I was driving the company’s Tundra in the rain and was making a right against a red. Instead of gingerly modulating the clutch like I would have in my own car, I stepped on the go pedal normally and waited for half a second for the stupid automatic to respond. It then delivered that annoying kick that I really hated on a sunny day. Lagging slush box + wet tire + rwd + empty bed = 1/4 donut on a public street. I would have preferred front wheel drive with viscous coupling to the rear. Spinning front tires are a lot less dangerous. Barring that, at least give me more control, in the form of a third pedal; then I’d take responsibility for my donuts
@db4690 I can’t disagree ! I just wonder why there are many trucks IN so. California 
California is one of the lowest states in the union at 37% with truck sales. In sheer numbers, that is still quite high.
I think this is where the discussion has gotten by lateral. The stament about “riding like crap” has to do pre 2005 Toyota small trucks and comparable Colorados…definitely not the Dakota. I am talking about them as small trucks. People want the really small ones prior to that. All the trucks you mentioned, save the Ranger sold in extended cabs with clamshell doors and crew cabs…these are trucks with up to 127inch wheel base. Thses are not what we are talking about. The short bed Tacoma, no longer sold as 2015 and ditto the Colorado are the closest you can get. Pre 2005 and standard short beds are what the small trucks are about. More then one of three new cars sold today are 4wd/AWD and well more then half of all trucks sold are 4wd. Toyotas which outsell everyone else in this category four to one, no longer makes any pretense to a small truck.
As far as Rangers holding their value, ALL TRUCKS hold their value well. They are just no longer selling anymore to justify their continued production production. The buying public has decided. It’s not me talking. All 4 wd attempts at small trucks today, the standard short WB Tacoma, Colorado and Ranger in 4wd mode stink as for riding and handling. Smaller versions of them in 2 wd has a small market…not worth of bringing them back.
There is one big reason why Toyota always outsells everyone else of late…reliability and the ability to take a lot of abuse. Just about everything else made in this category, past and present, are really poor…read CR !
Both the small pick up and any pretense to having fwd option on them, is an idea that the buying public has long decided is best served with the compact SUVs . Instead of small pick ups, you see them in every driveway that ever had or though of a small truck.
Other then strictly economy cars, the top performers in every class of car or truck when money is no object considering the following,…best handling, best ride, best towing, best load carrying…you pretty much name it…are all rwd or AWD. Fwd even in trucks, are performance compromises and just made for packaging convenience for non class leading performance, and cheap transportation.
Trucks as a class are no different.
Seems Dag owns this discussion and He has several salient points,Frankly I dont see why an AWD -FWD hybrid wouldnt work,with a V-6 in the 3.5-3.8 range should easily be capable of at least 30 mpg on gas,without sacrificing all the “creature comforts” as for FWD not handling heavy loads consider a 621 Cat Scraper(fwd) with sideboards you can ge close to 90K on it(and its not near the biggest either) even the articulated trucks operate most of the time in FWD mode I’m told.
As far as the traction advantage,turn around and back up the hill,works for me-Kevin
Hi Kev. I have talked to automotive technicians and reps and hybrid trucks in the traditional sense of a Prius are hard to engineer for space and weight efficiency. Both battery and gas tank are needed and now that many are sticking batteries underneath and under seats, there are compromises in the size and weight of the battery, ground clearance and passenger room. The other big point for Prius hybrids is, they loose a lot of their advantage when loaded and towing. Batteries then can store before are now drained quickly and the battey quickly becomes just a conduit for another drive motor. For the foreseeable future, light duty Scion based fwd pick ups that haul styrofoam might work but regular trucks in very mild hybrid form which GM tried along with more efficient gas and diesel motors are the only alternative. That’s why long haul trucks, tractors etc, all use diesels…the most efficient at this time for real work. Direct power from a generator to electric drive motors would work, but they save mainly in eliminating the transmission and in long service life. That alternative would work for me even if it doesn’t save lots of gas. It produces unlimited torque from a motor that delivers just hp so higher revving, car type motors could be use to generate while the electric drives do the real work…that would save lots of weight !
I don’t think anyone disagrees that FWD isn’t the best idea in a vehicle that’s designed to have a lot of weight suddenly tossed over the rear axle - although I don’t necessarily think it’s the unmitigated disaster that it’s been made out to be either. If you design the suspension correctly then FWD in a small pickup can still work - just don’t expect a comfortable ride when the bed is unloaded.
Where the disagreement happens is in the idea that ALL small trucks are useless, which is demonstrably false.
I do think that Dagosa is right that Americans want big trucks. But easily 90% of the large pickups I see on the road have clearly never been used to haul anything. I mentioned the Blackwood before - that truck speaks perfectly to the mindset of many if not most truck owners in this country: They want a pickup because it looks cool/manly/whatever dumb adjective they’re trying to conform to. They don’t want to use it for work, which is why the Blackwood’s designers didn’t think anything of carpeting the bed, and then trimming it out in artificial burled black wood with aluminum pinstripe overlays. And that’s not the only dumb truck for dumb rich people - the Lincoln Mark LT replaced it, and the Cadillac Escalade EXT competed with it. In short, Americans want big trucks for the same reason that buildings used to be designed with false fronts: They want to project an image, and are unconcerned with whether or not the actual substance matches the image.
Even the non-luxury marque trucks are rarely used for work. You see 6 year old pickups in pristine condition, which is not going to happen if you’re throwing building materials in the back. In short, even if mini trucks were useless from a hauling/utility perspective, they’re no more useless than a large truck that isn’t used for hauling and utility.
I get that some people work construction, or at a nursery, or other jobs that require large trucks to take large loads places, but for the average homeowner in suburbia, a large truck is overkill. Hell, even a small truck is overkill unless you plan to use it a lot.
Yes @shadowfax. There is an old expression in Texas that fits the public’s demand for extravagance in their rides and pickups in particular; “Big hat-no cattle.”
@shadowfax, as far as the trucking image is concerned, I agree that there are those who drive a truck as a commuter for the rugged looks or as a battering ram. Fwd works just fine for them. However, some people need to brag about how much theoretical payload their rig can haul whether they haul or not. It’s similar to bragging about that theoretical 0-60 time of a muscle car. And there won’t be much to brag about unless the power goes to the rear.
That doesn’t follow either, @chunkyazian . If the suspension is properly designed and you load it right, a FWD vehicle can carry a LOT. The GMC Motorhome was front wheel drive and weighed 12,500 pounds.
I agree that RWD is generally better for a pickup, but this concept that you’ll get no traction or steering from a FWD pickup is baloney.
If all things on 2 pickups are equal except that one is FWD and one is RWD, and you load them both equally to the point where you have no traction and steering on the FWD one, then you also have no steering on the RWD one and you’ll wish you didn’t have traction because you’re just gonna be going fast when you hit something. No traction/no steering means the wheels have been lifted off the ground.
There is nothing magical about rear wheel drive that glues the front wheels to the ground under a rear-balanced load. If anything, the RWD will tend to tip backwards first, because the torque from the drive wheels will want to rotate the truck around the rear axle in the opposite direction that the wheels are turning. This is why top fuel dragsters rear up when they start a race.
And all of that is assuming that the truck owner was enough of a dolt to put most of the weight behind the rear wheels - which is hard to do no matter what truck you’re driving. Look at a truck bed sometime. There’s a lot more space in front of and between the wheel wells than there is behind the wheel wells. They’re designed that way for a reason - to keep the truck from tipping backwards when the owner puts heavy things in it. I suppose you could defeat the design if you did something crazy like getting a bunch of lead bricks and loading them as close to the tailgate as possible, but who would do this and why?
“There’s a lot more space in front of and between the wheel wells than there is behind the wheel wells.”
A “standard” pick-em-up bed has about the same bed length behind the rear axle as in front of it:
http://www.fordf150.net/totm/200606-1990-ford-f150-xlt-lariat.php
@shadowfax
I don’t want to give you the impression that I think short wheel base truck based vehicles are useless. In that category I have owned four toyota standard cab, two of which were 4wd and a Suzuki side kick which I consider the same type vehicle. I have owned longer WB 4wd SUVs presently own a 127 inch WB mid size which is now the shortest Toyota makes. I drive in snow and on ice every single day of the winter where I live, tow and carry loads. I live on a small mountain and do off roading over skidder trails and often through the woods with no trails at all. Where I live which is extreme, fwd has no place in the winter and on many roads here all year round.
In a nut shell, they (small trucks)are much more maneuverable and NOTHING compares in off road ability to short high small 4wd pick ups in off road and rough terrain travel…absolutely nothing, not my tractor of even by neighbor and friends JD Bulldozer which got stuck several times in terrain I just floated through with oversize mud tires. These trucks are awesome. That’s just about it. Bigger/longer trucks are safer on the highway, ride better, tow more safely, carry loads more stably and as their expense goes up, so does the number of toys and electronics they have standard. For that reason alone, I, like most truck owners would not go back to short wheel base trucks. Their max beds are usually 6 feet but towing suffers, ride and most importantly, my back suffers with their tighter accommodations with worse and more confined and limited seating. I am not alone in my opinion. I am in lock step with everyone else who will not buy one, which is the vast majority of truck owners. If they sold, they would still be making them. It’s not a conspiracy, it’s supply and demand.
Now, if you put fwd and small trucks together, you have too many things working agains and not for you in any thing but the mildest conditions. And as the Baja will tell you, there IS something magical about rwd over fwd. it occurs mostly on hills and accelerating and it’s just physics. If fwd worked as a truck, they would be making them. If they are used the same way a small front drive car or compact SUV , sure, you can get by. Ask any more of a fwd truck or fwd any thing else and you WILL regret it.
“more then half of all trucks sold are 4wd”
I’m just curious . . . where did you get those figures?
By the way, when you say more than half of all trucks sold are 4wd, do you mean more than half of traditional body on frame pickup trucks sold are 4wd?
Or do you also include unibody SUVs, body on frame SUVs, and some other vehicles which qualify as trucks?
@db4690 re; "more then half of all trucks sold are 4wd"
Here is just one break down. “More then half” is quite conservative for truck and truck based vehicles like large SUVs.
Lastly, to me and publications who test them, a truck is a truck, regardless of whether it has a traditional ladder frame. For example. The Honda Ridgeline IS a truck.
@dagosa
I’m not questioning you
But I’m questioning those charts
No matter what those charts show, no matter who compiled that data, I do NOT believe that over half of body on frame pick up trucks sold in the US are 4WD
http://www.ihs.com/industry/automotive/index.aspx
This is where Car and Driver got their information. If you check the break down by states, maybe that is why you have a different perspective. If you live in a state with few 4 wd trucks by %, you could easily come to the conclusion. I knew it long ago through conversations with my relatives and friends who own several dealerships, including, Ford, GM and. Toyota. The framed pick up trucks that you refer to are pretty much the domain of mid to full size. There is only one midsize unibody truck sold that I know of…the Ridgeline and that has welded in frame supports and that is only available in AWD/4wd Now, we aren’t talking about HD or one tons or dump trucks. These are light duty classified consumer pick up trucks as described in the article.
@dagosa
Thank you for that link, but I don’t think I’ll go to the trouble of looking for that information myself
I still don’t . . . and won’t . . . believe that over half of body on frame pickup trucks sold in the US are 4x4
They cost significantly more than RWD, and I simply don’t believe that over half of pickup truck buyers spend that additional money
No offense intended to anybody, or any organization
I’ll irrationally continue to believe what I believe
@db4690
There are so many trucks sold in areas where there is snow…people accept that 2wd trucks will be a handful. Here in Maine, fewer then one in six Tacomas on the lot is 2 wd and fewer then one in ten Tundras are. I have a friend who has Pre runner 2wd tacoma in Florida. He says there, the two wheel drive sells very well. The difference between the two places, south and north is, 2wd is practically negated in snow country by handling problems while in the south, some will still buy 4wd. So, if you can 't look at it objectively at least look at the break up by states. There are just so many more trucks being sold in rural and snow belt states and in snow and on ice, rwd trucks for most are a handful. So they pay the extra bucks. Even though the extra cost of a Tacoma in 4 wd can be 20% , up here 4 wd is discounted heavily as many more are ordered then 2 wd. There are so few 2 wd trucks ordered, they aren’t discounted much. Instead of 20% it’s lowered more.
Trucks are used for the majority for towing and I can tell you this for a fact. Even though 2 wd trucks are often rated a little higher, their x4 wd counterparts do a much better job. They are actually a little better balanced and the maneuverability and when launching a boat off a ramp or backing up a sight grade with large boats, it vastly favor 4wd. I have to regularly maneuver our committee boat around for our yacht club for storage and launching and I can tell, the same as with maneuvering a camper, 4 wd is a huge advantage. When you back up a trailer with a rwd truck, you essentially become a fwd vehicle. Advantage then goes to 4wd. Many, even in states with no snow, tow vehicle light duty trucks will often be 4wd.
The majority of SUVs are AWD/4wd…why wouldn’t the majority of trucks be. Though trucks are technically found everywhere, both trucks and SUVs are found in much larger numbers in snow country and rural areas where ground clearance, which 4 wd by it’s nature gives you. It’s a matter of “location, location, location.”
But I guess we all reserve the right to be skeptical. I do all the time too.
Btw, we are looking at the break down of trucks sold recently and are not including all the trucks still on the road for the last 25 years or so. That most light duty trucks are 4 wd, is a recent phenomena.
@dagosa
“But I guess we all reserve the right to be skeptical”
Well said . . . I will indeed remain a skeptic