Who Will Be the Next to Jump?

KIA.midsizeP'up.hi[6]

Manufacturers love to create splashy concept cars to grab attention. Sometimes it's simply to allow designers and engineers a chance to stretch themselves; sometimes it's to take a poke at the competition; still other times, it's to gauge interest about a real project that's on their product planning sheets.

There's no question the automakers will continue to use this strategy to grab (or hog) as much of the spotlight as possible, especially at the four big auto shows, but sometimes we like to take a few guesses as to which companies are more likely than others to make this kind of leap in the truck segment.

Yes, we know that right now there are more companies deciding to leave the pickup truck segment than looking to join it, but you can bet there are quite a few serious (albeit contentious) product planning meetings going on right now that include forward-looking pickup crossovers in an attempt to take advantage of the changing boundaries and definitions.

In particular, we've heard about two heated meetings recently (one Michigan based, one Japan based) where the subject of the next pickup almost got out of hand. Again, from what we've heard from direct and indirect sources, the biggest issues for designers and engineers are the coming 2016 and 2025 federal emissions regulations, which practically forces them to think long and hard about moving away from traditional body-on-frame trucks and taking a closer look at products like the Honda Ridgeline or even the long-gone Subaru Baja.

Every once and awhile we like to let one of our favorite creative geniuses put a few sketches together to see what he comes up with. All we said to him was, "What if Hyundai/Kia wanted to do a pickup truck?" Then we stood back. No doubt they'd have to do something drastic to separate themselves from the other players in the midsize segment, but clearly product designer Mark Stehrenberger thinks the Koreans might do very well creating a sporty crossover pickup truck with heavy emphasis on bed flexibility and easy access.

As clever as the bed of the truck might be (and we think there is plenty of room for someone to make a much smarter, more versatile pickup bed — so far the RamBox is the best effort we've seen), we understand four full-size doors will be a requirement for some. Popular concepts like Toyota's A-BAT, GMC's Denali XT and Dodge's Rampage look like their time may be coming. Our guess is we'll see something from one of the "outside" players in the next couple of auto show seasons. Lord knows the big players seem to be quite comfortable sticking to their cautious strategy, so maybe someone else can come up with a better Avalanche or Explorer Sport Trac.

KIA.MidsizeP'up.rear.hi[9]

Comments

I think that we will see a shorter snout and maybe narrower.

Speaking of snouts the All New Dodge Ram looks something that Miss Piggy would drive lol.

That's definitely what pickup trucks need, 32" shiny rims...

LMAO @ AllAmerican.

The next all new truck we see will be the Ram Dakota should be in the next year that we see the prototype.

The Rambox is the most innovative truck bed you've seen so far? What about the in-bed trunk that's been available in the Ridgeline since 2006? You can fit a full size cooler down in there, or use it as a cooler itself since it's waterproof and has a drain plug. I use mine to store a toolbox, jack, jumper cables, antifreeze, wiper fluid, tow chain and other random stuff including a single-size BOB baby stroller. Seems pretty innovative to me.

The worst snout in the business is that Ford want to be Ram Front end F two Fiddy Super Dooty. Looks like an Aardvark. LOL

The next all new trucks will be the new global GM mid-size twins,the Colorado and the Canyon.Personally,I'm hoping that they will offer a diesel option right from the git-go.

I just don't see the 'working' or business end of these designs. Yes, I know they are 'concept' exercises, but why does it seem like they're just taking a car body, making the lids all removable so it can carry stuff...and call that a...a..what..a truck?? Judging by past concept models, the odds of any of these making it to the streets as a production model is like 100 to 1. Ooohs and Aaahs at the car shows, but never deliver.

@Oh my lol that's the luxury longhorn Miss Piggy drives around lmao yeah nice looking truck!!!

@Mark Williams Koreans seem to have an aversion to Pickups. They build Light "trucks" and Vans and one company which is Chinese owned SSanyong build some strange looking Pickups.
Hyundai and Kia do not have any Pickups in their range and GM Daewoo does not either.
Ssangyong Pickup and Hyundai Very Light Truck all with very Asiatic styling cues.
http://www.carbuddy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/10/6071939.jpg

http://cookehowlison.hyundai.co.nz/Images/_uploads/new-cars/hero/hd65-intro.jpg


@ Fessig47 Probably right there.

How come these "concept" pickup designers all seem to assume we want some sort of ghetto-creeping donk-mobile with bling bling 20s on it...? Have these people never been off-road before...? ...never towed or hauled a load of anything anywhere? ...never done a single day of real, honest, actual WORK in their lives?

Where do these people get off?

How do they go home at night and face their wives and children? Do they need to stop at a bar along the way home in order to even face the family dog without breaking down into tears because of the soulless, insipid, and wholly unrealistic depictions of vehicles that they waste their days "designing?"

It's ridiculous!

...Some might even say...riDONKulous!

Concept Truck Designer's To Do List:


1. Start with pretty much any car.

2. Remove trunk and/or rear seat.

3. Enclose reclaimed area in an open box of some sort.

4. Add ridiculously large, impractical wheels and ultra low-profile tires.

Voilà!
http://www.motortopia.com/files/29084/album_hotwheelschevyelcamino/4d8dd36b0a1e9/9.jpg
Here is your concept truck!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...5. Get wasted on the way home from "work" so you can still look at your own face in the mirror without clawing your eyeballs out of thier sockets like anyone with half a conscience would do.

The split door tailgate is 20 years over due, like a lot of people I like the space and seating position a pickup provides, the bed is used mostly for light hauling and groceries, why have to lift over a tail gate or bed sides when you can open the split doors and reach right into the bed, the dual cover is good, a lot like current 3 panel hard covers that flip up and back.

Small so-called snouts on trucks look horrible !

Think Titan and Tundra,slow sales because they are too short on the front ends..odd styling,especially side profile !

If American trucks shrink,have smaller front ends,I will never buy another truck again,furthermore sales would slip as most 1/2 tons are used as daily drivers and never for work ! Style,looks & comfort are the main reasons we buy them in replace of a car also safety,trucks are safer then any car on the road.

RAM has been the one to beat in style,as Ford,GM,Toyota copied styling cues from it for years ! Heck the power wars in trucks started because of the Dodge RAM 'Magnum" Engines back in '92,the 318 had more hp then the 454 and Ford's 460 back then ! Then the RAM's 450 Torque 305 horse cast iron V-10 engine in the 2500 & 3500 from 94-03 and unserpassed 510 horse ,525 torque aluminum 505 ci,Viper engine in the SRT RAM'S and the new killer 395 horse HEMI that gets better mileage then V-6 engines and is the best performing new truck out today,especially the RAM R/T !

So,NO SHORT FRONT ENDS ON FULL SIZE TRUCKS !! If you cant handle the current front ends,I suggest you buy a Smart car or be a man and grow up,small people should be banned from driving bigger vehicles as they always complain its too big...If trucks were any smaller I would not be comfortable as my fullsize the seat is set all the way back,reclined a bit and to the lowest floor setting,as being a fully grown adult over 6 feet tall and not obese nor over weight,I cannot fit in midget designed cars...Cars are designed for small people of 5'8 ,good height for a lady but darn small for a male !

I've been saying your protectionist CAFE/EPA/Design Regs/Taxes protecting you full sizers will be the end of your trucks as you know it. Or you will end up with F-250/350 sized half ton pickups, like Lou had alluded too, costing lots more to purchase and operate.

In the shorter term, diesels will get you guys out of trouble. Maybe you will end up with unitary constructed utes, styled like road whales with turbo 4s and V6s.

It is odd. To the mid size detractors. The world outside of the US will still have traditional styled pickups, maybe 9/10ths the size but with a full chassis.

I can't see a full chassis not being used here. Why? Because we need traybacks and the UNECE regulations allow for this.

You might not like the UNECE regulations. Why? Because some think its un American. But they will allow for your full size trucks and yes they will have to compete against our mid sizers.

But having half the number of full sizers is better than none.

Detroit, UAW, Energy, Government have to sit and look at where they want the US to head. I do think the Canadian will hopefully see the light first.

What a pitiful mess, sorry.

@Jason H
Designers are given generally a free reign. The designers then use certain ques and line from those designs. Also, what design parameters are the designers given.

Remember, you are talking about pickups without a chassis and that weigh little compare to now. So the design and look will have to be different.

In a lot of instances the actual vehicle has a completely different look.

@Toyota LOL !!
What a load of nonsense.

People in the US aren't necessarily taller, maybe fatter. People from around the world drive vehicles. Vehicles aren't a 'US thing'. Even the amount of miles you drive isn't much different or any different than a number of countries now.

Yes larger vehicles can be more comfortable. But I do know a Holden Commodore which I think is smaller than a Super Duty is more comfortable.

Really? Again, nonsense.

@Jason H--I don't like these large wheels either. These wheels are bad enough on cars, but now trucks. What purpose do they serve except this is just a fad. I do not need or want the bling as well. More expensive tires with less function.

A little off topic and not to offend anyone, but jeep recently released the new cherokee, not grand cherokee. it also has the 3.2 pentastar which makes 271 hp and 239 lb-ft of torque. that being said, theoretically with direct injection the 3.2 could put out the same hp and torque as the 3.6 with better mpgs. 3.6 fwd puts out 283 hp and rwd puts out 305 hp.

@Jeff S
Tyres will have the change. Higher pressure tyres with less rolling resistance will need to be designed.

These new tyres will have to offer the same levels of performance and safety.

Rims will have to be stronger as well to make up for the difference in the sidewalls of older tyres to absord impacts. So alloy rims will be the future.

I don't like the very low profile tyres either. They look nice on a racing or sports car.

In Australia we have people who put 40 series tyres on Hilux 4x4s and they do look like 'knob mobiles'.

What people say they want and what people actually buy are seemingly unrelated. I'm sure OEMs have picked up on this.

First, the Avalanche was just a Tahoe with with a balcony so there's no surprise it went away. I'm not sure who asked for it or why GM built it. GM is GM. Chevy SSR pickup?

And people claim they want a global Ranger, but Ford has reason to be more cautious than optimistic.

The Sport Trac was an honest pickup in the global style that (barely) sold along side the wildly popular Ranger for 10 years and built on the Ranger super cab 4X4 chassis. Still no one cared.
The Sport Trac also had the most payload and towing of ANY mid-size truck on the market. 1350 lbs payload, (1390 lbs with the V8!), 6250 lbs GVWR and 12,000 lbs GCWR. That blew away the Tacoma, Dakota Colorado/Canyon and the rest.

Actually, OEMs aren't stupid (GM? hmmm...) and know US buyers will snatch up the base-stripper regular cabs and mostly go full-size for anything else.

@Big Al from Oz - Full-size pickup OEMs would not mind putting them up against your mid-size. Mid-size would lose again and if not, all our OEMs would simply switch to mid-size. Not a big deal, but it's not going to happen because mid-size are just overgrown compacts and not built to commercial grade.

Our 1/2 tons, beside being a better value with similar MPG, are built to take torture like what "HEMI V8" puts them through and this means the average full-size user has a vehicle that's overbuilt and will definitely out last any mid-sizer under normal or heavy usage.

Write this down so you don't keep forgetting already... The above is the ONLY thing "protecting" our full-size. I've asked you numerous times to prove me wrong with links or anything whatsoever, and you scamper off every single time. Prove it or quit...

I think all these designs stink. When it comes to truck design I wish someone would do a retro look or liked I've said before a modern truck closer to the dimensions of an 80's truck. Enough of this unibody world truck crap!

@DenverMike
I didn't make a comparison.

I'm talking about regulations. They will change your pickups.

Comprehend.

Look at what is going on.


@ Old GM Guy. They are not even Pickups. hard to imagine what they would be used for. Picking up groceries from a Supermarket?

Oh and I'm not against any other country I'm just "pro-America" so stop trying to make me drive a "world truck". I want American styling for my American taste. The manufacturers are trying to force euro style on us and what works in one part of the world does not work in another. If a Ute is plenty down under then great, if South America can get by on a small Ranger or Canyon size truck that's good for them but I'm over 6 feet and 300 lbs and my tractor I pull to the property is bigger than a old Tacoma and I want and need a bigger, body on frame, tough as hell and strong as a freight train truck!
I bet if Washington and obama makes the truck manufacturers stop making these type trucks there will be a helluva market for the restorers of theses trucks!

@DenverMike
Your strategy will not work.

Purposely misleading statement like the one you did above only shows how much of a fool you are.

Read what I wrote, then comment on what I wrote.

If you read what I wrote, I stated diesel is a short-medium fix for your trucks.

@Old GM Guy
They aren't a world truck.

I don't think we would want them here as well.

@Big Al from Oz - No I responded to your comment/rant: "CAFE/EPA/Design Regs/Taxes protecting your full sizers..." . I ignored your comment about diesels which is also wrong.

Future regulations and CAFE may be kinder to full-size, but it hasn't happened as of yet. And certainly hasn't happened in the past. The S10 "footprint" would impacted, but it no longer exists. Mid-size trucks are somewhere in between and growing. Actually, mid-sizers can be worse pigs at the pump than full-size depending on how they're equipped and used.

But then why shouldn't mid-size be held to a higher standard? Consumers expect better MPG than full-size anyways, even though that's not always the case. Shouldn't a Corolla get much better MPG than a Camry and be held to higher MPG or CAFE standard? If the Corolla is just as much a pig at the pump, shouldn't Toyota or Corolla buyers pay some kind of extra fine? If the Corolla also cost the same as the Camry, would you still call it 'conspiracy' if consumers widely rejected the overpriced pig?

Also the 'trades' industries need 1/2 ton full-size trucks that can handle the work load without being forced into 3/4 tons or dealing with inadequate mid-size breaking down or having to make extra trips to accomplish the same task as 1/2 tons.

@DenverMike
Are we trolling again? Lying again?

@Big Al from Oz--In another 20 years most of us will not be driving or will be dead. Many of these guys that don't want to part with their high powered and thirsty V-8s will not be the consumers of trucks or cars and that includes me. Just like the land yacht cars of the past and those that drove them who had similar views they will pass as well. This will happen regardless of what you, Denver Mike, or I say. When fuel prices rise to $5 to $6 gallon or above the salvage yards will be full of crew cab or extend cab behemoths that were driven by those who used them as pleasure vehicles. True heavy duty trucks that are used in business will always have a market but high powered toys will be in high demand as scrap metal.

I do believe that the full size truck of today could differ from the global trucks that you have in that the interiors and exteriors could be similar in size to today's full size trucks while having a shorter snout and lighter components and small engines such as V-6s and 4s. This will upset the Hemi V8s and the Denver Mikes of the truck world but the next generation will be buying these trucks. You might see the current full size trucks for a while longer badged as "Classic" or "Heritage" but as the current generation passes and the new sized more efficient trucks are adopted the next generation will buy them. You might see your diesels in the newer generation of trucks.

@Jeff S,

"When fuel prices rise to $5 to $6 gallon or above the salvage yards will be full of crew cab or extend cab behemoths that were driven by those who used them as pleasure vehicles."

They said the same thing when fuel reached $2 in the '80s. $4 a gallon was unthinkable then, but now we pay more than $4 a gallon for bottled water.

Full-size half ton would be the first to go, but followed right behind by fully loaded mid-size trucks that are about equal pigs.

"This will upset the Hemi V8s and the Denver Mikes of the truck world but the next generation will be buying these (mid size) trucks."

This would upset anyone with commonsense. Anyone that's ever had to work mid-size trucks and put up with limited work/load capacity, poor fuel economy, cramped interior, lack of power and as fragile as the wife's 4Runner, Pathfinder, Explorer or Equinox when it comes to blown transmissions and head gaskets after getting worked hard day in and day out.

@Jeff S
I was talking about the influence CAFE/EPA and all of the other regulations and barriers have on vehicle design.

I'm sorry that DenverMike is trying to make this into a competition.

Believe it or not what I mentioned has a significant bearing on vehicle design.

CAFE in particular is making the biggest changes. Hence my comment on the differing regulations determining vehicle design and where full size trucks will end up. That is what this article is about.

People like DenverMike are low lifes who try and play mind games. He's already trying to change the direction of what I have stated. That's a usual ploy of his.

But like I've told him in the past, stay on the debate.

A couple of people have stated their concern on my recent posts, but if they were in my shoes how would have they reacted?

It seems quite apparent who is behind these attacks.

Concept vehicles?
Looks like modern day Ranchero's or El Camino's. We have seen this stuff before. Will they last?
You have to go to classic car shows to see them anymore.

@ Southern IL man
Yes the ElCaminos and Rancheros exist but I would not put money on those concepts getting any traction.
http://static3.justauto.com.au/just_images/7203aff6-1baf-4ddd-93dc-9004f3ceaff6/7203aff6-1baf-4ddd-93dc-9004f3ceaff6-atlg.jpg

http://static3.justauto.com.au/just_images/83987529-3b83-4d73-aa98-e6c4ecb045ae/83987529-3b83-4d73-aa98-e6c4ecb045ae-atlg.jpg

Maybe alternative fuels can make us keep full size trucks

Awesome Concept's. Gotta love MOPAR.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JX7q2hRCpgY

Short/small snouts are bad?

Only an asphalt queen/street cruiser would want a contrary design in a pickup.

If you look at nearly all of the classic 4x4 pickups, they had very short noses--just like Wranglers, Hummers, any other 4x4 that is actually meant to go off-road. Longer noses are a bid towards fuel economy, not capability.

The short snout design was actually a selling point of the Tundra for me--good interior room, a decent sized bed, and capable approach angle--while keeping overall length in check.

@Big Al from Oz,

"I've been saying your protectionist CAFE/EPA/Design Regs/Taxes protecting your full sizers will be the end of your trucks as you know it."

How has "protectionist CAFE/EPA/Design Regs/Taxes" protected full-size trucks as opposed to protecting 'light trucks' in general?

And how will it put and end to trucks as we know them? 19 MPG by 2016 is easily attainable by full-size trucks as is the 17 MPG that's required now. 23 MPG by 2025 will also be easily attainable with minimal changes or techology. So again, how will all these regulations put an end to full sizers as we know them?

The trucks that will suffer the most will be those with the 'Chevy S10 footprint' with a CAFE required 26 MPG by 2016 and 37 MPG by 2025. Oh wait, there are no trucks with an S10 footprint. Mid size trucks may continue to grow until they reach full size (footprint). And that's if any OEMs still make them or sell them in the US. If anything, it's the mid size trucks that will pull a disappearing act, but that'll just comes down to consumer no longer desiring mid to top level and well equipped mid size and OEM getting tired of supplying the habit of the remaining bottom feeding cheapskates.

How will diesels get us out of trouble? I'm at a point where I would pay more for a simple gas engine over a frickin' diesel. Wide acceptance will never happen in the US and it would be cheaper to pay the non CAFE compliance fines by either the OEM or consumer (or both) if it ever came down to it.

Speaking of rims (responding to Big Al specifically and all followup comments), Some of you may have forgotten that there has been some interesting wheel technology in the works that has the 'spokes' of the wheel absorb a lot of the shock and deformation that was once the purview of the tire itself, allowing for that ultra-low-profile tire with less rolling resistance and greater sidewall stiffness for on-road handling.

I do strongly agree that such wheels would be useless on a truck that regularly goes off road in any kind of unimproved track--even logging trails. The conventional smaller-diameter wheel with high-profile tire makes getting through serious terrain much easier--but that doesn't mean those 'fancy' wheels can't handle the job--at least for the short term. The UK's Top Gear team pretty well proved that with three supposedly high-performance "estate cars" (station wagons) on pretty much stock wheels and tires. It wasn't until the final scenes in Africa when they were riding on a quite literal "washboard" road that they started breaking wheels and chewing up tires. Fortunately, they had carried a number of spares for each of the cars they drove.

The point is that such vehicles as the concept drawn above may never truly have to work--it would be a "lifestyle" truck rather than a true working truck. If you want a working truck you'd have to go Class IV or higher and might even require a CDL to drive it due to its massive GCVW. A rig like that above might be classed as a half-ton (I think even my old Lariat is) but you guys who feel you have to have the biggest and strongest will have a class of truck all to yourselves again.

Speaking of size vs fuel economy, you have to know that eventually in order to make a truck lighter, they're going to have to make it smaller; there's no option. They keep making trucks bigger with ever stronger yet lighter materials and eventually you're going to have them so brittle they'll break under any kind of load. The only way out of that is to literally develop a work-class truck that comes in around Class IV or Class V which will simply be too big and too expensive for the non-corporate owner. That's when you're going to see half-ton trucks get smaller again and use smaller engines.

Hey-- Bigger isn't always better any more.

Someone above had an issue with small front ends. Unfortunately a full Crew Cab Ram 1500 with a 6.5 foot bed won't fit in a garage? With the new V6's taking the place of old V8's, the big 3 could shorten the front end by 8 inches and make the traditional full size become the new mid size. That would surely open up a bigger market for any manufacturer. Many of us want all the utility of a full size, but for a daily driver, the lengths are a bit tough for parking.

@DWFields - Full size trucks need to gain 5 MPG by 2025 and there's still a few technologies still left unused. Aluminum engines and body panels are completely doable and the F-150's hood has been aluminum since '04 along with suspension pieces. This also assumes no new technologies come along.


So it wouldn't take too much to keep full-size the size they are now and besides, fines are just $55 for every mile per gallon under the CAFE requirement. If full size MPG stays the same as today's 17 MPG, that's a $330 fine per truck by 2025. Inflation will take care of a large portion of that anyways.

Any combination of these would be better than dropping down to a smaller CAFE 'footprint'.

As far as im concerned full sized trucks are here to stay. DenverMike couldnt of said it better him self. The cafe ratings are very reasonable for trucks and wont take much to meet the new regulations. My 2010 gmc 1500 with a 5.3L gets 17.4mpg combined. GMs new engines are all direct injected and will easily gain the 2-3 mpgs needed to meet the upcoming mpg requirement.

@trx4tom
You telling me you don't market Fiats, lautenslager?


@Jason: The eight speed hemis are in transit right now to dealers.

It should be compared to a 3.7 FORD (the Ram is a 3.6).

You can compare whatever you like, but to make it a fair comparison, two non turbo engines makes it fair.

Also less cost then an Ecoboost. Not every plans to pull heavy. And how about the premium fuel needed for the Ecoboost, for when towing heavy?

I know this isn't apples to apples either cause it isn't the same route, nor as long of a drive. Here's the Ford towing less, with a smaller cab:

http://special-reports.pickuptrucks.com/2010/11/2010-v-6-fuel-economy-and-long-distance-ride-quality.html

Years ago Car and Driver or Motor Trend hooked up an F-150 with I think a 4.6 3 valve, and towed at max weight in the mountains, and got rather low mileage. The point was to just test max towing numbers, and the gas mileage drop.

I don't think there's any doubt about the 3.6 getting it done, mileage might be the sam as a V-8 when towing though.

Posted by: TRX4 Tom | Mar 8, 2013 2:14:21 PM

Like I told you, if you keep the $hit up I'll be thorn in your sides.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Mar 27, 2013 10:17:30 PM


@trx4tom lautenslager

More marketing?


@Jason the 2014s? You must mean that they start building GMs then. No worries.

Maybe the people desperate for an old GM that reminds them of a better time will be the only customers.

Ram will probably build 2013 MYs thru July if not August.

I don't get all the crying. Here it is in March, that's 1st quarter, right?

I don't know why it is that we get to thinking we need 2014 models out so early. I think Jeep has some out,as well as Fords, maybe?

But we will wait for a good laugh to see what GM's numbers will be.

I don't think they will sell that well. They still have just a 6 speed. Oh well, maybe their brakes will work, atleast a 1500, as they work quite well on GM 3500 duallys.

But no matter what happens, dealers will still have the highest rebates in town, darn near giving them away, and I will continue driving right past them.

Posted by: TRX4 Tom | Mar 8, 2013 3:54:54 PM

They will keep coming. Just adding a dash in you name will not help.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Mar 27, 2013 10:35:08 PM


@trx4tom lautenslager

All of a sudden a puny V6 will do. Marketing again?


So, Papa Jim, are you saying a person that needs to haul their horse to the trail ride/LOCAL horse show/rodeo should just get a v-8? Or if they pull a small trailer a few times a year? Or maybe they pull a lightweight bass boat, quite a bit of times a year?

Not everybody needs a v-8.

I think it's all based on how often you will tow, and how heavy. Where you live is part of it too. A truck that works in flat Florida won't always work here in northwest Arkansas, or in the mountains.

Posted by: TRX4 Tom | Mar 8, 2013 2:25:22 PM


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Mar 27, 2013 10:38:36 PM


@TRX4-Tom
Get you and you neanderthals off my A$$.

You work for Fiat.

Ever since you changed from Tom Terrific and came onto PUTC you have been on my back over mid sizers.

Why? Like I stated RAM DOESN'T have a midsizer. Ford, GM, Toyota, Nissan all have one or there is one in the pipeline.


Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Mar 27, 2013 10:41:44 PM

Anyways,

Lay off guys.

Toyota LOL: ha ha, yeah...... I drive a F150 (just about 3K miles a year, running errands and such), a Jeep Wrangler Unlimited (wanted a two door, but I have kids) and the wife drives a Hyundai Sonata. We fit fine in them, although I do have the seat back 3/4 of the way and it is set all the way down. I'm 5'9" and about 170 lbs. Defnitely not obese, 30 years old, Work in the field as a chemical plant operator (so can easily afford a new full size truck) and plenty of dong to please an lady .....so I feel no need to belittle anyone on driving a smaller truck than me. I have had my a** handed to me by taller guys like yourself, and also gave a few a** whippin's to them as well. You're not bad, guy.

I have seen you post this same bs before trying to get some sense of superior feeling because you are taller or whatever. Sounds like a complex in other areas to me. I don't scoff down my nose at fat, short people or people like you that may look like some skeletor man. So, step down off your high horse,And for a lady of 5'8", sorry bud....you can keep her. Keep your amazon lady. The average woman height of 5'5" or so does me just fine.

Al: man, really....can ya'll just stop with the debate? I am sure that TRX4 Tom and DenverMike are probably indeed two very different people as I have seen them battle it out before.

Jeep

U.S. 1.780 m (5 ft 10 in) 1.632 m (5 ft 4 1⁄2 in) 1.09
Black Americans, 20–39 N/A Measured 2003–2006 [112]

U.S. 1.706 m (5 ft 7 in) 1.587 m (5 ft 2 1⁄2 in) 1.07
Mexican Americans, 20–39 N/A Measured 2003–2006 [112]

U.S. 1.789 m (5 ft 10 1⁄2 in) 1.648 m (5 ft 5 in) 1.09 White Americans, 20–39 N/A Measured 2003–2006

Here, this is for Toyota LOL: average hieght for male/female broken down by race for the USA. As it stands, average height for white male like myself is 5' 10.5", while the average height for a white female is 5' 5". There, straight from wikipedia. Need a link?

Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_height

I suspect you will stop this nonsense about banning shorter drivers from driving trucks, or whatever other nonsense you come up with. I have see this from you in the past, and just laughed as I am now. You really think you're some type of goliath or something. buy an abrams tank, it'll fit amazon people of your stature just about right.

You mentioned that the concept artist was tasked with a Kia/Hyundai pickup design, but the green emblem and front fenders lead me to believe that someone suspects Range Rover is going to kick out a pickup. They make some pretty capable SUV's, so I'd bet they could make a good pickup variant.



Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
  • Your email will not be shown.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Home | Buy or Sell a Truck | News | Special Reports

Powered by Cars.com. By using this site, you agree to our terms of service | © 2011 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us

Visit our partner: MovingTruck.com