[stevenh563]

http://autos.aol.com/article?id=20051216195709990001 Read this article, its a comparison between a Frontier and a Tacoma. Lots of performance specs and specifications. Pretty stupid they picked the Frontier over the Tacoma for 1st place even though the Tacoma outperformed the Frontier in every category! Basically they picked the Frontier because it "felt more comfortable on the ride home". What a bunch of idiots, still worth reading though.

 

[TRD Hunter]

intresting

 

[cephasiii]

FYI, they did pick the Taco over the Frontier for 1st.

 

[tacoma-05]

actually if you read the whole article;frontier is in first place in the head to head comparison, but in the midsize shoot out with all the midsize trucks the tacoma won that test.

 

[stevenh563]

FYI, they did pick the Taco over the Frontier for 1st.

F.Y.I., no they didnt, here is the exact quote from the article. I dont agree with it but thats what they said.
"This made choosing a winner difficult, but the Nissans take the win. If we were buying a truck that would spend its entire life in the dirt, one of the Tacomas might get the nod, but before you play in the mud on the weekend, you have to get through the week first. While equally as tough and capable off-road as the Tacomas, the Nissan Frontiers are simply more refined and more comfortable. Bottom line, had we been forced to endure another few days in the desert we would have wanted to be driving one of the Nissan Frontiers."

 

[Count]

This goes to show you how subjecting a thing choosing a truck or car really is.

I'm of the impression (firm belief) that the Toyota Tacoma is much, much more refined than the Nissan. I've owned both Nissan and Toyota trucks in the past. The Nissans felt like tin cans in comparison.

I checked out the new Nissans before choosing my new (and second) Tacoma. No comparison. The Nissans (even the Pathfinder) feature a Mickey Mouse interior. I do like that granite color they offer, though.

Bottom line is I could not see any reason to go back (revert) to Nissan, especially when they're bringing nothing too impressive to the table. They have 20 more ponies under the hood than the Tacoma, yet the Tacoma is still faster at 0-60; and in the quarter-mile; and in the quarter-mile while hauling 1,000 pounds of sand in the back.

My opinion? Nissan should leave and go home, with their heads down. For shame!

Of course, you don't hear anything out there about that famous "Nissan quality," do you?

Once, a Japanese man told me, "Nissan make good truck. But Toyota make better truck. Toyota truck legendary!"

I believe him.

 

[stevenh563]

Thats one thing about some of the magazines and t.v. shootouts that really sucks. It usually comes down to their opinion and who really gives a s*** what their opinion is were all intelligent enough to form our own opinion without some idiot telling us what he thinks. Thats why I pay attention to the specs, the 0-60 times, tow ratings and things that are facts not somebodys opinion. Opinions are like ***holes everybody has one, so Id rather look at facts and then form my own opinion.

 

[meatwad79]

maybe, but #'s arent everything. and sometimes these guys are hired because their opinions are professional opinions and merit some validity.

...and sometimes its some dumb chick who thinks the softer riding car is better cause it feels nicer just cuz, or one car is better than the other because it comes in an auto and has prettier colors or the vanity mirror isnt big enough, etc...

 

[stevenh563]

My problem is most of the magazines and t.v. shows are sponsored by different manufacturers. Ever watched a truck or four wheeler shootout on t.v. and paid attention to which manufacturer pops up in most of the commercials? Or at the end of the show when they thank the sponsors and one of them just happens to be the brand that won the shootout? Theyre not going to bash a manufacturer thats paying their bills by advertising in their magazine or paying for commercial time during their show. Thats why I think you cant put a whole lot of trust in what they say. I listen to their opinions but I form my own after Ive had my own experience with the vehicle.

 

[Count]

My problem is most of the magazines and t.v. shows are sponsored by different manufacturers. Ever watched a truck or four wheeler shootout on t.v. and paid attention to which manufacturer pops up in most of the commercials? Or at the end of the show when they thank the sponsors and one of them just happens to be the brand that won the shootout? Theyre not going to bash a manufacturer thats paying their bills by advertising in their magazine or paying for commercial time during their show. Thats why I think you cant put a whole lot of trust in what they say. I listen to their opinions but I form my own after Ive had my own experience with the vehicle.

Bingo, Stevenh563:

I'm a professional writer and have written for many, many national magazines. You can bet that the editors aren't going to "bite the hand that feeds them" with negative reviews or articles about products.

Advertising is the primary source of income for magazines. The only reason that magazines feature articles is to separate the advertisements. I'm not kidding about this.

For an editor to review product X and then publish an article portraying product X in a negative light, would mean that manufacturer of product X would likely refuse to advertise in that publication in the future. And most industries I know of have only a finite number of sources of advertising revenue. So editors tend to take care of their clients.

 

[stevenh563]

Bingo, Stevenh563:

I'm a professional writer and have written for many, many national magazines. You can bet that the editors aren't going to "bite the hand that feeds them" with negative reviews or articles about products.

Advertising is the primary source of income for magazines. The only reason that magazines feature articles is to separate the advertisements. I'm not kidding about this.

For an editor to review product X and then publish an article portraying product X in a negative light, would mean that manufacturer of product X would likely refuse to advertise in that publication in the future. And most industries I know of have only a finite number of sources of advertising revenue. So editors tend to take care of their clients.

My point exactly, Ive seen several shows and magazine articles where one competitor will outperform all of the others in nearly every category then somehow finish second or lower to another manufacturer. And usually if you pay attention the winner has several advertisements during the show or several advertisements in the magazine. What a coincidence!