Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Toyota Tacoma vs. Ford Ranger, Part XII



  • keith24keith24 Posts: 93
    "Keith, I will say this. You obviously care nothing for longevity or quality (which was my main
    point). I see this from your buying a Chevy."

    For starters, I don't see any quality or longevity issues w/ my truck. Sorry you're of this opinion. Granted, my F-I-L's '98 silverado blew a trans @ 62,000 miles for no apparent reason. It didn't pull a trailer, nor did it haul anything heavier than pool cleaning equipment. Go figure...However, his '91 silverado had over 300,000 miles on it when he sold it. Only problem was the A/C compressor locked up right after it rolled over 300,000. THAT WAS IT!! Would that be considered bad? I don't know where you're from, but around here, we'd consider that pretty darn good!

    My trucks got 65,000 miles on it, 32,000 of which I put on it. I hunt, and am outdoors a good portion of the time. With my truck. My truck doesn't rattle. It'll squeak every now and then. But when you go where I go, I don't care WHAT it is you drive, it's gonna squeak a little when you get it twisted up just right. Don't believe me? I'd be happy to let you follow me down "3 Sister" getting into Little Grassy to duck hunt. Just be sure you bring your own chain or tow strap. You'll need it. I guarantee it. 100%.

    Now, do you have THAT MUCH of an inferiority complex about your truck that you have to berate & belittle others simply for what they bought? Is this a justification thing for you?

    Does it make you feel like you've done something when you berate others? I was like that once. IN JUNIOR HIGH!

  • I've never owned a Toyota, but many Ford products. Ford through the years has put much more effort into covering up their blunders, from the exploding pinto up to their over easy explorers. Shame on you Ford telling customers to run tires at 26 lbs. The repair staff is just as guilty and inept. If ever a company should be put out of business, it's this one. This is more than a debate about quality. Ford, as always seems to put the profits over customer relations, and safety. I can't admire Ford about much of anything. I wish I could, but I've had enough of the way they do business. The only thing worse than their quality is their attitude. Good luck to all Ford customers, you'll need it, plus a good life ins. policy
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    I would need a tow strap, I've got a Prerunner. However, anyone will tell you that a compact with same tires as a fullsize will out mud the big trucks. Lighter is better. I gotta locker in mine and it helps alot, still can't steer all that well though. You have had good luck with the trucks. If I was gonna get a 1/2 ton truck, I'd be all over the z71s, Ive wanted one forever. My dad has an old sierra, and he's had decent luck with it. They are good trucks. What I base my comment on is just the amounts of recalls, problems I've read about on here, and stuff like that. Chevy just doesn't have a good rep for that. I hate it as much as you. Those engines they use knock like sin, trannies have trouble, and many other things.

    Whoa, I just read the last part of your post. Ouch man, sorry I came across as so harsh. I would consider a trade with you right now, honestly. You replied to my comment about quality: Ranger vs. Taco. So I came with a refute. Get used to it if you're gonna hang around here. But to say that Chevy's rep. for quality even holds a candle to Toyota's would be a lie. My dad will tell you the same thing, but he still will never buy anything but Silverados and Sierras. My apologies, man.

    On a lighter note. If you invite me duck hunting one more time, I might show up on your doorstep one frigid Dec. morning with my Browning raring to go. I love to hunt more than anything. Never been duck hunting, though, I just love the deer too much. What state are you in? I'm in MS.
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    keith, take it easy man. sads an okay dude. he just loves his truck like everyone else does. nothing wrong with that. and you have to admit, gm products aren't the most reliable when compared to fords or toyotas.

    sad- only thing ford doesn't offer that toyota does option-wise is a locker. big deal, those are easy to obtain. any other options are just luxuries that one can have with a ford, and not with a toyota. so if toyota offers an in-dash cd changer next year on their all new tacoma, you gonna dismiss it too? what if it has a built in clock, wouldn't that be an advance in toyotas technology? hehe

    dunkmydonut- what does "ford or toyota" have to do with what you posted? you sound like a person who is posting currently on here and conjured up a new user name to help support your effort. oh, and i had an explorer with firestone tires, it says right on the door to put 30 lbs in all four. whoever put in 26, didn't read the build tag.
  • modvptnlmodvptnl Posts: 1,352
    test where they compared a '98 toy prerunner, S10, Ranger and Dakota.

    What was interesting was the order of finish was Dodge, Ranger, toy then S10.

    The old Ranger push rod 4.0 was fastest empty by .2 seconds and second to the toy with 800 pounds by .2 seconds(so much for the torque theory) and the Ranger stopped the best. Guess them toy brakes are WEAK!!! LOL!!!

    Funny how this test gets lost by the toy fanatics
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    that 5-spd automatic tranny they put in the older 4.0's starting in '97 really helped that engine. and as far as (my) torque theory, the old 4.0 only had 5 lb/ft over the 3.4, but hey, its still more. lots of factors to consider, axle ratios, tires, air pressure, tranny, driver. and i also believe that ford brakes are second to none.
  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    I wonder if Toy has upgraded the brakes since '98. I've read 2 different compact pickup reviews in the last 2 years and in each of them the tacoma has the shortest stopping distance.
  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    not that Ford is entirely without fault in the whole firestone tire debacle, but.... if you remember GoodYear defended Ford by stating that they also recommend 26psi in their 235/75/15 AT's that were in many explorers. (fyi: the goodyear equipped Explorers had no tread separation problems.)
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    catpoint reviews actually show that Ranger outstops Tacoma by about 5 feet average. Its ok. Mod is still carrying his memories of the Silverado vs. Tundra fight.
    And the old Ranger can outrun Prerunner all it wants: Prerunners never came with manual transmissions. Manual tranny beats auto every day.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    I think I agree with you 100% about the clock, tbunder -- quite possibly the most ridiculous quirk I have ever heard of. Don't use this against us, but Tacos had square cup holders for a couple of years. LOL. Some things leave me feeling rather confused. I thought that it had long been an accepted fact on here that the Ranger was available with a bigger choice of options. That is sort of vague comparison between the two, so I guess the argument of mine was not a very clear one, either.

    The racing contest that included the Prerunner -- were the other trucks normal 2xs? I can guarantee that they did not have 31 inch tires. Much less they are lower to the ground. Just to show how insignificant that test was, a 4.3L, low-to-the ground Extreme would smoke any of em. Its not fair to post stuff like that when no one knows how each of the trucks was set up. Lemme race any of em with the same tires, gears, and height in my prerunner and the story will be different, I would think. That DOHC is something special, and I like Toyota for the fact that they went the extra mile and used technology to make a comparable motor out of such a smaller block.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    Be careful posting stuff like that. LOL
  • kbtoyskbtoys Posts: 62
    I know that we can't use magazines as reliable sources but did anybody check out this years consumer reports automobiles. It showed overall that the Tacoma was the best in compact pickup while the Ranger was in the poor section.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    about Consumer Report testing. They showed a Taco DoubleCab vs. Ford SportTrac, going up the rock cropping CR has setup for testing. Taco made it up without any problems, SportTrac spinned and smoked tires, and barely got up there.
    Two trucks, same course, same driver. Hmm.
  • kbtoyskbtoys Posts: 62
    The sports track was the worst of all the pickups according to CR
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    sport trac vs tacoma? are you guys insane? now that's a fair comparison. the funny thing about cr is that one year they'll rank a vehicle in the good or excellent category, like the ford explorer which is considered to be bulletproof by cr, but the next year they'll call the same vehicle poor or to avoid it. and it's the same overall vehicle with no changes at all. its just a magazine that changes its tune each year to sell magazines. nothing like the real world. luckily people don't believe everything they read, if they did, ranger wouldn't outsell everything else year in and year out.

    but for the sport-trac to go exactly the same place a tacoma could is pretty awesome, considering that thing is a four-door explorer with a bed. really, it makes the taco look bad when the sport-trac could climb the same section as a taco. sport-trac has crappy tires, no locker, lower ground clearance, lower approach/departure angles, no off-road suspension, and it still went where the taco did. we all know which truck had more power though.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    SportTrac is the only viable alternative to Taco DC, isn't it? What else would you compare a DoubleCab to?
    As for power......yeah right.
    Ford SportTrac Curb Weight:
    2WD: 4100-4300 lbs (Choice, Premium)
    4WD: 4300 lbs (Choice, Premium)

    Now compare that to 3700 lbs weight of Tacoma DC. I'd say that 20hp or 20 lbs/ft of torque is far from enough to make up for the weight difference.
  • Is the Sport Trac the Ranger? No. Is that the closest thing to a "compact" crew cab truck from Ford? Sure. Must be the same power in a Ranger is just too much for ya.

    But if you want to argue crew cab in other Ford Vehicles, I'd like to remind you of which vehicle that is on topic with this forum that offers standard air conditioning, ABS brakes and available V6 in a regular cab. How about 4 doors on a non crew cab model? How about the 2-4 extra inches of room in every direction? How about 200 pounds of extra payload? How about edmunds's consumer ratings showing 8.7 for the Sport trac and 8.1 for the Tacoma crew cab?

    Also, lest you forget, that's 20 PEAK hp, or torque at a full 600 less RPM(3000 VS 3600). Cubic inches will help you out in RPMS closer to Idle, and these peak numbers only support that. More cubic inches also respond better to upgrades and mods, than smaller engines.
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    i never said anything about which is faster. who cares in trucks. i said more power. but you got a point, the sport-trac is heavier, which only provides added protection in a crash. and you already proved that it can go anywhere a taco dc can go, right?

    also, those dakota crew cabs with that sweet 4.7 are pretty cool. not to mention the nissan crew cab 4x4 for barely over $20K loaded up. both of these trucks undercut any toyota by thousands.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    The test that was shown was a simple rock bed, with concrete and rocks. SportTrac failed to take that hill comfortably, so no, it will not go anywhere a Taco DC will.
    The added weight may or may not provide additional protection in a crash. Unless that added weight are the safety features, it probably won't. Heavier vehicle carries higher energy than a lighter vehicle at the same speed. Therefore it takes a lot more to stop the heavier one. At a headon impact with a wall, for example, either the wall or the truck have got to give in, and it usually ends up being the truck. On the other hand, if SportTrac runs into some other small vehicle like Honda CRV, you can kiss the Honda goodbye.
    Heavier weight only plays part if your truck is heavier than the other one.
    Either NHTSA or IIHS have tested the fullsize trucks before, and Tundra came out on top. In the same tests, F150 came in last. That does not give any support to "Heavier is safer" that you are trying to say here.

    And who cares about Dakota and Nissan CrewCab? This was about a Ford and Toyota, and you are changing the subject away from that. Dakota may be powerful, but from what I heard they go through engines like peanuts. And Nissan...well, lets just say that "Supercharged 210hp V6" may have sounded great 10 years ago, but now it sounds like a joke.
This discussion has been closed.