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



  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    stang: I'm telling you guys what you told us couple of month ago. Bundys' big arguement was that "hundreds of thousands of owners can't be wrong". Well, same goes for Toyota.

    tbunder: Supercharger is something that pushes limits of a vehicle. It puts higher load on the engine, transmission and drivetrain. Therefore, if one were to install a charger and use it to full potential, one would have to take certain precautionary steps to ensure that vehicle continues to perform properly. Toyota increased injector size in 2001+ models specifically because people were buying up TRD charger and were complaining of ping. Silverado knocks fresh out of factory. Tacoma doesn't do that. With Silverado, it's crappy design, with Tacoma, it's not a bad design, but it happened because when 3.4L was designed, supercharger for it did not exist. When 2nd gen superchargers came out, Toyota fixed the ping problem. Yes, it's a short term fix (since they'd only be produced for 4 years), but hey, thats exactly what your 207hp engine is: a short-term fix.

    It does not take a charger to surpass 4.0L power output, there are cheaper ways to do that. Headers, for one, would do the trick easily, without costing 2K. And a tacoma with a charger not just "surpasses Ford pickup in power", it blows it away. Just how much power gain does unwarrantied supercharger provide for Ford? Wouldn't that be fun.....those lockers would have imploded right in the dealers' parking lots :)

    Escape was mentioned to make a point: Ford seems to always hurry to fill a void in markets by putting out a half-finished model, and then issuing recalls over the next 2 years. Yes, sounds great on paper, but it's sad in reality.

    If you don't want to start anything in the future, don't make sarcastic posts. I was telling that guy exactly what would happen. I guess it is rare in Ford camp. And lets say this: my respect for Ford has not risen any.

    sad: The army officials don't want to be charged with terrorism and saboutage for using Ford and Chevy :) Imagine army having to send trucks back to dealerships replace rear axles because lockers imploded.
  • On the percentage of supercharged 3.4l's vs naturally aspired 3.4l's in Tacomas. I would bet that a great majority are N/A. So why would Toyota install larger injectors into all v6 Tacomas, if it only solved supercharged pinging(which in your own words, is about 10% of all supercharged applications)? In the nature of statistics, the injector upgrade sounds funny when defined as a fix that only applies to a fraction of a fraction of 3.4l owners. Why not just make the injectors part of the supercharger kit?

    It would seem the blanket injector upgrade would apply to an issue with the 3.4l itself, either a problem or enhancement to it's operation.

    Car and driver recently published an article on the "American Iron" or North American full size trucks. If the Silverado has such a bad design, why would it rank 2nd over the Tundra(3rd). The Dodge ram came in first, with the f-150 in 4th place. The silverado has a dated exterior, but has one of the most refined, civilized ride, some decent power, and one of the best fuel economies in the genre. The silverado does NOT knock from the factory. My father and my boss both own a 2002 extended cab with vortec v8. Both are smooth as butter, and has a nice feel from the ride, even in the back seat.

    "sad: The army officials don't want to be charged with terrorism and saboutage for using Ford and Chevy :) Imagine army having to send trucks back to dealerships replace rear axles because lockers imploded."
    "If you don't want to start anything in the future, don't make sarcastic posts. "

    I take it you wanted to start something?

    Lastly it is a fools debate to say simply headers on a Toyota 3.4l would surpass the Ford 4.0l in stock trim. If you are going to update one engine, the other should have the same benefit.

    saddady, nice tacoma picks. Maybe the armed forces wanted a crew cab? That's why you don't see any Rangers... :)
  • gringo1gringo1 Posts: 67
    What should I have done to my 92 Toy 4X4 pickup before going to Mexico?

    160,000 miles. Replaced new clutch, new water pump, timing belt already.

    Also, what spares should I bring along with me?

    I will be gone two years.


  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    Im not trying to renig here or anything, but I will speak for myself in saying to not hold me to any of the percentages I speak of. I am just giving a guesstimate at best.

    The Car and Drive part -- go back a few years and you will see that they simply always go with the newest in most of their comparos. I think the Tundra won its first year (how, I have no idea) in a similar contest. As far as the Silverados, some do knock from the factory as I have learned from browsing the topics here. Most don't however, and my dad just bought a new one which I do like to a certain extent. It does have a few problems at its 4 month age, which is not sitting well with my opinion of the trucks. Smooth does describe them well, though.

    As far as the army pics, I wasn't trying to put down the Ranger (not sure if it sounded that way). I read a document from a military newspaper, that said they just wanted to use Yotas cuz they blend in better. Take that for what its worth. There have been stories of some leaving the country with gun turrets, ungodly roll bars and lots more. Sounds pretty cool. Have a good lunch! l8rs
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Well, true, I have no idea why they went with bigger injectors on 2001s. But I haven't heard of anyone having problems with 2000- Tacomas b/c of smaller ones. They definitely don't ping when N/A.

    Car and Driver: I wonder how it would look to readers if winner of an "American Iron" contest was a Nip truck. While not all Silverados knock, why do I need seeing posts in edmunds from different people on the topic? It can't be a massive conspiracy by other automakers.

    And lastly: tbunder said that it's sad that Toyota needs a 2K supercharger to beat Fords' 4.0L power. I told him that it doesn't. Headers would do just fine to bring the 3.4L to the same output.
  • smgillessmgilles Posts: 252
    Scorp: I have been doing research in my Haynes/Chilton and other Toy mechanical books and it appears as if the injectors are the same size. I think the reason why people with 95-00's have more pinging is do to their ECUs.

    My 2001 hardly ever pings (I have heard it twice in two years) and when it did I was around 1500 rpms under a heavy load. I now have 25,000 miles on my S/C and 35,000 on the truck and have not had ANY problems with the charger or the truck. Also, there is no need to to re-do the valve body. My tranny is just as firm as it was pre-S/C, just put a heavy duty cooler and put synthetic fluid in the tranny and flush every 40-50,000 miles. As far as cutting engine longevity in half...I have to disagree whole heartedly. With proper maintenance and care it will be just fine, but I guess when I turn a 100,000 I will let you all know if my engine self-combusts:) All I can say is that it is absolutely the best mod I have ever done to my truck, the SAWs are a close second.

    Tbunder: TRD tells you that you have to run 92 octane or the next best thing. The higher octane burns slower, therefore reducing pre-detonation. Nissan tells you the exact thing. They will also give you a smaller pulley that will eliminate all ping, but lowers the boost. The charger gives you the best of both worlds, the truck is as quick 90% of cars on the road and can still go just about anywhere I desire. As far as price w/charger becoming $27-$28,000 I think you better find a new dealership to buy from. I paid $21,000 out the door for the Toy. and paid $1800 for the charger. To bad you still didn't have "new" 4.0. I would be glad to show you the difference between 207hp and 265hp:)

    Stang: The horror stories I have read here on edmunds and gmpistonslap are enough to prevent me from buying a chevy for a long time.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Really? It's seem that getting a SplitSecond unit could be cheaper than buying Supra injectors and putting them on. As for tranny stuff: I'm rephrasing info that Gadget posts on his site.
    We'll see when you turn 100K: I think that adding load on drivetrain would wear it out faster. Of course, it's one thing when you use charger to pass someone on a freeway once a month, and another if you race from every light and stop sign.
    Lucky buy on the charger for $1800: I heard they got more expensive, or was it the new iForce charger?
  • smgillessmgilles Posts: 252
    I bought my almost 2 years ago and they were much cheaper. I bought my from James Rogriquez at and paid no shipping. I am glad I bought it now, because the cheapest I have seen lately is $2300. Knowing what I know now I would still pay that much for it. I have read gadget's site a million times and think the 4runner tranny is "softer" than the Tacomas.
  • Plain and simple.
  • frey44frey44 Posts: 230
    I own a 2000 XLT 4x4, 4.0 5 speed auto. This truck varies from crap (when something goes awry) to decent (when the windshield wipers work). If you want quality, buy a Toyota. If you want a cheap truck at less cost, buy a Ranger or S10. However, be forwarned that the depreciation on a Ranger will KILL you. The price of a Ranger will drop like the proverbial rock. Buy a new one for 22K and a year later be happy to get 17K. Good luck.
  • marklomarklo Posts: 2
    at the comments that are continually posted in here. I know it's a Ranger vs. Tacoma message board, but good grief. I've come to realize, diehard Ranger owners, will never like Tacomas, and visa versa. I'll continue to come in here for a quick chuckle..."Mine is better than yours!" LOL! ;-)

  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    lmao. intelligent, real intelligent.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    and I am proud to say that I do not believe that Rangers are crap and that they are pretty nice trucks. Wow, this therapy stuff really worx! Happy monday everyone.
  • I wouldn't own a Ranger if someone bought it for me. I used to sell cars, and every Ranger we sold was ugly (inside and out), made of cheap materials, and the engine sounded like metal grinding metal.

    I have NO problems with S-10's. Better built in my opinion. If I had to have a cheap work truck, I would get one.

    Oh yeah, and I really like the Ranger Prerunner package....Oh what is that you say? There is no such thing (No, the "Edge" package does not count)??

  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    certain people here think that prerunners are sissy trucks. I have been told that in some peoples eyes they aren't even real trucks. Imagine that. IMO, they are one of the smartest ideas borne by truck mfgs. in a long time. I rank the notion right up there with the third doors.
  • I've been looking at the new Edge/"prerunner" line for a while. If only I can find a dealer willing to special order me a 4x2 Regular cab Edge Ranger with 4.0l and a manual transmission, then you can call me sissy boy all you want. You will just probably be saying it to my tail end...
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    obi one k-knownothing is hilarious. he speaks with such intelligence i can't even get through his messages. it's like he knows all about trucks and is teaching us something with each and every worthwhile post. i wished my 2001 "off-road" "207 HORSE SOHC 4.0" "5-SPD AUTO'D EXT. CAB 4-DOOR" ranger was as tight and built as well as my previous two S10 ZR2's in which the back seal leaked all the oil out on one and the other sat for three days in freezing temps for not starting. i also wished my SOHC 4.0 wouldn't have rattled so hard it broke my steering column right off. if only ford could build them like gm. who knows, if ford still used the original ranger chassis that was born back in '83, it MIGHT be as good as the awesome S10 with re-circulating ball steering and ten speed cable operated caliper feel brakes. but the frame on the S10 that dates back to '82 is the thing that puts the S10 trucks ahead of the ranger and everything else in durability and strength.
    if ford would just keep their 207 horse butter smooth SOHC 4.0 out of the ranger and all its technical advancements out of the way, it may outsell the dakota and frontier and maybe someone will show some respect for it. but until it goes to the front in sales, towing capability, power and torque, and price, everyone knows the ranger just can't compete in the compact segment. obi, thanks for the posts. you have taught everyone so much here at edmunds. it's a pleasure to have you post your knowledge. it has enlightened me so much that i await each and every post that starts with OBI.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    I'll have to go back and dig up the post where you said that you liked your ZR2s better than the Ranger. I distinctly remember your saying that you had no problems with them. What is it? I like em both, but Chevys quality in my mind, shrinks everyday.
  • 01taco01taco Posts: 1
    I'm surprised there has not been hardly any reference to the Consumer Reports data. I would think that their data would be reliable. I purchased a 2001 Toyota Tacoma Xtra Cab 4wd, V6 w/manual. I compared my choices of the other similar small trucks with the Tacoma based on Consumer Reports. According to them, the Tacoma has a very good reliable record as it ages. It appears that the Fords and Chevys are less reliable as they age. Of course, I know there are people who are on both sides of the spectrum with the issues of quality vs manufacturer. But I think its hard to dispute Consumer Reports data.
This discussion has been closed.