Mahindra Light Duty Diesel Pickup

Pennsyltucky · #1 04/06/10, 09:59 PM

It looks like this baby will be hitting the US market fairly soon. Finally, there will be a light duty diesel pickup available. :banana02: Not only that, but the two wheel drive will have a 2765 lb payload. Now, the styling isn't as good as it could be, but I guess that will keep the joy riders at bay. I would hate to buy a new vehicle, but this is one I'd give serious consideration to. At 30 mph highway, that might even offset the cost of buying new. Although, they may not be so expensive. Dealer I spoke to suggested price would range fall somewhere between $16,000 and $26,000. What do you folks think? Here's a specs sheet link.

http://www.mahindranc.com/files/Mahindraspecsheet.pdf

salmonslayer · #2 04/06/10, 10:40 PM

I have been following their announcements for a while and I actually like the styling; I am just disappointed that they chose not to offer their manual transmission. I doubt I will ever buy new again but it certainly looks like a viable alternative to the current crop of small pickups and the diesel is a real bonus.

foxtrapper · #3 04/07/10, 06:04 AM

And for 1/4 the price, I can buy a used Toyota diesel. I know which way I would lean.

With big dualie diesels getting upwards of 20+ mpg, with lots of towing capacity and creature comforts, available used and nearly new for a bit less than the Mahindra, I know which way I would lean.

Pennsyltucky · #4 04/07/10, 07:19 AM

Huh, I didn't know Toyota imported diesel pickups to the US. Where do I find one of those??

Bret4207 · #5 04/07/10, 07:39 AM

You look for an early 80's Toy.

edcopp · #6 04/07/10, 08:03 AM

Just pocket change for rich American farmers. Stay tuned.

Jolly · #7 04/07/10, 09:33 AM

Been following this one for awhile. Seems like everytime they almost start to import, something else crops up and the roll-out is delayed.

If they can get the price right and the truck proves to be durable, it's going to be very popular, IMO.

wy_white_wolf · #8 04/07/10, 09:37 AM

Last I heard (last week) they hadn't applied for EPA approval yet. That is usually a 2 month process. This being the first and only small diesel pickup since the LSD it's expected to take longer and it may not pass for Cali or NY.

I'd like to see it on the market for a couple of years before I spend money on it. If it was an established manufaturer here I might not be so skeptical.

beowoulf90 · #9 04/07/10, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pennsyltucky

Huh, I didn't know Toyota imported diesel pickups to the US. Where do I find one of those??

You can also look for an old chevy LUV, they had some that were diesel. I don't remember if it was Mits. or Iz. that built them for Chevy.

HermitJohn · #10 04/07/10, 10:33 AM

Unless you are growing your own fuel, I just dont see any big advantage for a computer controlled diesel. No manual transmission available would kill it right there for my tastes. Can just imagine what an oddball Indian automatic would be like to get repaired. You can get 25 to 30mpg with a 4cyl Ranger, what good is a diesel that gets 30mpg for heck of a lot more money? If it got 50mpg, they hey, bring it on. But even then it would take heck of a lot of miles to break even. And remember the 80s small Toyota, Nissan, and Mitsubishi diesels werent industrial diesels and didnt outlast the same manufacturers gasoline engine by whole lot.

I remember one of my cousins bought a Nissan diesel back in 80s for big premium used. Tranny went and he had to pay some crazy price for a used one out of a salvage yard. They had different bolt pattern than ones for gas engine. He fixed the truck and immediately sold it.

HermitJohn · #11 04/07/10, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beowoulf90

You can also look for an old chevy LUV, they had some that were diesel. I don't remember if it was Mits. or Iz. that built them for Chevy.

Luv = Isuzu
Courier = Mazda
Ram50/Arrow = Mitsubishi

Ranger first came out it offered a diesel option. Not popular by that time but think they first offered Mazda diesel then Mitsubishi diesel. May have that reversed, but they did offer each of them at one point in time.

Pennsyltucky · #12 04/07/10, 11:40 AM

Man, i don't relish the thought of having to buy something 20+ years old just for affordability sake. I'm no mechanic, so older models are probably out of the question for a guy like me. And yeah, kind of a bummer no manual transmission is offered. I'm no fan of automatics, but I supposed Mahindra is trying to keep prices "low" by limiting the number of configurations available. I am disappointed with how many "frills" come in the standard package. I have no use for electric locks and mirrors, motorized headlights, premium stereo, etc. I reckon they could have priced it in the 13-16k range without the added junk. Although, I am fairly impressed with the payload and long bed. In my book, the greater hauling capacity gives it a huge advantage over other light pickups that poo poo any time you want to move some dirt or gravel. I dunno, I guess we'll see how they perform in the coming years if Mahindra follows through and begins to import.

Gary in ohio · #13 04/07/10, 12:23 PM

They have been saying SOON in 2008..... I am on the waiting list for a test drive but with so many variables, cost, mpg, dealerships Ill wait till I have more info before even considering.

beowoulf90 · #14 04/07/10, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HermitJohn

Luv = Isuzu
Courier = Mazda
Ram50/Arrow = Mitsubishi

Ranger first came out it offered a diesel option. Not popular by that time but think they first offered Mazda diesel then Mitsubishi diesel. May have that reversed, but they did offer each of them at one point in time.

Thanks, I couldn't remember which one it was. I just remember them...

salmonslayer · #15 04/07/10, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Unless you are growing your own fuel, I just dont see any big advantage for a computer controlled diesel.

Good point, this is one of the reasons I am happy with my old F-250 with a 6.9 IDI...I just need basic tools to work on it.

ginnie5 · #16 04/07/10, 05:03 PM

Volkswagon also had a diesel truck. Early 80's I think. It was a Rabbit.

o&itw · #17 04/07/10, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HermitJohn

Unless you are growing your own fuel, I just dont see any big advantage for a computer controlled diesel. No manual transmission available would kill it right there for my tastes. Can just imagine what an oddball Indian automatic would be like to get repaired. You can get 25 to 30mpg with a 4cyl Ranger, what good is a diesel that gets 30mpg for heck of a lot more money? If it got 50mpg, they hey, bring it on. But even then it would take heck of a lot of miles to break even. And remember the 80s small Toyota, Nissan, and Mitsubishi diesels werent industrial diesels and didnt outlast the same manufacturers gasoline engine by whole lot.

I remember one of my cousins bought a Nissan diesel back in 80s for big premium used. Tranny went and he had to pay some crazy price for a used one out of a salvage yard. They had different bolt pattern than ones for gas engine. He fixed the truck and immediately sold it.

Huh?..... I've got a 97 Ranger 4cyl with a manual 4 speed.....I've had it tuned up twice in the last 5 years, and there is no way it gets 25 to 30 miles a gallon, unless it is downhill in the Rockies. Not to mention, except for maybe the engine, it is a piece of junk. Friends don't seem to get any better gas mileage than I do.

I bought it used...got it instead of the Toyota because it had an extended cab, and my wife wanted that.... poor decision on my part.

If you want a P/U and not a suburban toy..... don't buy a Ranger.

HermitJohn · #18 04/07/10, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by o&itw

Huh?..... I've got a 97 Ranger 4cyl with a manual 4 speed.....I've had it tuned up twice in the last 5 years, and there is no way it gets 25 to 30 miles a gallon, unless it is downhill in the Rockies. Not to mention, except for maybe the engine, it is a piece of junk. Friends don't seem to get any better gas mileage than I do.

I bought it used...got it instead of the Toyota because it had an extended cab, and my wife wanted that.... poor decision on my part.

If you want a P/U and not a suburban toy..... don't buy a Ranger.

They only offered a 4spd manual in the most basic model and then only for couple years when they first introduced it in early 1980s. Only manual tranny offered in 90s was a 5 spd.

I have driven elderly friends early 90s (think it was a '91) Ranger 2wd, with 4cyl and 5 spd. It got 25mpg, but then it had close to 200k miles on it. And it could carry 1000 pounds feed on it without too much problem though stiffer springs and lower first gear would have been nice. The 30mpg came after they dropped the LIMA engine and went to the newer 4cyl in the 2000's. And no if you insist on going 80mph uphill in 2nd gear, you probably wont get 30mpg or even 25mpg. But then if you have lead foot and actually want to go fast you need a BIG thirsty engine anyway. Thats why they make BIG trucks with BIG engines.

Want notion of stupid, it was that little 2.8L V6 that was originally in MY '84 4wd Ranger. 14mpg and I tuned it every which way!!!! My old 4wd F250 can get 13mpg if driven with a light foot and I am not in a hurry. When I replaced the little V6 in RAnger with an old 300 inline six, mileage went up to 16mpg. I think that can be improved on though I mainly wanted to be able to keep up with traffic on hills, wasnt worried so much about milage. The big six accomplished that goal!!!! The little V6 was just dangerous in traffic it was so underpowered.

PhilJohnson · #19 04/07/10, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by o&itw

Huh?..... I've got a 97 Ranger 4cyl with a manual 4 speed.....I've had it tuned up twice in the last 5 years, and there is no way it gets 25 to 30 miles a gallon, unless it is downhill in the Rockies. Not to mention, except for maybe the engine, it is a piece of junk. Friends don't seem to get any better gas mileage than I do.

I bought it used...got it instead of the Toyota because it had an extended cab, and my wife wanted that.... poor decision on my part.

If you want a P/U and not a suburban toy..... don't buy a Ranger.

Here in the flatlands of Wisconsin my friend had an 88 Ranger that he drove for years that got 28-30 mpg. I would never get a 4x4 Ranger with a 4 cylinder or one with an automatic. A manual transmission with 2wd is the only way to go with these puppies. About the only advantage I can see with a Toyota over a Ranger is that when (and here in the Rust Belt it is when not if) the frame breaks in half Toyota will give you blue book value of your truck in good condition

The only small trucks I would consider buying are those with 2wd, four cylinders, and manual transmissions. Any other type of drivetrain in a small truck is a waste of gas. My 83 F-250 diesel usually gets around 20 mpg and it has the added advantage of being able to run on drain oil. The amount of gas being used compared to what a small truck can carry is inefficient when compared to a fullsize.

I like the new Mahindra truck but I think it is priced a little too high for something being sold by a previously unheard of company here in the US.

Jim-mi · #20 04/07/10, 07:34 PM

I'm curious of the quality/reputation of the Mahindra tractors . .?

For those buying a "Lister" diesel clone out of India . .they say tear it apart and clean out the casting sand........then it will run a long time.

wanted real bad a friends VW Rabit pu (80's) . . .but after using a shoe horn to get myself behind the wheel . . .not such a good idea.....

My Chev 6.5 is running real good on our veggie oil fuel . . . . . .so I guess I'll wait and let you all de bug the Mahindra.....when and if....