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



  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    well, i own a '97 mystique with a zetec 16V 4. it has 103,000 miles on it, still has the original exhaust system on it. has never had a muffler and it also still has the original timing belt (can you say playing with fire?). this car is the most dependable automobile (since my '84 mercury capri rs i drove when i was a kid and still have) that i have had in my possession and it still gets close to 30 mpg. so much for long-term poor quality at fomoco. i generally believe that if you take care of any automobile, it will go 200K at least.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    Vince8!! already.. Yes, I took some time away from this room because it was, and still is, the same thing over and over again.... Rangers are junk, Rangers can't offroad, Rangers can't tow, Rangers fall apart... same old stuff from the Toyota crowd. I still own my Ranger and also own an Escape now.
    Saddaddy, you are talking to the wrong person when claiming I don't know anything about offroading.. I know plenty. I don't do it as much now because my kids are in Soccer, vollyball, softball, music... UGH! no time.. Ranger is running great, not one problem.. Although a buddy of mind broke my center console by leaning on it too hard... I replaced it myself.. I just thought I would come back for a quick visit and shake the cage a bit... As I used to say... See you in the Cascades!!
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    Sorry for making the assumption, just seemed that kinda stupid to come bad mouthing these trucks when you spend all your time at boards about vehicles with independent suspension all the way around. Couldn't resist. Where did you get the "Rangers can't tow, Rangers fall apart"? I am pretty sure that those AREN'T arguments we have used. Those are the ones WE TAKE. LOL. Towing capacity is something that Ranger has the higher rating on and no one denies that. Might wanna get your facts straight b4 you put words in our mouths.

    This is a free country, you can say what you want. But I would like to express that this discussion has become very civil - much more so than it sounds like you are used to. However, I am not gonna judge you like that. I got lots of respect for the Ford owners here b/c they are mature and not asses - I hope they would say the same for me. I just ask that you follow the lead of everyone else. Don't flame anyone b/c you disagree and crap like that, cuz we all try not to. Like I said, maybe I am all wrong about you. If so, sorry. But please don't make this place a nightmare. Have a great Easter weekend!
  • frey44frey44 Posts: 230
    ...with a Toyota engine and powertrain. The ideal small truck. A great 4 door cab with a motor and driveshaft that won't vibrate you to death. Even better, stuff that new allowy inline GM straight six into a Ranger. WOW !
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    I don't know, but what was the problem with Trailblazers? I remember hearing that they were stalling after 6 month, was it an engine problem, or something else?
    I will take Tacoma looks (even 2002 grill. I like 1996 more, but new grill is nice) over Ranger anytime. People say the grill is funky...fine. It looked funky to me at first, but I don't have any problems with it now.
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    i think the ranger has it all over the tacoma in front end looks when fitted with real tires. my truck just plain kicked [non-permissible content removed] looking at it from eye level with the BFG's sticking out. those lights, the honeycomb grille, and the nice chrome bumper with fog lights and gigantic tow hooks sticking out just looks tough. i like the toyota front end, but it just isn't as tough looking as the ranger. it needs fog lights and some real tow hooks. nonetheless though, the hood is sexy and i like the overall layout of the trd package. the white looks best imo, with the black trim. the trd's tires are cheap though. id rather have the goodyears even though their traction ability isn't as good. those rugged trails are only like $50 from tire rack. the FX4's factory BFG's just plain rule though imo. if i had a trd or any off-road non fx4 ranger, the first thing i'd do is put on some BFG a/t's.

    frey- no thx on the 3.4. with lower horsepower and torque, and the timing BELT, no way. that new SOHC 4.0 is a powerhouse and just plain runs. also, not knocking the tacoma, but look under both the ranger and tacoma- the driveshafts on the toyota look like pencils compared to the shafts on ranger 4.0's. if it vibrates, then there is something out of whack. my ranger never vibrated, anyways up to around 90 anyways. i go 65 and it was smooth as silk, but NVH was improved in '01's.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Well, so do other Ranger owners who don't have "real tires" miss out on everything?
    The lights are fine on my taco...I don't like chrome crap, makes things look cheap. As for towhooks: we hide ours underneath until we need them, instead of advertising to everyone.
    I got a westin lights bar upfront with 2 Hella 500s on it, is that tough enough?
    As far as tires go: TRD is an all-purpose package. It's not a specialized FX4 package, a lot more people have it, and not everyone may need 33x12.5x15 BFG MTs on their trucks. Those look absolutely kickass on a Taco with 3" body lift and 3" susp. lift. TRD is simply a step away from onroad and into offroad. Gives you a jump start, so to speak.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    saying much of anything in this room. I know my Ranger has been reliable at 52,000 miles and some severe offroading in the Cascade mountains to the deserts of Eastern Oregon to the coast range mountains , its never let me down. I own a 1998 4.0 XLT S/C 4wd with a 3.73 limited slip rear end. I have the stepside package and offroad pkg along with some all terrain 265's. Nope, I'm done with this room. My Ranger has proven to be the best value for my money and I would buy another one in a heart beat.. See you in the Cascades!
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    dont get so defensive. i think i started my whole post out as "in my opinion". as in this is my opinion. anyways, yes the toyota has projection style lights, but they still don't offer fog lights. who wants to go out and buy off-road lights just cuz toyota doesn't equip their trucks with projection fog lights like ranger gets?

    the "real tires" are anything other than factory, even your trd tires aren't what i consider "real tires". those rugged trails are as cheap as they come. i like the FX4 cuz they equip it with LT rated all-terrain 31's. yes the regular off-road ranger has goodyear's on it, but i think they are better than the rugged trails for everyday usage. anyways, they're more at i would think the two are probably the same as far as off-road worthiness go. neither one are aggressive at all.

    you said you don't like chrome crap, so i assume you have the color keyed sr5 pkg. i happen to like chrome bumpers, you do have a chrome rear bumper unless you changed that too.

    the hella is a good choice and i bet it looks tough, but again those are really expensive. and on the ranger, my 2001 anyways, i wouldn't have wanted to hide the honeycomb grille and cool lights with an aftermarket item.

    im trying to figure out what you meant by saying that the trd isn't as specialized as the FX4 package. are you serious? i thought you equaled the trd with the fx4.

    last but not least is tow hooks. i hope you aren't claiming that the toyota tow hooks are as good as ford's (ford's are twice as beefy and more convenient). and please don't tell me you'd rather crawl around under a truck in the mud or snow to attach a tether when that time comes when you need pulled out. i find the convenience of towhooks right out of the frame built in with the bumper is extremely convenient. my explorer sport didn't have these and when my dad had to pull me out of a snow bank (with a SD V10) when my wife slid it off the road, it wasn't fun attaching it under the truck. either way, the toyota's probably serve their purpose. but the FX4's towhook in the back is a step above the toyota's none. and it can be mounted on any ranger too. again, not knocking the toy, just saying what i believe to be advantageous about the ranger's towhooks.

    one more thing- im not a lift it type of person. if it ain't factory, it ain't sh7r imo. i leave everything alone, i may change tires (i did), shocks or anything one couldn't tell. but i would no way ruin a perfectly good truck like the fx4, zr2, trd, any new truck with a lift, especially a fake one like a body lift. again, jmo.
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    welcome back. i guess you're a type of martyr here, eh?
    one thing, are you sure you're accurate on your rear-end ratio? i believe all factory off-road packages since they come out in '98 for ranger were 4.10's. maybe you changed your gearing. just wondering.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    I'm also just stating my opinion.

    Here's the pics for my truck:

    It's a colorkey SR5 package, with everything silver, except mirrors (color-keyed mirrors were discontinued). No chrome whatsoever.

    BFG Trails may be cheap and crappy, but were they were tires that 4x4 mag used in the tests? Lets put it this way....they do the job well.

    TRD is not the ultimate offroad package. It's more or less as far as Toyota might be willing to go to provide some basis for comfortable offroading without putting the onroad performance at risk. If you want more functionality, do the mods yourself. The market for it is huge.
  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    actually I think the Tacoma does have foglights. I agree with you about the tow hooks, though. toyota should have added one in back. oh well, it's a pretty easy (and cheap) mod nonetheless.
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    those lights you see are turn signals and parking lights. they fool though. maybe on the s-runner they're fogs, but not on 4x4's. the towhooks (are there even two up front?) are weak when compared to the ford's.
    scorp- sweet truck.

    FX4 is only ranger to get rear two hook stock. its just a place on the frame though, so one can be bolted up anytime.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    Yes, I have a 3.73 limited slip diff.. I ordered my Ranger from the factory this way, with offroad pkg.
    I just wish Ford would wake up and put some better tires on their Rangers. At least they got rid of those damn Firejunkers.. :-)
  • allknowingallknowing Posts: 866
    You only need tow hooks if you get stuck. Consequently, Toyota didn't have to make them as heavy duty as the perpetually stuck Fords. Maybe it's all that "jumping" that you Ranger guys do???
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    you know i try to make this convo civil, and then i get a totally intelligent response like that from you. but its good to see that you actually notice one thing on the ford that is more heavy duty than the toyota. keep looking, and you'll notice the tiny frame dimensions on the tacoma, not to mention the pencil sized driveshafts compared to ranger's.

    one more thing- what's "jumping" got to do with using towhooks? still wondering on that one.

    scape2- with all due respect (don't get pissed, i just like to get to the bottom of things), im wondering how you got ford to build you an off-road equipped truck with only 3.73's. the standard is 4.10's with no option otherwise. are you sure on this? cuz if so, it'd make for one very rare ranger model. i'd check your build tag on the driver door. also, what do you think of the awesome 4.0 SOHC going in the ranger now?
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    You got me?? I just walked into a Ford Dealership in 1998 and went through the list for the Ranger. I did not want 4.10 because of MPG reasons and I wasn't going to tow anything heavy anyway.. The paperwork I got was a print out from the Dealership showing a 3.73 rearend ratio. Might they have pulled a fast one on me...
    I think the 4.0 SOHC was a very good response to the Toyota 3.4 along with the Chevy 4.3 in terms of HP/Torque. I know the Toyota crowd hates this but.. the HP/Torque curve on the Ranger is better for truck use.. You don't have to rev the heck out of the engine to get the torque you need and it comes faster also. Of course I wish I could have this engine in my 98 Ranger.. The 160HP and push-rod technology is getting old.. A new Ranger may be in order in about 3 years.
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    the older 4.0 is growing gray, but remember, torque makes a truck work. and your 4.0 still has more torque than the toyota 3.4.

    you may want to check your msrp window sticker, it will tell you what gear ratio you have. also, on your build tag it will say.

    it really isn't a big deal. i just thought that if you did have a factory 3.73 off-roader, that'd be pretty cool. of course, no one else on earth would really give two hoots, but people like us truck fanatics do care.

    im looking at a new jeep liberty sport right now with the new 3.7 liter, it has 4.10's in it too. it is faster than the SOHC'D ranger i had. it runs hard. later
  • allknowingallknowing Posts: 866
    Why do you think that Consumer Reports picked the Tacoma as the most reliable compact truck from 1994 - 2001? Do you think Toyota paid them off?
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    dont know, dont care. i guess the people that matter didn't read those issues did they? you always fall back on those magazines dont you?

    also, the tacoma did not exist in '94 "ALLKNOWING".
This discussion has been closed.