By on August 8, 2016

2017 Honda RidgelineMidsize pickup truck sales shot up 29 percent in the United States in July 2016, enough to drive the sub-sector’s share of the overall pickup category up three points to 17 percent.

Indeed, without the gains produced by the midsize truck sector, overall U.S. pickup truck volume would have flatlined in July on declining sales of the two top-selling truck lines, Ford’s F-Series and the Chevrolet Silverado. Moreover, without the midsize truck sector’s additional 8,973 July sales, total U.S. new vehicle sales volume would have risen by less than one-tenth of one percent.

Instead, because of a dramatic increase in sales of the second-generation Honda Ridgeline in its first month of availability, another huge uptick in Nissan Frontier sales, and continued growth from GM’s Colorado/Canyon duo, pickup truck sales grew four percent and the American auto industry reported nearly 10,000 extra sales in July 2016, year-over-year.

In June, Honda reported the best month of Ridgeline sales in America since August 2008. Still suffering from limited availability in July, Ridgeline volume nevertheless grew 42 percent (compared with June; 58,533 percent compared with July 2015) to 3,518 units, the best month of Ridgeline sales since April 2008.

The Ridgeline’s July 2016 total was only 14 units shy of the GMC Canyon’s total in the second-generation Canyon’s best month since the nameplate returned in the fourth-quarter of 2014. For the Canyon’s Chevrolet Colorado twin, July marked the fifth consecutive month with more than 9,000 sales. GM is on track to sell approximately 140,000 midsize pickups in the United States in 2016.

Nissan, which is on track for its best year of Frontier sales since 2001, reported 7,244 sales of its midsize pickup truck in July, a sharp 3,050-unit year-over-year improvement.USA midsize truck sales market share chart July 2016 YTDToyota, despite a three percent year-over-year downturn, still earned top honors in the category and claimed 41 percent market share.

Through the first seven months of 2016, total U.S. midsize pickup volume is up 19 percent, with the Toyota claiming 44 percent of the 251,178 sales produced by five nameplates.

Midsize pickups are back. Mostly. Sort of.

Rewind to the first seven months of 2006, and with a bundle of other contenders, Americans had acquired 368,000 small/midsize pickups, a 13-percent year-over-year drop. The Toyota Tacoma, with fewer sales in that seven-month stretch than this year, owned 28 percent of the segment.

Timothy Cain is the founder of GoodCarBadCar.net, which obsesses over the free and frequent publication of U.S. and Canadian auto sales figures. Follow on Twitter @goodcarbadcar and on Facebook.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

79 Comments on “Midsize Pickup Trucks Jump 29% In July 2016 As Full-Size Pickup Sales Level Off...”


  • avatar
    Tinn-Can

    Well dang… Did I wait too long to get a good deal on a Frontier now that they are actually selling well?

    • 0 avatar
      bunkie

      It has to be fleet sales. Why would anyone spending their own money buy a Frontier when there are so many other better trucks?

      I suspect that much of this is driven by pent-up demand for mid-size trucks. The GM trucks are finally available in decent numbers and the new Ridgeline is an impressive, if a bit unorthodox, entry.

      Conversely, the new F-150 is a year old and GM is playing defense with the full-sizers. That’s just speculation, of course.

      • 0 avatar
        gtemnykh

        To my eye the Frontier is the best looking midsizer, and has the best V6 available in the field (an actual truck motor, wowzers!). Throw in some favorable pricing from discounts as we saw in the article on Nissan’s strategy last week, and it all makes sense. Mid-level SVs get some nice features like heated cloth seats and factory spray in bed liner and utility track system, all standard.

      • 0 avatar

        I believe it’s price. And value for money. I like the Frontier most in this segment, but I like trucks that well feel trucky. For other buyers I think it is value. A coworker bought a loaded up NISMO last year. He told me out the door price was 5-6k less then any Toyota dealer was willing to do on a similarly equipped Taco.

        Correction PRO4x. not NISMO

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          mopar4wd,
          Once the new Frontier is released I think Nissan will encounter the same problems as here with the new Navara.

          People still expected the Nissan to sell in the same price range as the previous model (current US model).

          Nissan has reduced it’s pricing since it’s release and now I’m seeing more and more on the road.

          The new Navara has a great interior, very SUV and CUV in quality and appearance.

          I don’t like the suspension and engines available here. A V6 diesel and better off road ability would go down well.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        You’re right about Frontier fleet sales. Years ago, the Frontier was the only midsize pickup without a regular cab to offer. Cheapskates were escorted off the lot too. Now the playing field is even, with the fairly dated Frontier, slightly cheaper than the rest.

        • 0 avatar
          Drzhivago138

          And all those fleet buyers (utilities, mostly) have found a use for a Frontier S 4×2 King Cab.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Utilities and industry need extra cabs and crew cabs beside the regular cabs, but they don’t want to mix brands, one for the regular cabs, one for the extra/crew cabs. So they’ll stray from brands that don’t offer the full range.

          • 0 avatar
            Mandalorian

            I had a Frontier rental not too long ago (Hertz was out of Impalas). It was fun to drive, but that interior was seriously cheap. It’d be worth the upgrade to a full sizer just for interior quality reasons alone, not to mention there wouldn’t be any fuel economy penalty for a V6 Frontier. I used to drive an ’02 Tahoe which basically had the interior of a 1997 Silverado and even that was a step up from the Frontier.

      • 0 avatar
        Pete Zaitcev

        A friend of mine bought a Frontier because he’s a crazy NISMO fanboy, who previously owned an Xtrail and Murano. Blew out the transmission somewhere around 60k miles. I told him, but would he listen? Of course not. Toyotas are for proles, yeah.

        • 0 avatar
          gtemnykh

          Sounds like they pretty common coolant contamination issue from the trans cooler internal to the engine coolant radiator. For what its’ worth, 4Runners of my generation are known to do the same thing, but at a less rate from what I gather. Nissan addressed the issue some years back. An aftermarket external transmission cooler is another option, and the one I opted for on the ‘yota.

      • 0 avatar
        bunkie

        I remember looking at Frontiers a few years back. Based upon the sticker pricing, interior and fuel mileage, they just didn’t seem competitive, particularly compared to full-size trucks. It can certainly be argued that the Tacoma has, like the Frontier, remained the same for a very long time. I like my Tacoma, but having recently rented a Ram 1500 (whose Pentastar was real revelation), I can see that, if one is willing to put up with the larger size (my wife would need a step to comfortable enter/exit), you get a lot more truck for the money in domestic full-sizers.

      • 0 avatar
        TOTitan

        My daughter recently bought a three year old Frontier Pro4x crew cab with just 30,000 miles for 24K. That thing is a great truck. Put in 4 low and lock the rear axle and it will go just about anywhere. She lives on a ranch and her hobby is sheep herding which requires going where there are no roads frequently to haul hay to the critters. For 24K its been an amazing deal.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          TOTitan,
          Here the old Navara (Frontier) was bought by the person after a cheaper pickup. They were going out of the dealers for around 2/3s to 3/4s of what the new global Ranger/BT50, Amaroks, etc were selling for.

          They would be more than adequate for what your daughter is using it for, but, in more off road demanding situations they just don’t quite cut the mustard. They would be good for camping and some beach work.

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            Where do they fall short BAFO? In terms of sturdiness I figure they’re right up there with a fully boxed “Alpha” frame shared with the Titan. In the US they sit lower than an equivalent Tacoma and my understanding is that articulation is a bit worse so they’re not quite as capable in more technical terrain. Pro-4X is nonetheless a very serious rig, with factory rear locker and full skid plates, all terrain tires (okay Hankook DynaPro ATMs), and Bilstien shocks.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            gtemnykh,
            At least I’m decent enough to address you civilly. BAFO? WTF??

            You more or less answered what I highlighted. From ramp over, height, approach and departure, etc. I do believe the Frontier would be competitive off road against a US full size 1/2 ton in most instances.

            The Navara here is not regarded in the same league as the Hilux, Ranger, BT50, Colorado, Dmax, Amarok, etc let alone a 70 Series or Patrol pickup off road.

            Add to this the lack of competitive off road electronic aids and you have the Navara well behind in most any off road situation. The old/previous Navara is outdated by a country mile.

            Look at how well the US Colorado is off road or even the Taco, this is the norm here. Even then the Colorado is only middling in it’s off road performance.

            In the US with the lack of a competitive midsize segment you will most likely think the Frontier is the “ducks guts”. The reality is, this is not the case.

            For it’s price I do believe the Frontier is good value, hence they are selling. This is not different from us, when we had the old Navara (D40) up against the next gen midsizers. They were also cheap and attractive due to pricing.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            gtemnykh,
            Oh, I’m referencing the D40 against the newer midsizers. The new Navara is much better, but still not in the same league as the Ranger, BT50, Hilux or Amarok.

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            No offense meant, just a common shortening as I see it, much like I often see “gtem” and think nothing of it.

            For what it’s worth, the Frontier here in the States beats the pants off of the US-spec Colorado offroad, it isn’t even close. Colorado has crap angles (with the low hanging bumper trim especially, but even with it off), way too soft of a suspension that is prone to bottoming out, not enough articulation, and no dedicated selectable locking rear diff. We’ll see if they come out with a ZR2 variant, but as it stands the Z71 package is a bit of a joke.

            I’d rank offroad capabilities as such in the US midsizers:

            Tacoma>Frontier>>>Colorado

  • avatar
    indi500fan

    Honda has upped the attractiveness of their pickup bigtime in my view.
    Obviously it’s still a fwd/awd minivan underneath, but will be interesting to see if they sell any volume.

    • 0 avatar
      BoogerROTN

      I looked at one this weekend and, for what it is, it was a nice vehicle.

      That said, it’s priced so high compared to a full-sized truck that I can’t imagine it pulling many non-Honda buyers into showrooms. The RTS AWD is ~$33K (18/25/21 EPA)…and dealers aren’t dickering on price at all. Contrast that w/an F-150 XLT 4×4 w/2.7l (19/26/22) for ~$35K and escalating dealer incentives. At $33K, I just can’t make the Honda numbers work…especially considering trade-in values on domestic crew cab 4x4s.

      I’m sure it’ll go over well w/previous Ridgeline owners, especially the updated interior & better MPG. Legacy buyers will be in, but Taco guys and little coal rollers (Canyon/Colorado) are already locked into their brands. I just don’t see the conquest sales…

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        BoogerROTN,
        I really believe you can’t make a direct comparison between a full size 1/2 ton and a Ridgeline.

        The Ridgeline will superior in so many ways that the F-150 isn’t. I suppose both have very ordinary FE, but other than that as a daily driver what would you want to drive?

        Most pickups, even 1/2 ton F-150s are just an overkill to 75% who own them. They drive around empty, with not a scratch in the bed with just a driver. They are the conservative “look at me” I’ve made it vehicle for the dwindling US middle class.

        A status symbol, a nice one though.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          Sorry BAFO, Americans aren’t as egotistical as you hope. The “75% of trucks used for private/noncommercial”, is “trucks” including minivans, SUVs, etc, not just “pickups”, fullsize or midsize.

          But above all, we want *value*. That may not mean the “cheapest” of what we’re looking for. Nor highest trade-in value.

          Midsize pickups just don’t offer the over all value of other “trucks”, including minivans, SUVs, etc.

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

            He seems to like to make up random facts and figures to support his anti-full-size truck rants.

            The Honda is superior in ride quality and handling, that’s about it. But, no, the F-150 can barely tow a pop up camper and 75.543% of their owners never use them right and they all break down and aluminium and EcoBoost will kill sales and only midsize trucks are wonderful and perfect for everyone because of many, many, many advantages they have, that I shall now list:

            .

  • avatar
    Joe Btfsplk

    Today’s “midsize” pickup is about the same size as a Y2K standard sized truck. You might be able to fit a midsize into your garage… good luck with a full size.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      >about the same size as a Y2K standard sized truck

      Haha, nope. Midsize trucks are larger in every dimension than the old compacts, yes, but they’re still noticeably smaller than even older full-sizes.

      Let’s take, oh, a new Tacoma. Access Cab or Double Cab/short bed.
      Length: 212.3″
      Wheelbase: 127.4″ (this is about an inch longer than the compact Ranger SuperCab’s WB)
      Height: 70.6″
      Width: 74.4″

      Compare that to a 2000 F-150 SuperCab/6.5′ bed:
      Length: 226″
      Wheelbase: 139″
      Height: 75.5″
      Width: 79.5″

      The new Tacoma is 82% the size of the old F-150. And if you compare a pre-2004 F-150 to a post-2004, even to a 2016, the only dimensions that changed were OAL and WB because of a 6″ cab stretch that year.

      Now, when you thought “Y2K standard sized truck,” you may have thought of the first-gen Tundra, which was by no means a regular full-size truck. With a WB of 128.3″ and a width of 75.2″, yes, that old Tundra is similarly-sized, but you’d have to go back to 1959 to find a full-size truck with those dimensions.

      • 0 avatar

        True but they are getting closer and if you put a 6′ bed on the Tacoma you get almost the same length 225.5″ And it also depends on what you compare it to the old GMT 400 GM’s were only 76.8″ wide. That’s awfully close. Part of the issue is the cabs on fullsizers have grown in height (not just ride height but floor to roof dimensions) And Bed depth, those to things seem to conspire to make them look massive.

        • 0 avatar
          Drzhivago138

          You do get the same length and WB on a Double Cab/long bed Tacoma or Frontier as on an older F-150 SuperCab, but I’m trying to compare apples to apples, and the SuperCrew/long bed F-150 didn’t come out until 2006.

          The GMT400 appears to be the only full-size platform which was narrower than its predecessors. The first-gen C/K from the early ’60s was 78″ wide like all other full-size trucks at the time. The second and third gens, and the GMT800, were as well. FWIW, I found 77.1″ for the GMT400.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        I am always amazed at the persistence of that myth. I owned a 1990 F250 and my brother had an 87 F150. They are bigger than the current crop of small trucks.
        Compare a crewcab to a crewcab not a reg cab to crewcab for length.

        • 0 avatar
          Drzhivago138

          It’s all the perceived size increase because of the higher bedsides, prevalance of 4×4 vs. most trucks before 1990 or so being 4×2, and the new crew cabs vs. old regular cabs. It’s hard to compare new regular cabs to old regular cabs because there aren’t many new regular cabs, but it’s impossible to compare new crew cabs to old because there just aren’t any smaller-than-HD crew cabs any older than 2001ish.

    • 0 avatar
      threeer

      @ Joe…this. Exactly. Maybe some folks are starting to realize that *mid* size actually means what a full size truck was about 10 years ago or so. I’m all for choice and folks buying what they want/can afford, but I’m still convinced that a large swath of full size truck buyers have about zero need for the vehicle. That said, even the newer smaller (relatively speaking, that is) trucks are likely larger than the actual usage will require. But there you go…more choice, freedom, apple pie, etc…

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        > Maybe some folks are starting to realize that *mid* size actually means what a full size truck was about 10 years ago or so.

        In capabilities? Sure (more or less). But in physical size, no.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Before this devolves into the usual peeing contest about the lack of true small trucks in ‘Merica, let me just say that I welcome more choice and variety in any segment.

    If money can be made doing it then the manufacturers will.

    Ford, please hurry with the rebirth of the Ranger/Bronco.

  • avatar
    JK43123

    Wow, not everyone needs a whompin’ tank with seating for 6.

  • avatar

    Sierra up quite a bit, Ram staying the course with up 2 percent and Titan up a little as well. F150 Silverado and Tundra all down. Interesting, not sure what it mean s thou.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      mopar4wd,
      I do believe Titan numbers will improve substantially as more variants are released. Currently the XD with it’s highend Cummins diesel is only attractive to a very small segment of the market.

      The F-150 has plateaued. So, it’s made of aluminium. I have shovels made from steel, aluminium and plastic. The best one is the steel one, even though it weighs a little more.

      Ford is behind by a country mile in relation to total pickup and SUV numbers compared to GM.

      If one counts all of the Silverado station wagon SUVs, Colorado/Canyon numbers Ford is quite dismal.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        You hear that?

        The best shovels are made of steel!

        Must have taken hours to come up with that metaphor.

        Oh, ever shovel snow with steel shovel?

        What metal is the most corrosion resistant to down under BS?

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          Lou_BC,
          Judging the quality of your input of late, I’d expect you to have extensive knowledge in shovelling sh!t, with any shovel.

        • 0 avatar
          Kenmore

          When BAFO makes his lumbering passes here it reminds me of an episode of All Creatures Great and Small where a spider monkey with violent diarrhea runs amok in the surgery.

          But in slow-mo.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @BAFO – someone has to shovel what you are dumping. I think that I’m going to have to fire up my snow blower.

      • 0 avatar
        stuki

        The only aluminum difference in the F150 is the body panels. The rest of the truck is composed of similar materials as the rest. Some alu, some steel, lots of plastic.

        Kind of like the Corvette. It’s a bit unfair to say it’s “made of plastic”, and “my steel shovel is stronger than my plastic one…..”

        More worryingly is the reason behind Ford going to alu: The lightweighting of vehicles that cannot reasonably get any smaller and still be what they are expected to be. I have heard some murmurs about less than entirely vaultlike rigidity of crewcabs in the new F150, from loyal owners of many generations. But it’s not the alu per se, as I hear the same thing from owners of recent GM 1500s. Probably not entirely coincidentally, both Ford and Chevy (and Ram and Nissan) have been on a tear to make their HDs more civilized recently, to the point where they now drive nicer than half tons did not long ago…..

        We are constantly fed the story of how “capabilities” of newer half tons are what HDs used to be, and midsizers are where half tons were. But that is primarily along narrowly chosen metrics like well controlled max towing over a carefully chosen mountain pass. I’d almost be willing to bet, that a more useful “capability” for most half ton buyers, is resistance to bed dents from casual “abuse”. A-la Chevy’s Ford smackdown attempt. And that 30 years ago, the steel sheets lining the beds of half tons were (on average) of a thicker gauge than what is the case in the current Silverado. Better rust control, tighter tolerances and more sophisticated modeling have, just like in bicycle frames, allowed lighter-stiffer-more “capable.” But all that shaving away of material that is not immediately useful for publicized tests, doesn’t come entirely cost free from the POV of more broad spectrum end user usage.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          Stuki,
          Everything that sits on the chassis of the F-150 is aluminium.

          I have done extensive research into the pros and cons of aluminium vs steel and what I found using an atypical 2002 manufactured vehicle is;

          1. A complete aluminium vehicle will give you 40% in weight savings.

          2. A high carbon/tensile vehicle will give you 35% in weight savings.

          Not much in it when looking at the FE advantage. More gains can be had from decent aerodynamic and engine drive train changes. These changes would also be cheaper for the consumer.

  • avatar
    Pete Zaitcev

    I don’t understand why Ridgeline is “midsize”. Mr.Drzhivago138 made a comparison with F-150 above, and to continue on that, width 78″, height 70″. So it’s about the same as Taco in height, but the width is 98% of F-150. It’s a gigantic truck that’s just not as tall because it sits low to the ground in its minivan platform.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      The Pilot/Ridgeline platform is kinda wonky. The 130″ WB puts it squarely within mid-size territory in my book, but the 78″ width would make it a full-size, right? But then you sit in it and the front row doesn’t seem like it would be wide enough to sit someone in the middle semi-comfortably if it had a 40/20/40 bench.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        Pete Zaitcev

        Honda originally stated way back when that the Ridgeline was a full sized competitor.
        Now we know why.

        • 0 avatar
          stuki

          Used to be that “full size” status, required “fitting a 4x sheet between the wheel wells.” Which Honda engineers had no problem accomplishing with less outside bulk than what is traditional. Of course, to most actual buyers, as the original Ridgeline’s sales demonstrated, in reality “full size” carried slightly deeper connotations that just that.

          If at all possible without blowing through all kinds of weight and/or cost budgets, I believe Honda would be well served by offering a genuine 6 1/2 foot bed crewcab that still fit inside the 19 foot length envelope that is pretty much max for parking structures even in most of America. The amount of teeth gnashing amongst buyers who “need” a crewcab, but really want a 6 1/2 foot bed but can’t justify the length, is epic. Of course long beds and unibodies aren’t the most immediately natural combo….

    • 0 avatar
      BoogerROTN

      The ride height is the one thing that got me thinking about the Ridgline as a truck for my elderly father. Egress is quite good, as is visibility (for a truck).

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Pete Zaitcev,
      I do believe the Ridgeline is quite a large pickup. All the Ridgeline needs is a couple inches of lift to make it’s presence felt a little more.

  • avatar
    bunkie

    Apparent size with pickups can be a fooler. My Tacoma is a 4WD model and, compared to a RWD Tacoma of the same body style/bed length, it looks huge by comparison just because of its lift.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      That’s why I usually try to discount height figures when comparing sizes of vehicles. One, the height is usually dependent on 4×2 vs. 4×4 or any offroad packages, so it’s so variable as to be unusable, and two, it contributes so much more to the percieved size of the vehicle than it does to the actual dimensions. A lifted Tacoma dwarfs an old 2WD F-350, but which one is the *bigger* vehicle when actually measured?

  • avatar

    As the overall market shifts from sedans to “utility” vehicles, a mid size pick up becomes a utility vehicle with a box, instead of a cargo area and tailgate.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      AGR,
      I do think you are very correct with your assumption.

      Pickups, especially 1/2 ton and midsizers are just SUVs, a car alternative.

      75% of these are just daily drivers, like CUVs and SUVs.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    I do recall approximately four years ago or so I was describing the new generation of midsize pickups available to us and mentioned that if they were available in the US they would sell quite well.

    I do believe my assessment was accurate.

    One only has to look back then and what midsize pickups were available in the US? The US Ranger?

    The Ranger, even though admired by many was an out of date agricultural machine. It did not even compare to a 1/2 ton in most any category.

    Even you current Frontier/Navara. Quite outdated at that time here.

    The old Izuzu based Colorado? Another dinosaur. The old Taco’s, as capable and desirable as they were, were not really that good compared to the new Tacos.

    If no one has, just take a new Colorado or for that matter a new Taco for a spin. You will notice the driving dynamics are as good as a full size.

    The size of the midsizer has grown, but I don’t think they are the same size as an older half ton. The midsizer has bulked out in height and little width and length. They had to to make the rear large enough to accommodate passengers in relative comfort.

    The US is missing out on many great pickups, due to regulatory controls, which I do know causes some commenters here on TTAC to be in a state of denial regarding the impact the draconian and unfair taxes and regulations have on this vehicle segment.

    Capability and ease of driving a midsize is a strong point for its ownership. They are as capable as most any 1/2 ton around. This will only get better.

    As I mentioned above I would love to see you guys be able to get your hands on the Amarok, our Hilux, BT50, Izuzu Dmax, Mitsubishi Triton, etc.

    We even have Renault branded pickups! I can’t wait to see the Mercedes Benz midsize come out. There are rumours AMG will have a version.

    The US pickup market is more than large enough to support these additional pickups. We can in Australia with a population of only 24 million, compare that to the US’es 320 million.

    Our new Navara/Frontier has 340ftlb of torque and is getting over 35mpg. This will be the norm soon.

    Gotta love diesel! and it’s a great off road and highway engine.

    I would like to see the Ridgeline here in Australia as well. I want all to be available here.

    More choice equates to more freedom.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Amarok – ah yes, VW durability in a vehicle class where longevity is king.

      BT50 – you actually think that ugly thing would sell here?

      Hilux? – okay. I’ll give ya that one, but Toyota feels we are fine with Tacoma.

      Frontier – antiquated and sells most likely because it is cheaper than the rest aka dinosaur Ranger syndrome.
      I’m all for a modern version.

      Bring on the global Ranger.

      I like more choice but some of those choices are dead even before you try to float them around the toilet bowl.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Lou_BC,
        The reason the US has a different Toyota midsize has to do with the chicken tax.

        The cost of retooling a plant to build the Hilux would be much more expensive than the minimal changes required to continue on with the Taco.

        The US could of closed the plants down and imported Hiluxes, this can not occur as I mentioned due to the chicken tax. So, the US and Canuckistanians are left with the Taco.

        The Hilux and Taco diverged when the cost of a Hilux became more expensive to manufacture in the US. So, and “Americanised” version of a Toyota midsize was made, the Taco.

        The Hilux has a fully boxed chassis to the rear, the Taco doesn’t as it was built on a Toyota Surf chassis, a lighter SUV chassis.

        The suspension on the Hilux is a little heavier as well. From what I can gather the engine and drive trains are very similar, except where the diesel are concerned.

        When is all said and done I do believe the Taco is quite a good pickup, but you also have the Toyota tax as we do.

        As for the other vehicles. The BT50 as ugly as it is could be deemed as attractive as many full size pickups with those little d!ck, big rig grilles.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @BAFO – Canada doesn’t have the chicken tax. There is an import tariff but what hurts our product mix is the fact that our market doesn’t tend to be big enough to offer non-USA products.
          People don’t want a stiff rough ride like what would be offered by the Hilux.

          “little d!ck, big rig grilles”

          I was wondering when you’d mention d!ck size. Therapy might help one accept what one can’t change.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan

            @Lou_BC
            Canada gets what the US gets. Similar relationship to Australia and New Zealand, with some minor differences.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      @BAFO – Once you subtract the junk that would never attempt US emissions and crash standards, what’s left? The Colorado, Isuzu, Hilux and Navara are redundant to what GM, Toyota and Nissan already offer in the US.

      Mitsu and VW I’m sure have weighed the benefits of cannibalizing their highly profitable, US lineup of cars with a marginally profitable pickups.

      Ford made their call a long time ago.

  • avatar
    Carlson Fan

    MSRP for a diesel LT CC 4WD Colorado at my local Chevrolet dealer is over $44K. Sale price is $41,800 – Crazy!

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Carlson Fan – 50k in Canada.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Carlson Fan,
      We have LS Colorados on sale here for AUD$37 000, these are dual cab, 4×4 with a 2.8 diesel, manual though. This is around USD$28 000.

      For your price of a Colorado we can get into a LTZ with a couple of grand in change.

      You have to wonder if “Made in the USA” is really that good, especially when a 25% profit is being made on pickups overall.

      It seems you guys are paying a premium of thousands of dollars per vehicle. I suppose if you listen to the US pickup diehards, it’s all worth it.

      I say let some competition in, this will drop your prices down to what we have.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        There’s not 25% profits on pickups “overall”, BAFO, try again. With the aluminum F-150, most likely. But it tapers off from there. Except sales *volume* is absolutely everything, when it comes to the profitability of pickups.

        Small and midsize trucks could never affect the *price* of fullsize pickups, a great value as they sit. The tail doesn’t wag the dog.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I don’t see why we shouldn’t open the US market more. I do see a problem with the Government Regulators and with the lobbyists. For the right price our politicians can be bought. We have the best Government money can buy. It would be much better if the major countries agreed on unified global standards for safety and fuel economy. In the meantime we have to live with what we have, I am just glad that there is more competition in the midsize truck market.

  • avatar
    gtemnykh

    I still find myself looking at lightly used Titan Pro-4X crew cabs. Yeah yeah the infotainment is crap and the fuel economy stinks and the engine and transmissions are over a decade old. But holy smokes do you get some serious bang for your buck. I also think they are the best looking half ton currently made. Kind of minimalist and lithe, crazy to say that considering how “big rig” they seemed back in 2004. Great clearance and an electrically locking rear differential.

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    I’d love to see an aluminum Ranger for the USA……… If for no other reason than to watch someone’s head explode.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    You might get your wish, but I think that the Ranger will start out similar to the Global Ranger and if not eventually all aluminum it could use aluminum, plastics, and carbon fiber along with light weight high tensile steel. Most vehicles will be subject to the higher fuel standards which means reducing weight. A Global Ranger would be a good addition to the North American market.

    Lou, I don’t know if you have it in Canada, but there is a new series on TV for the Summer called Brain Dead where bugs from outer space crawl up in people’s ears and destroy their brains. Eventually the infected have their heads explode. It takes place in Washington DC and it is a satire. Makes you wonder if something like that is in the brains of many of our politicians. Maybe Donald Trump’s brain has been infected with these bugs.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Tim Healey: I am big on following the manual to avoid paying for unnecessary stuff. As for brakes, the techs always...
  • -Nate: Here we go with the endless sign ins again….. A good story . I worked @ Natzel Oldsmobile for a brief...
  • Lorenzo: Well, it was warranty work, on a drivetrain component. When I worked for a state transportation department,...
  • Chi-One: Kyree: GSA owns all the Fed vehicles and leases them to the agencies. Each vehicle has a GSA credit card to...
  • JMII: Not sure what is worse – “advisors” who recommend these overpriced & not needed services...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber