So this afternoon I participated in what turned out to be a mid-sized truck marketing survey (apparently paid for by DaimlerChrysler) and for which I was paid a cool $100! Represented at the survey were (all 4x2's): Dodge Dakota (ST, SLT, Laramie), Chevy Colorado, Ford Ranger (XLT), Toyota Tacoma (SR5 Pre-runner), a Toyota Tundra, a Ford F-150, a Dodge Ram 1500 and a prototype of the Ranger/Tacoma/Colorado sized Mitsubishi "Raider." Also on display were prototypes for a swing-out step to help access the Dodge trucks' cargo bed, and sliding bed-rail tie-down system that had some other nifty accessories available. Oh, yeah, they also had proposals for portable/dockable MP3 players and DVD players, as well as tinted chrome wheels (which I thought were totally lame, since they looked just about like the regular chrome wheels).

Anyway, I'm a compact truck guy and so didn't spend much time with the F-150, Ram or Tundra. After poking around each of the currently available compact trucks (sans Nissan's Frontier, which was conspicuously absent from the survey), I would definitely pick between the venerable Ranger or the Tacoma. The Dakotas, in all of their incarnations, are an awkward size for my purposes (just a bit too big), and the interiors looked cheap, even on the Laramie. For some reason, Dodge's bumper chrome looks cheap, too, as compared to the Ranger's and Tacoma's. Also, with the R/T gone for the next couple of years, the engine options are fairly ho-hum (even the V-8 options). The Colorado is almost laughable with a towing capacity of only 4000 lbs, a horrible interior and lousy gas mileage. None of the Dakotas nor the Colorado had bed stake pockets or front tie-downs. Weird. As far as making a decision between a 4x4 Tacoma or Ranger, for me it would really come down whichever dealer would make me a better deal (which is how I'd decided on my current 2002 Ranger). In 4x2 models, I would probably lean towards the Tacoma with its electric rear locker, unless I were planning on towing a lot in which case I'd go with the Ranger for its extra 800 lbs of capacity.

The Mitsubishi Model E/Raider was a very interesting (proposed) truck. What they had there was really just a mock-up--sheet metal on an interior--but the options and the price are both very intriguing. It seemed to be based on the Dakota to some extent, at least as far as interior features, and rather bleak inside, with a expanse of blank plastic on the passenger's side of the dash. It would need to be dressed up for a production model. The exterior is tough to describe; it's more rounded than squared, in the vein of the Tacoma, but more futuristic looking. The first thing I thought when I saw it was "space turd." But it was a likeable space turd. Looking at it from the front, it also reminded me a little of the Volvo SUV, but again, more rounded. One thing I didn't like was its Dodge-like front end overhang. They had the Raider sitting on BFG All-Terrains, but the way its nose stuck out so far, I'd have doubts about taking it anywhere with steep approach angles. The proposed engine was Dodge's 3.7L, but the mileage listed was better than the Dakota's, possibly due to a lower anticipated curb weight. The width was comparable to Tacoma/Ranger, and it had lots of comfort/convenience options comparable to those vehicles. Really, the only thing it didn't seem to offer was a locking rear differential. Oh, and I'm not sure about bed stake pockets or tie-downs--the bed on the prototype was there to give an idea of exterior appearance, and was covered over. The most remarkable thing about it was the proposed price: $21,300, or about $2,000 less than Toyota and Ford vehicles with comparable options. If I were shopping for new trucks (and it were available), I would definitely consider it along with Ranger and Tacoma.

As far as the prototype options on display for Dodge/Mitsubishi trucks, the sliding rail system was pretty slick, and was listed as being only $50. The rails mount to the inside of the truck bed and two sliding tie-downs are set into each for four tie-downs that can be positioned anywhere along the length of the truck bed. Also available for the rail system were sliding cross-bars (for another $50), a movable barrier that divides the bed into two compartments ($100) and arched cross pieces for $175. The arches looked kind of like this from the rear:
__
/ \
| |

...and would enable one to carry stuff that extends over the top of the truck, like an upside-down kayak. What the cross-pieces _didn't_ have that would have been nice are tie-down points on the sides. Also, I think some kind of telescoping (so they can adjust with however the arches are positioned in the bed) horizontal pieces could come in handy, although they'd be a little tricky to engineer. A final option that would be great for off-roaders/campers would be a tent that could attach over the arches (think covered wagons....). Alas, there were no questionaires to fill in telling them what they should do, only what I thought of what they were proprosing to do. Finally, there was a description (but no pictures or mock-up) of some sort of "luxury" arched cross bars that extended over the cab or something, but I couldn't really envision what they were talking about, unless it was just some kind of a fancy lumber rack. It was listed at $275.

The swing-out bed step was kind of lame, IMO, but only because I'm tall and I have no use for it. I suppose the 5'2" set would find it useful. I don't recall what they wanted to charge for it.

As I said much earlier, the tinted chrome looked like the regular chrome to me. I guess maybe there was a subtle difference, but it was REALLY subtle. If they want to offer wheel options, they should offer anodized colors. That would be bitchin'! The portable MP3 player that docks in the in-dash radio is a great idea, but overpriced ($400 for one that holds only 128MB--why not 512?). There was a second version that claimed to hold 20 gigabytes, as well as "one-touch recording" of anything on the radio, but it was pretty bulky and seemed like it would be a big distraction while driving (imagine trying to scroll through 20 gigs of MP3s on the freeway!). Also, it's supposed to cost $1,000. I poo-pooed the DVD players, even the one that can be removed to watch movies outside of the vehicle, because A) I'm not really into movies and B) I think television screens in vehicles are a stupid idea.

Two other things on display were "Worry-Free Fabric," which as a $600 option would give you all the security of a can of Scotch-Guard, and a portable GPS system that gives voice directions in the truck and can be used as a hand-held (but non-talking) GPS unit when removed (for $1,000).

 

I remembered two other things that they asked opinions on (and I KNOW you are all dying to read about them); a "fold-flat" front seat, where the seat folds forward (and thus flat) for a work surface or, more practically, a place to put that doggone big box that doesn't fit inside but you don't want to put in the truck bed because it's full of faberge eggs (or because it's raining). I thought that was a pretty snazzy idea. Also, the back seats fold away and a panel folded out to provide a flat storage space behind the front seats--no humps anywhere. Another good idea.