Jim Press predicts a good future for small trucks

We used to have trucks like that back in the 80's. I had a 88 Dodge Ram 50 (Mitsubishi) for 10 years and it was a great truck. It was a 2wd extra cab with a 2.6 and a 5 speed. The bed was a full 6 ft and it had a real payload of more then 1500 lbs. Since it only weighed 2750 lbs, it had plenty of power and I averaged 25 to 30 mpg (US) over the 300,000 km that I put on it. The biggest plus was the price. It cost the same as the Dodge Colts and Omnis parked next to it on the lot.
 
Todays "small" trucks are too big, too expensive, too thirsty and offer no more or even less capacity.

the dodge dakota packs a lot of power and towing into a small package. The fuel economy is not good but a tubo diesel with about 270 hp /520 ft-lb should fix that.

I agree the diesel would make the mileage better but it would just raise the price even higher.
 
My point is the Dakota is not a small truck and it's not affordable. They weigh well over 4000 lbs these days and the price approaches that of a full size as does the fuel mileage.
The only advantage they have is over mini trucks is towing and if you need to tow that much you really should get a full size.
 
A 2800 lb truck with 2.4 diesel would be perfect (IMHO).

The Dakota isn't a small package, though. Moreover, its fuel economy is the same as its bigger brother the Ram, which provides greater hauling, towing, and people-carrying capabilities. I like PickupTruck.com's suggestion about putting the M80 concept into production. I'd like to see it with a 2.0 turbodiesel, a 2.4 naturally aspirated gasoline I4, and a 2.0 turbocharged gasoline engine all matched up with either a 6-speed manual or automatic transmission.

The problem is here in America everyone thinks bigger IS better and it's only now that a very small minority are starting to realize that a lot of times smaller might just be a little more efficient. We just want bigger!
 
Evidence of that can be seen in all the "compact" trucks out there. From the Colorado to the Dakota, especially the Frontier and Tacoma (we'll leave out the Mazda and Ford since they haven't changed since the last decade) have all grown significantly in size, while not becoming any more efficient.
 
What I would like to see is better fuel economy and cargo capacity. Bigger beds and more payload and towing capability. Take any one of the "mid-size" trucks and beef up the rear suspension and put a fuel effiecient diesel in it would be good to go.
 
I would also like to see a return of the smaller vans like the Astro and Aerostar...

Instead of abandoning the small truck like it looks like GM and Ford are doing, they just need to redesign them to be smaller and more efficient. There are plenty of people who need the open bed but don't need a real big truck. The upcoming G8 ST is too much sport and too little utility to work for this, but start thinking along those lines and you get the idea.

I used to have a '97 Nissan pickup with the 4-banger and a 5-speed tranny. That thing was a blast to drive (and the only time I enjoyed a pickup with a stick). I wish I had never sold the thing.

I have the current Frontier with the V6 and 6spd....it's fun. I think these mid size trucks are a good size. I've had both full size and compact and the midsize is a nice combo of attributes of each. I'm consistantly in the 18s in mixed driving and I've seen 23 or so at 65 on the highway (with a bed cover).

I have to agree. I happen to like bigger, and always will. However, the main reason the Dakota hasn't been a big seller is because it's 3/4 the size of the Ram, but commands the same prices, and gets the same economy. I remember the mid 80's D-50 well. I drove a Mitsu pickup with a turbo-deisel, which was the same truck, for the military around 1990. It was a blast to drive, hauled everything I needed to haul, and probably got 30+mpg with the 5-speed trans. I drove the thing everywhere for two weeks before I had to fuel.
 
Deisel tech will get cheaper over the next ten years, as it will become part of the way forward in the auto industry. It has to be, as it's one of the few existing technologies that offers decent economy without having to resort to millions of dollars of research and development in alternate drivelines. The only part that will not get cheaper is the fuel, which will only get more expensive as demand increases.

One point most people miss is that pickups are not good at transporting dry goods or tools (especially if you want to keep them!). There is a huge gap in the market for a commercial rated minivan since the demise of the Astro and Aerostar. My company is currently looking to replace 2 Astros and 2 pickups (that includes my 2007 Ranger).
  Bring on the Euro vans big and small but keep them diesel.