11 replies to this topic

[BillTheHiker]

I plan to get shell model of either the AT or FWC and trying to evaluate short vs long bed version. I also have yet to buy the truck but am settled on getting a slightly used mid size, probably Nissan Frontier. To get a decent ground clearance I need to get the pro 4x and the long bed version is virtually impossible to find, and the same is true for the Colorado and Tacoma. I am wondering if I would find the short bed  version too small. I mostly camp alone and do not plan to spend time in it other than sleeping and eating. I will use my portable Coleman stove, large water jugs with spigots and will make a built-in an ice box and use dry ice.

 

One advantage I see in the short bed is the shorter wheelbase will be better on those rough BLM, FS roads, like the ones I just drove my outback on in Capitol Reef NP -that pretty much resulted in my decision to get a truck. BTW, I do not like the full size trucks -they are so huge.

 

Any of you have a popup on a 5 foot truck bed and wished you had gone for the 6 foot model?

[97grandby]

I owned a nissan pro-4x Frontier and loved that truck. Was a mtn goat off road. If it is just you, look for a a extended cab and they all come with the long bed. Its only the crew cab you get the super short bed, and wow is it small.  The main down side I had with the nissan was the super small fuel tank. I added exhaust, intake, and hyperchiped the motor and was lucky to ever see 20 mpg empty on a long hwy trip. 14-15 around town empty. Towing anything dropped it to 12 mpg in a hurry. I hooked up a 20 ft travel trailer once and got 8 mpg.  So that meant I had all of 120 miles until my fuel light was coming on. But if you can just plan your stops and carry an extra fuel can you will be in business.  I know budgets always matter, but I would really look at new. Used with 100k miles they seemed to be around 20k when new with full warrenty it was 27k. Good luck and let me know if you have any other questions I might be able to help you with.  

Edited by 97grandby, 04 November 2016 - 08:22 PM.

[BillTheHiker]

@crumbs. WinCo supermarkets here in Boise has dry ice during warm months. I sailed from SF to Kauai many  years ago on a 40' sailboat and we packed prebaked, prefrozen dinners in dry ice in an ice chest and the uneaten food was still frozen solid 11 days later in Hawaii. And that's after about 8 days in the topical heat of July.

[BillTheHiker]

@97grandby. Good info on the Frontier. Any knowledge of mpg on similar setup for Colorado and Tacoma? I  would not think there could be a lot of difference. My big concern is driving those desert roads where you drive 100+ miles from nearest gas just to get into your destination area. 5 gal can would  be needed, maybe 10.

 

[PacificExposure]

I had an mildly modified Tacoma 4 door long bed V6 TRD with an Eagle and it was both extremely off road capable and a comfortable size.  No way I would have been comfortable with my wife and I in either a short bed or a regular/extended cab.  We load our gear and clothes in the back seat and the Eagle was a tight fit.  The Swift is 12" shorter the benefit of shorter wheel base wouldn't have been worth the sacrifice in space.  There was nowhere my Tacoma couldn't go that a short bed would have been able to.  If you're really worried about clearance, frame sliders and a high clearance bumpers will fix that quickly.  My biggest problem was always that I had to put my spare tire on my roof as I needed the clearance where the spare normally went.  Huge PITA.  I recently sold the combo and replaced it with an F150 with the V6 twin turbo because the mileage was killing me.  With 33" tires and all the added body armor and camper weight I was lucky to get 9 mpg when fully loaded.  I now very much appreciate the added size the Hawk gives me and the truck is very capable out of the box and gets 25 mpg empty and 20 fully loaded, 700+ mile range with the 38 gallon tank!

[BillTheHiker]

@PacificExposure. Wow, full size truck got better mpg than tacoma -what was mpg for tacoma?

[PacificExposure]

8-9 mpg in the Tacoma loaded, 13 without the camper.  33" tires, steel sliders, skid plates, and front and rear bumpers are heavy!  

 

The trail limo in all its glory

 

[PacificExposure]

Current setup:

 

[ACEBLACKDOG]

i certainly understand the desire to go "small"....

 

i like the silverardo 2500hd  6.0 liter for the ride, the ride height, more room = more comfortable....never even know camper is back there....

 

ya gotta give of somethings to get some things.....

 

in other words....my mileage sucks....but i knew that going in....

[97grandby]

The other thing to consider is the doors on the swift and fleet are much narrower and lower in hight then the full size campers. I'm 6.1 and seem to hit my head every time I go in and out of the campers at shows made for the mid size trucks. I Don't have that problem with my grandby. There are a few topics about mpg's that people report and I would say 95% of them from a Tacoma to a 1 ton diesel get between 11-15 mpg. Only one that seems to get 20 mpg or better is ram 3.0 eco diesel. To me the only advantage of a Tacoma/frontier is they are a little narrower and not as long. But you are asking them to do the maximum allowed amount designed by the manufacturer and then some. Lots of guys add new leaf springs, air bags and sway bars to help the weight. To me I went with a 3/4 ton truck and haven't looked back. I have a new gmc quad cab 1/2 ton as my daily driver but the campers are just to small for a 5.8 bed and the trucks payload would be maxed out in a hurry. And i tow a trailer about half the time. But again that works for me and my little family. From what I remember hearing from fwc is the most common camper they sell is being mounted on a Tacoma, so what do I know.


1990 Ford F-250
1997 fwc grandby