . . . 35.0 . . . 19.3 . . . 25.1 . . . 28.0
Departure Angle (°) . . 40.5 . . . 26.0 . . . 24.4 . . . 26.0 . . . 27.0
. . .City/Hwy (mpg) . . 15/19. . . 15/18. . . 13/18. . . 13/17. . . 13/17
. . .Combined (mpg) . . 16 . . . . 16 . . . . 15 . . . . 14 . . . . 14


I'd love to see more discussions of this type of stuff. I'd also love to see some pictures of regular cab full size trucks out there on the trails.

[Metcalf]

For me your good ol' regular cab longbed pickup is a good compromise for your typical 'traveling' style expedition work. If you want it to bridge over into what I would call 'technical exploration' where you are going to try to get out on a difficult trail ( Rubicon, Dusy Ershim, etc ) than it is too big.

My dodge does everything but your typical 'extreme' wheeling well. It will do more off road than I let it also, but I still drive it daily. It did Fins and Things in Moab without much issue. The downsides are that the hood is HARD to see over and the departure angle needs some work. The wheelbase is tolerable. I think the biggest limitation besides over-hood visibility is the departure angle.

Personally for what I WANT to do my dodge is too big. I do love the 20mpg Cummins, 5-spd granny transmission, all gear NP205 T-case, D60 front with real wheel bearings and locking hubs, and the D70 rear end with a decent limited slip. Can it be improved on? Sure! I just need a shrink ray to make it about 3/4's the overall size

I'm leaning pretty hard towards something based on the 4-door JK platform. I think it is one of the overall best 'size' vehicles on the market if you want more off road capability. Wheelbase is decent but not overkill. Departure angle is probably the best on the market in that size vehicle. It is big enough to sleep inside. The body width is deceiving because a lot of the figures list to the outside of the flares....which are 4" or so outside the main part of the body.

This is basically what I want to build.....



I think for ME this would be the perfect compromise. Big enough to do a LOT of different things but small enough to do a LOT more things that a 'truck' size vehicle.