Do compact trucks have a place anymore?

"HammerheadFistpunch" (hammerheadfistpunch) 01/16/2014 at 17:14 • Filed to: Truck Yeah

6

33

There has been a lot of buzz surrounding the arrival of new, or rather re-introduced, players to the compact truck market, the promising Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon and I got to thinking about the small truck market. We've all hear the small truck marker is dead or dying, so why now? is this just a desperate gamble, or shrewd timing? Do compact trucks have a place in this market?

Lets start off by listing a few of the arguments I typically hear against small trucks:

1. Compact trucks aren't compact anymore, they are pretty much as big as a full size truck

2. There is no market for it, its not worth building.

3. But I get more for my money with a full size truck.

4. 'Merica

To frame this, I want to say that I have no beef if you want or need a full size truck; work needs to get done and the person with the most toys wins, or so I'm told. Also, my arguments are based on data I gathered on the best comparisons I could get from 3 points in model year history 1995, 2005 and 2013/14. These obviously don't take into consideration all possible engine, cab, wheelbase, and drive-train combos because the entire history of numbers can't contain all possible permutations of pickup trucks over time.

1. Back in the day, a compact truck used to be small, now they are just pretty much full size trucks. Nope.

Aggregating the data for 2014 Nissan Frontier, 2014 Toyota Tacoma, 2012 Chevy Colorado and what we know of the 2015 Colorado in their extended cab long bed configurations (longest possible) you are shy of a modern 1/2 ton (averaged against F150, tundra, Silverado) in the follow ways:

Length: ~13 inches shorter

Width: ~8 inches narrower

Height: ~6 inches lower

Weight: ~1200 lbs. less weight

This confirms at least one thing; new trucks are big. But I've heard it said that compact trucks are what full size were 10 or 15 years ago. Nope. Compared to a mid 90's sampling we get:

Length: 2 inches shorter

Width: ~6 inches narrower

Height: ~ 3 inches lower

Weight: ~1000 lbs. less weight.

The fact is this: Compact trucks are smaller and lighter than a full size, and by significant margins.

2. There is no market for them. I guess the question that needs to be asked is; how many units do you need to make of a new model for it to be worth it (annually)? 10,000, 50,000, 100,000? I don't have the answer to that but will ask the question, how many MINI's are sold each year in the US? How about Jaguar/Land rover? Brands with complete lineups of cars with dedicated dealer networks and associated expenses. It might surprise you to know that in the US the MINI brand sold about 50,000 TOTAL MINI's in 2013. Jaguar/Land Rover? They had a record setting sales year at 67,000. This is a simplistic view of the market but given than many manufactures are chasing niche model sales numbers in the 10,000 unit range, i would call 50,000 annual units as a good selling vehicle worth building.

We all know that compact trucks had a serious decline in sales, which prompted all but Nissan, Chevy and Toyota to pull out from the market...but how bad is it really?

Last year the market for compact trucks was over 220,000 US units sold between the Frontier and Tacoma alone (the terrible previous Colorado was discontinued to be re-introduced but was selling roughly 35,000 units a year before the end). The ford ranger was selling ~55,000 units a year up until as recently as 2011 (discontinued in 2012)

The market goes up and down with the years, but the data suggests that there are ~200-250 thousand buyers in the compact truck market annually. Given that there are only 3 brands competing in the space, and the metric of 50,000 units for profitability, I would say there is definitely a place. Then factor in that even the old designs for compact trucks on the current market (frontier and Tacoma are nearly a decade old) still beat out full size trucks by an average of 3 mpg combined. Given the trends of downsizing and efficiency, that gas mileage will factor more and more into car buyers decisions and it seems to me that there is a clear market space for a light duty truck that is still light duty.

3. But I can get the full size truck for about the same price and get so much more!

You are actually right, given incentives and the high demand and resale in the compact market, full size trucks are often on parity with or cheaper than compacts.

The real question here is: what do you need a truck for?

Is it for heavy work (6000 lbs+ towing/1000 lbs+ payload 20% of the time) then you really should consider if the reduced stress of having an average of 158 hp and 169 ft-lbs more (highest power 1/2 ton engines compared to compact) and heavier duty components wont pay dividends greater than the loss of economy or the size penalty.

If however you need a vehicle for occasional trips to home depot, pulling a light trailer or boat or active gear like camping and biking, then why is the extra utility valuable? Sometimes more is just more. Factor in that Compacts traditionally have excellent resale values, cheaper operating costs and lower insurance premiums and it could become a proposition worth considering. And with a diesel finally being offered, it may actually even be a prudent choice over a crossover vehicle for a small family, given the mileage and resale associated with diesel engines in the US.

With the 2015 Colorado/Canyon on the horizon and the Frontier/Tacoma due for updates I think we will start to see the market actually increase. I honestly think the future looks pretty bright for compact trucks.

4. There is nothing I can say here to appeal to the people who want to fight me on this one. Believe it, or don't.

Nibbles > HammerheadFistpunch 01/16/2014 at 17:21

2

Keeping my '95 Dakota 4x4 until someone offers something else with gobs of torque and a stick

Looking at you, GM. C'mon with that manual diesel Colorado/Canyon

Textured Soy Protein > HammerheadFistpunch 01/16/2014 at 17:29

0

What I don't get is why there aren't more pickups in general with full-time 4wd modes. I chose my Grand Cherokee for that reason. I always liked the '01-'04 Tacoma crew cab but they're all part-time 4wd.

Milky > HammerheadFistpunch 01/16/2014 at 17:31

2

IMO with the new lighter F150 and the diesel Ram coming soon, I don't see much room for smaller trucks. Lets be honest most truck buyers have the "bigger is better" mentality and we Jaloppos are the minority.

HammerheadFistpunch > Milky 01/16/2014 at 17:34

1

That's the general consensus. But The f150 is going to have to go up in price with all that aluminum, and the eco-diesel ram is going to command a premium price. The fact remains that there are a lot of people out there who, for whatever reason, don't want to drive around in 28 tons of American pride. I'm one of them, for me, more is just more.

HammerheadFistpunch > Textured Soy Protein 01/16/2014 at 17:34

0

It is interesting that the 4unner and FJ cruiser have it as optional, but the trucks don't. I suspect its to keep options, thus costs, down.

nermal > HammerheadFistpunch 01/16/2014 at 17:52

1

It's an issue of scale.

Take the F150. I couldn't find a breakdown of total sales last year, but for argument's sake let's say that 500k of the 763k F-Series were F150s.

Then lets say it cost ten million dollars to design the front suspension. Totally pulled those numbers out of thin air, for example making purposes. Anyways, that means that in each truck, there is $20 of costs from designing the front suspension.

Now, take that same thing and apply it to a compact truck that sells 50k per year. Your front suspension costs just skyrocketed to $200 per truck.

Using the same concept with every other system across the compact truck, you can see why the last round of domestic compacts were disco'd. Because the full size trucks sell better, fixed costs can be spread across more units, lowering prices and / or increasing profits.

Since big trucks are similar / not much more costs than little trucks, all the stupid americans want the big one.

For Sweden > HammerheadFistpunch 01/17/2014 at 12:02

1

In 'Murica, compact trucks have two places: landscapers and lifestyle vehicles.

505Turbeaux > HammerheadFistpunch 01/17/2014 at 12:05

0

good question, I hope not. I miss the Ranger.

Good article, shared on Oppo facebook page

FJ80WaitinForaLSV8 > Textured Soy Protein 01/17/2014 at 12:37

0

Curious as to why you want full time 4x4. I assume you live in the frozen north but couldn't you just leave your truck in 4x4 all winter?

FJ80WaitinForaLSV8 > HammerheadFistpunch 01/17/2014 at 12:42

0

Great post. Especially like the size aggregation data for debunking those myths that so many people perpetuate.

One point which is often lost in this discussion is that OEMs use to build SUV derivatives of all of their compact truck platforms. Crossovers have killed these vehicles off thus making it that much harder to spread the chassis development costs.

I truly believe that cost will determine whether this segment sinks or swims. In other words the OEMs need to fix #3. It very well could be that CAFE throws some interesting curve balls into this market. Maybe OEMs will start selling these as loss leaders to boost their average?

Nothing > HammerheadFistpunch 01/17/2014 at 12:52

3

What if I just want a full size truck? Not for need, just for the sake of having one? I know that's not a popular opinion, but for the most part (not all) a vehicle purchase is about want anyway.

My automotive tastes are broad. I like and have owned tiny cars that I barely fit in (CRX, MGB, RX8, Miata, etc) and I've owned giant vehicles that hog the road (the only full size brand I haven't owned is Dodge, unless my '85 Ramcharger counts). I've enjoyed most of my vehicles for the characteristics that each have had. I loved the small, nimble, point and shoot feeling I got from my CRXs. I have loved the go anywhere and haul a lot of stuff attributes of my '69 Bronco, Ramcharger, Blazer, and full size pickups. Have I owned a compact pick up? No, unless the 1st gen Tundra counts.

I've mentioned numerous times why I ended up in a Tundra and not a Tacoma. I found that what I got with the Tundra outweighed what I got with the Tacoma, for less money. Chop the Taco price by a few K, and I'd be in one. Offer it with the V8 (like you could get in a 4runner) and heck, I'd probably be in one despite the proximity in price. Ultimately, the Tundra (or another full sizer) is a better choice for towing in the mountains. My guess is that I would've enjoyed the Tacoma equally, or maybe a little better, than the Tundra. Maybe next time I'll get in a compact/mid-size. When shopping, I did consider the Frontier, but found it way too dated.

Getting back to my original point, for most people getting a full size truck, it's simply because they wanted one. That doesn't make me less Jalop because I have one. I like that my 6'4" frame can site behind my 6'4" frame and still have gobs of leg room. Just as much as I like that I have to perform a controlled fall to fit into the race seat that's in the Miata. Yes, I know people make questionable choices, but hey…I’m glad I have the choice to choose what I want to buy and drive. Now get out of my way, I need to get to Costco. Suppose I should fill up on the way, my gas light is on.

Textured Soy Protein > FJ80WaitinForaLSV8 01/17/2014 at 13:16

0

I live in Wisconsin. Unfortunately it's not really as simple as leaving the truck in 4x4 with the axles locked all winter. We get a good amount of snow but we also have lots of snow plows. There's basically 2 different situations with snowy roads:

A) We get 6+ inches of snow, the plows can't quite keep up with the rate of snow falling, so there's a good few inches of snow on the roads everywhere. This is fine to drive in 4x4 with the axles locked because the snow provides enough slip to keep the axles from binding.

B) We get a smaller amount of snow, and the plows mostly take care of it. There's not enough snow cover on the roads to let you drive in 4x4 with the axles locked, but there's still lots of random slippy spots all over the place which full-time 4wd helps with.

Snow like A) happens maybe 25% of the time we get snow. And while locked axle 4x4 works in these situations, it's not like you're crawling up some rocks where you want the axles to be locked. Full-time 4wd that shifts power front to back depending on traction, so you spin your wheels a lot less, and overall the truck is more controllable.

The rest of the time it's like B), and in these situations you can't really use part-time 4x4 because the axles will bind same as if you were on dry pavement.

I still like having low range which locks the center diff, but this is only really for particularly sticky situations where the full-time 4Hi isn't cutting it.

FJ80WaitinForaLSV8 > Textured Soy Protein 01/17/2014 at 13:23

0

I guess I didn't know that most part time 4x4 vehicles don't have a center differential. My two 4x4 vehicles are a land cruiser and ranger rover both of which are full time. learn something new every day

HammerheadFistpunch > Nothing 01/17/2014 at 13:26

0

i thought i was clear that buying a fs truck is just peachy with me for whatever reason. as someone who bought way more car than they need i get your point totally. this was more an exercise to see if there is a market for compact trucks, not a decision guide or rant

Nothing > HammerheadFistpunch 01/17/2014 at 15:07

0

Understood. Part of my point was that if a manufacturer offered what I wanted (and pretty much Toyota was "it" at the time), I probably would have gotten a compact truck.

The remainder of my miscellaneous ramblings were as a general retort to the "big trucks suck" commentariat on this site.

TinFoil Knight > HammerheadFistpunch 01/18/2014 at 20:46

0

Id buy this right now. Chevy dropped the ball when they dc'd the luv & the s 10. when i was growing up Uncle George had a red 1980 s 10 5mt long bed sigle bench seat that got the job done. I was co driver all over the U.S. in it. Doing geneaology research learning my family history.I mowed so many lawns, out of the back of that truck. I know it had over 250k miles on it when he traded it in on his 1984 Monte Carlo SS (the BIG SEXY one black with the red monte carlo ss graphic).It was only out of service for one weekend when the water pump died, monday morning it was back on the road.

FelixScout > HammerheadFistpunch 01/23/2014 at 13:27

2

I worked for 15 years in the entertainment industry in Chicago and LA. We would eat something like this right up since a full sized pickup is frequently to big to drive through alleys and into cramped loading docks designed 40 years ago. Considering 95% of materials are delivered to us via a 17'-25' flatbed or box truck, when it's not sent by semi, a compact pickup to go to Grainger to grab the 75 roto-lock pipe clamps or the 24 lights plus 3 zip strips rental order that are simply too much gear to wedge into the 95 Sentra the Head Elec drives. Currently the Transit Connect is starting to look appealing to that segment since it is the small cargo vehicle they're been wanting.

The small farmers that are popping up these days would definitely consider such a vehicle since you could still put 50 hens in back, carry a load of manure (if its not delivered), or haul your produce to market. It will do the job well enough for someone with less than 10 acres to think that this may be a useful vehicle, and if they need something bigger there are effective temporary options that wouldn't cut into costs too heavily.

Also this would make an effective small contractor vehicle.

KnifeKnut > HammerheadFistpunch 01/24/2014 at 19:36

2

These all sound like good arguments for why automakers with north american manufacturing capacity should offer us a ute. Indirectly, good argument to repeal the chicken tax.

Saf1 > HammerheadFistpunch 01/24/2014 at 22:01

0

They always will overseas! Especially in countries where industries like agriculture are more prevalent

willconltd > Milky 01/25/2014 at 09:26

1

Bigger is not better when I can't fit it inside my garage. At some point don't you think that the full size trucks are comically bloated? I can fit a 1997 F150 in my garage, I can not fit a 2012 F150. Not to mention parking, driving, and maintenance costs. I want a truck that gets 30+ mpg and actually fits in my garage. The current offerings are pathetic.

willconltd > nermal 01/25/2014 at 09:30

0

We aren't all stupid Americans.

IDRIVENEON > HammerheadFistpunch 01/25/2014 at 09:48

0

Does anyone remember these?

A compact 1-ton. 2655 payload capacity, 5,000 towing capacity. I'd buy one today if I could find one.

ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable) > HammerheadFistpunch 01/25/2014 at 10:02

0

I honestly can't wait for the Colorado/Canyon twins to arrive. Especially the diesels.

We currently own a 94 Dakota 2WD Ext-Cab, and it's great as a winter beater. I will readily admit I want the GMC as a lifestyle truck. I will use it commute*.

However, owning a truck always has it's positives. We bought our Dakota on CL after getting frustrated trying to coordinate schedules with my FIL to borrow his.

I have some landscaping projects I want to get finished this spring/summer so having my own truck is going to be handy. Plus there is always our random IKEA trips, friends moving, etc that makes owning a truck fun, and if not fun at least interesting.

*The whole premise rests on the diesel getting better than 25mpg in town. That's what my current DD gets. Once we know more about how it does, I will do some maths to figure out if it's worth the extra for the diesel if if the turbo-4 will be enough.

My parents live in VA, up an un-paved mountain pass, so we need 4WD to be able to make it there in the winter should we need to visit.

HammerheadFistpunch > FJ80WaitinForaLSV8 01/25/2014 at 10:23

1

you sure do...like they fact that you have a rangie...who's side are you on anyway? (uncomfortable text based smile thingy to convey levity)

DollaMoneyAve > Textured Soy Protein 01/25/2014 at 11:47

0

I agree with everything you said. Here in NYC, it's a similar situation. I feel like I'm shifting my transfer case more than my gear selector to keep up with the variable road conditions! Also, we have a lot of tight 90 degree turns given the urban layout, and locked 4wd makes them... unpleasant, both for me and the Jeep. However, I've never needed 4lo except while off-roading, and even then it's only necessary for near-vertical climbs because of the drastic change in gearing.

milanst666 > HammerheadFistpunch 01/25/2014 at 12:01

0

I wish they'd release a corresponding body-on-frame suv for each midsize truck. Right now, I own an xterra pro-4x which is an suv based on the frontier platform. I use my suv for hiking and skiing and fear all of my gear would be quickly stolen from the back of a truck, not to mention, it is more comfortable sleeping in the back of an suv than it is in a truck bed.

JoelA237 > FJ80WaitinForaLSV8 01/25/2014 at 13:19

0

Part time 4x4 systems can actually be damaged by driving on dry pavement while engaged. Full time systems are built differently, usually having a clutch style center differential (transfer case) where as the part time is usually chain, or if you are lucky gear driven.

Michael H > Nibbles 01/25/2014 at 13:21

0

The Ram 2500 has a stick and 650 ft.lbs (derated for the stick). That fits both your criteria, and is the last torque monster you can get with a handshaker trans. Buy 'em while you can.

Nibbles > Michael H 01/25/2014 at 16:48

0

True. It is, unfortunately, way out of my price range at the moment.

Nibbles > Michael H 01/25/2014 at 16:48

0

True. It is, unfortunately, way out of my price range at the moment.

Nibbles > Michael H 01/25/2014 at 16:48

0

True. It is, unfortunately, way out of my price range at the moment.

Cronus > FelixScout 03/13/2014 at 12:27

0

How are 95% of materials delivered by a flatbed, box truck, or semi but a full size pickup is too large to fit the loading dock?

FelixScout > Cronus 03/13/2014 at 12:47

0

Rereading this I realize I was a bit vague in the heat of the response, I was talking operational use for delivery and pick-up and blending them to confusion. Sorry. I will attempt to clarify.

When the vehicle is too large for the dock stuff is dumped in the alley and then moved in by hand or fork or both. Load-in for the Riviera and the Aragon in Chicago is bad and you need a crew to shift the cases up the alley to the venue. The Viaduct can only accept pickups and small trucks, Same for the Sierra Madre Theaters in Sierra Madre, CA. Not all are like this and any major theater built in the last 40 years have dedicated docks that can handle semis. But converted spaces and older venues have docks configured for vehicles (generally box or flat beds or horse carts) so they can be too narrow for most modern cargo vehicles, which why I pointed out the Transit since it's rather narrow and tall for it's size.

When driving for pick-ups or small deliveries you frequently end up going to older buildings with accesses that are difficult for a large vehicle. Think of industrial urban areas built up between 1900 and 1950. Post 1950 we start to see industrial parks crop up with much more space to take large trucks for large deliveries and receiving.

On the operational end a small truck would blend fuel economy, low costs, and reflect the actual use of most venues that need a vehicle. Plus it would be an effective runabout for such an operation since it would be great as getting around tight city areas.

I hope this clarifies my point.