Nissan Frontier Forum banner

Compact 3rd Generation?

5K views 25 replies 14 participants last post by  BlueMoon 
#1 ·
I remember reading something somewhere that the third generation Frontier is rumored to be a compact truck, the same size as the first generation Frontier. This would allow Nissan to offer better pricing and fuel economy than all the mid size trucks offered, as well as be the only truck in the compact segment. What do you guys think of this? Should Nissan offer the smallest truck in North America, or should they stay in the mid size game and compete with all the new mid sizes coming out? This would also mean that the North American Frontier would be drastically different from the Navara, for the first time...
 
#2 ·
On paper, it sounds great.

In the real world, pickups are sold mostly on the basis of how they compare to their competitors - Brand X has more towing capacity or ground clearance than Brand Y, etc.

Going smaller might give Nissan an edge in fuel economy and garage park-ability, but they would take a beating to their competitors in just about every other category.

There's a reason why "small" trucks have steadily grown larger over the years: Most customers equate "larger" with "more capable".

OTOH, if some other manufacturer that currently doesn't compete with the established pickup brands introduced their own true compact pickup, it might be a winning strategy.

For example, I could see Hyundai, Mazda (or even Mini!) introducing a ground-breaking small pickup. VW currently sells one in some parts of the world, under the "Saveiro" or "Pointer" names.

 
#4 ·
The Navara NP300 had its world premiere last month. This is an indication of where the Frontier is headed, there is a strong possiblilty that it is the new (yet to be debuted) Frontier.

The current D40 trucks are pretty much the same, with different countries getting slight variences. For instance, North America is one of the only ones with the facelifted (09+) front end.

If Nissan wants to enter the small truck market again, then it would make sense to revive the pickup moniker and possibly add "Li'l Hustler" that was in existence in the 521/620/720 trucks. The Li'l Hustler nameplate was on all the pickups back then, with or without the option package with the stripe. In Canada it was simply known as a Hustler, which was cool, especially in black with the gold stripes. My dad had an 84 4WD Hustler, I have yet to find another with that exact color combo (black with gold stripes).
 
#5 ·
If they do in fact make the Frontier a compact instead of a mid size, I'm absolutely sure it would stay truck based and not car based, like the S10, Ranger, previous gen Frontier, etc... Nissan will probably keep the size the same however, so that they can still compete in the segment. However, downsizing would give them no competition for the Frontier, and people looking for a bigger truck would go to the Titan, increasing it's sales. It's something that would either wildly succeed or epically fail.

Chrysler would be super smart if they offered a Jeep truck (possible planned), in addition to a car based Dakota (also possible planned). That way they would offer two different small trucks; one that's sporty and better on road, and one that's rugged and awesome off-road.

It would be interesting to see how a modern Chevy El Camino would fare, especially if they offered an SS edition with the 5.3. That would basically be what the SSR was, now that I think about it...
 
#6 ·
Another option would be to introduce a compact or sub-compact truck as the third model in Nissan's product line.

That would avoid the need to make it big enough to compete with the Tacoma, Colorado, etc.
 
#7 ·
The problem with a compact or sub compact (even our mid sizes), by the time you add up all the required electronics and mandated "safety" and pollution features, there isn't much difference in cost between a compact truck and a full sized truck (which has also grown).
With today's powertrains, trucks are being limited on tow and payload based on what the law says, not the machine's capacity. Remember the first gens with a 3500 pound tow capacity on the manual transmissions vs. 5000 on the autos? That was about emissions, not truck capability?
 
#8 ·
Smaller:
easier to drive
easier to park
fits in more garages

sales: point of difference

Too many things out there have become clones of the competition, even stuff like cruise ships, hotels, Home Depot/Lowes...no point of difference
 
#9 ·
Americans are typically too obese for compact trucks. Unless Nissan can perfect TARDIS technology, I don't see Frontier getting any smaller. Lighter is certainly possible. More tranny gears and modern engine tech (DI, fully variable valve timing, turbos, etc.) would also help.
 
#12 ·
Actually, I guess the Holden Ute is GM's rebadged, modern Chrevrolet El Camino...

Anyways, isn't Nissan offering two different sizes of the NP300 for the global markets, similar to how they were selling the D22 and D40s at the same time? I kinda doubt it, but perhaps they will offer a separate compact truck in North America... It would be freaking cool if they also offered a truck-based SUV version of it (like the Xterra is to the Frontier); North America hasn't had something similar to a Geo Tracker or small Wrangler for a while. But that's asking too much. :p
 
#17 ·
#19 ·
In theory this is a smaller truck is something that I've been asking for. In some of the comments sections in pickuptrucks.com other posters post things along the same lines on how midsized trucks are too big nowadays. I think there are at least one or two other people on this forum who say the same thing once in a while.

But comparing the specifications of a 2014 Frontier SV 4x4 manual against a 2004 Frontier XE-V6 manual, both short beds, the differences aren't as big as I would've thought:

mileage: 2014: 15/21 2004: 15/19

width: 2014: 72.6 inches 2004: 71.2 inches

length: 2014: 205.5 inches 2004: 199.9 inches (and keeping in mind it look like the first generation Frontier has a slightly smaller bed at 4.7 feet compared to 5 feet)

rear leg room: 2014: 33.6 inches 2004: 30.7 inches

turning radius: 2014: 43.3 feet 2004: 41.8 feet (compared to the 2014 Tacoma double cab V6 turning radius of 40.6 feet)

Here are the links to Edmunds:
2014:
2014 Nissan Frontier SV Crew Cab Pickup 4.0L V6 4x4 5-speed Automatic 5.0 ft. Bed Features and Specs

2004:

2004 Nissan Frontier XE-V6 Crew Cab Pickup 3.3L V6 4x4 4-speed Automatic 4.7 ft. Bed Features and Specs

The main issue for me is the 30.7 inches rear leg room, which I kind of question if it's accurate or not. It kind of seems like it would be the numbers for a King cab, but I don't really remember sitting in the back of a first generation Frontier. But if that's the actual numbers then a rerelease of the first generation Frontier probably won't be an option for me. Since the rear leg room is the biggest issue for me now and is something that I'm not sure can be adjusted to like some of the other things about the Frontier.

So hopefully Nissan isn't literally doing a rerelease of the first generation Frontier. Because currently I don't see any major advantages in efficiency it would provide compared to what would be given up.

And instead Nissan is just basing the next generation Frontier on the first generation Frontier but with improvements. ie updating it's 4 speed automatic transmission to 5 speed, increase the rear leg room, improve the rear seat ergonomics, etc.
 
#22 ·
My CCLB is a bit taller but similar overall dimensions as a 2003 f150 (v6) regular cab 8ft box I find myself parking next to on occasion.

And if you look at the already released picutres you will notice that the 3rd gen isn't going to be any smaller really than the current gen.
 
#25 ·
Found this link on Truth About Cars:

Report: Nissan Scraps Small Truck Plans, Navara Now On For North America | The Truth About Cars


"Our industry source who reported that Nissan would use an old version of the Frontier has reported back to us with some bittersweet news.

The reported next-generation Frontier, which would have been based on the bones of the old, first-generation Frontier, has been abandoned. According to our source, bringing the old technology up to modern crash standards was too onerous a task, and the costs were simply too high – even with using an already paid for architecture.

The big issue at hand is this: Nissan still wants to have a small, basic, fuel-efficient affordable truck, since they see it as an untapped niche. Their original thinking was that the D22 Frontier would let them get their in a cost-effective way (remember, small trucks are low-margin, difficult to price and carry significant regulatory burdens). But now that this option is off the table, Nissan is forced to use the all-new Navara as a starting point.

From a superficial perspective, that’s not such a bad thing. The Navara is a modern, global mid-size pickup that is a proven design and a sales success across the globe. The problem is that, as it sits now, it’s far too expensive for what Nissan USA is looking for. So, the North American truck will use the Navara architecture, due to its crashworthiness, and ability to fit a modern, diesel engine under the hood, but the tradeoff will be a fair amount of content will not make it across the ocean.

As with the now dead D22, Nissan Mexico will be responsible for engineering the truck to meet NAFTA standards. This “clean sheet” approach, if it can be called that, will cause further delays. The current Frontier will soldier on until 2018, when the new truck arrives. A diesel variant arrives a year later. The new truck will likely have a different look and stick to the original mandate of being akin to a modern-day Hardbody. But instead of actually being a a modern day Hardbody, it will be a revamped modern truck.

Nissan had planned to give North American truck buyers something truly unique, but it was not to be. We will be getting what is arguably the better, more modern option, but this new approach will just add more time, effort and expense to the program. The goal of a low-cost, fuel-efficient pickup is still in sight. Nissan will just be approaching it in a different way."

Not sure how reliable the source is because I think this is where I read more info about Nissan reviving the D22 model and the source of the article doesn't sound that reliable as well.

But seriously 2018 until the next model?!
 
#26 ·
well if that is true, im sure as heck not waiting til 2019 to get the truck i want. looks like i'll end up going elsewhere. I'll have to give the new colorado diesel a better look when it gets here :)

really surprises me theres no small truck available any more. i see all makes of them around here constantly, some are certainly showing their age though.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top