Howdy, Stranger!

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

Ford Ranger vs Toyota Tacoma



  • Ok, pluto, this debate is getting silly. Care to bring out your other persona Yoda, the one who appeared and accused me falsely of copyrighted pictures? That's right, falsely. And what about shock absorbers? You have yet to provide proof that they are a major design flaw in a Ranger. That was just a rediculously long debate about nothing. I said they pose no problem, you said there were a major design issue. It's all a dead and moot issue. All you can say is they hang low on the rear axle. Must be quite a problem for the people "you find refreshing, because they don't want something huge, or to go offroad with".

    How's that Limited slip in your Toyota doing, Pluto? You know, the Limited slip differential you said that engages whenever you don't have your locker locked? Or the Limited slip that is available on a Tacoma(not). If you state you have to give respect to receive it, when have you followed your own rule? So I ask you again Pluto, stick to trucks, because this is not a popularity contest, and there will be no winners if this mud slinging continues.

    Comparing the 3.4l to a 3.0l, well, why not compare it to the 2.3l? You can bring up all kinds of comparisons, but realistically you are selling one side short. Because an auto manufacturer offers more options than the other, that should not be considered a "unfair". Hopefully someday Toyota will expand it's niche marketing, you know offering trucks that can do work, or just a grocery getter.

    Nobody said the F-150 (4.6) makes the perfect work truck. However the new 6.0l Diesel SD would kick butt! Even the 5.4l that is a very popular option throws your point out the window.

    While I don't see many "work trucks" with 20 inch rims, I do see plenty of street trucks, and plenty of work trucks. Many people buy trucks just to dress them up, and stock 20" rims may be valuable to them. I personally don't care for that much flash, but others do, and again, the available options only diversify the amount of consumers who will buy the truck. I would say the majority are just daily drivers, but about 20-30% are used for hauling. Maybe 10-15% of street trucks with the flashy rims, lowered suspension, etc. Whatever floats their boat. The only analogy is that each owner will find what meets their needs, and the more options available make it easier to find a truck that meets their needs.

    In retrospect, doesn't this all appear to be a Us vs Them debate?
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    i like how you didn't even reply to anything i said to you. nice flag waving. we all know it's hard to keep up with domestic truck offerings, but you at least could have tried.

    regarding those 20" rims on ram 1500's, care to list a comparison against payload and towing between a ram with 20's and a tundra with it's best whatever tires? i'd love to see just how wimpy those 20" rims are and the tires that wrap around them. please, back up your statement with some facts. ill be waiting.

    and stooping so low to comparing your 3.4 to a little 3.0 is now your new lowest point. i was surprised to see you had to do that. that's pretty pathetic.

    also, still waiting on your comments about the 5.4 against the only engine available in tundra. and the spec comparison between f150 and tundra in the payload and towing departments with the best available equipment.
    we know you're squirming, and it's hilarious.

    facts man, facts. you started this whole debate. back it up with something other than blanket statements like the 20" tires and wheels on rams being flashy and all that.
  • Reading your last post, particularly the last paragraph, would lead one to believe you embrace diversity and options when it comes to pick-up trucks. Well, the Tundra only adds to the diversity and options available to consumers, offering people a very reliable and for some, a more practical, refined alternative to the Big 3 offerings, yet you certainly don't embrace it. Why can't you practice what you preach and accept the Tundra as that, instead of constantly comparing it to something it wasn't even designed to compete against and declaring it a failure? How can we ever consider you credible when your actions run contrary to your stated beliefs and intentions?

    If Ford offered a truck exactly like the Tundra, you would declare it a glaring success and yet another example of how Ford offers another pick-up option for us.

    Your statements about the copyrighted picture debacle are nothing short of pure lunacy, plain and simple. Now I'm accused of having multiple personas? Please, midnight_caballo - I take great pride in proving you wrong, and I wouldn't want to share the spoils with other fictitious members. Numerous times myself and others began to point you to YOUR posts which had copyrighted pictures (only after you made such a stink about mine, of course), only to find said posts had disappeared (a phenomena quite common when it comes to you and your postings...). As always, you simply blamed the moderator for deleting them. Don't you think the moderator would have deleted them on his own when they were first posted, rather than having to be directed to them later by the whistle-blowers??? You just don't add up, midnight_caballo.

    The shock absorber debate was an intelligent, technical discussion that went to hell after you were defeated and threw a temper tantrum that was promptly deleted. If the debate was truly "ridiculous and about nothing" why did you take it so seriously? While you deny the temper tantrum took place, why then did other members who witnessed it comment on it?

    While you like to point out the limited-slip incident, I find it amusing that out of my hundreds of posts I've made since I've been a member, that's my ONLY mistake you can bring up. At least I didn't go back and delete the post and say I never posted it, or blame the moderator for deleting it, LOL.

    I actually think you're a pretty intelligent guy, midnight_caballo, and find it worth my while debating with you. I wouldn't invest the same amount of time and effort in my postings directed at *tbunder,* however, because I think he's a 15 watt bulb not worth the energy consumption to debate with. But you must simply learn to admit mistakes when you make them, and become more tolerant of those whose opinions differ from yours.
  • What does all of that fairy tale nonsense have to do with these trucks? I'm suprised you didn't include something about me kicking some kittens too.

    It must of taken you a long time to type all that too... :)

    Signed your master of all Conspiracy...
  • I'm on work time, not my own time. And I'm hardly surprised you don't/can't address the issues I've brought up.
  • You didn't answer my question. What does this have to do with trucks? If you want a response, are you sure you want the answer? You have brought up these so called mistakes of mine over and over again, yet I have replied and said my peace in the past. We all know the root of your claims are false. Nobody has validated your claims, because it's off-topic and false.

    And tell me again, how does saddaddy's pictures of tacoma's and F-150's get deleted too, if I just deleted anything you thought was incriminating against myself. My links were from non-copywrighted pages, your TEXT was very clearly not. Isn't it silly to accuse me falsely what you are truly guilty of?

    Signed again, Your master of Conspiracy, the shadowy figure in the grassy knoll,
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    The tundra doesn't even want to compete with the trucks you put it up against.

    And tbunder, not trying to start ANYTHING here, but, what is wrong with someone (I don't know who, I didn't read everything) comparing the 3.4L to the "little 3.0L." You sit there and compare the 3.4L to the 4.0L all day and I will to. If I did my math correct, the 3.4 is much closer in size to th e 3.0 than the 4.0. Whats the deal? Seems fair to me.
  • Is Plutonious always this argumentative? I wasn't around to witness any previous mistakes, yet I wouldn't like to argue about meaningless issues.
    To add to the engine comparison, the 3.4l can also be compared to the ford's 4 cylinder extended cab. Still I would also have to compare Toyota's little 4 cylinder would not hold up to the larger v6 found in the Ranger.
  • Hello, I came to this forum to read up about what everybody thought about these two trucks. I am also interested in a Nissan frontier or s10 possibly. What do you guys recommend based on your experiences? I am looking for a economical vehicle that is safe, reliable, and doesn't break my piggy bank.
  • Of course, I am going to recommend the Tacoma. In four cylinder form, it is not only economical and affordable, but as "bullet-proof" as you can get. Toyota's four cylinders are what earned them their reputation for reliability and durability.

    You will probably save a little if you buy a Ranger, especially with their never-ending sales incentives (that alone should raise your eyebrow). But remember, if you buy an extended warranty plan (the Tacoma already has a lengthy warranty) and you sell the truck (which you will someday), the difference in purchase price is going to be trivial. I encourage you to read the classifieds in your area and compare the prices of used Rangers and Tacomas.

    You will find people who swear by their Rangers, and you will find an equal number who curse theirs. Just peruse these forums and you'll see. That's because Ford quality is hit or miss. Individual owners, reliability surveys, used-car price guides, etc. unanimously point to the Tacoma as being the better vehicle. All the anectodal tales by the Ranger guys will not change this fact.

    Bottom line - Toyota is noted for quality, Ford advertises it (Quality is job #1...).
  • Any analyst will remember that a larger proportionate number of vehicles in the market will lead to more reports of complaints. The Ranger has been a sales leader for over 18 years. People are also more likely to voice a complaint than a praise. That is seen in the recent dialog here. You should read through any forums dedicated to any vehicle you plan on purchasing, but every account found should also be taken with a grain of salt.

    I have owned two rangers, a 93 and now a 03 which have both been more than satisfactory. My 93 reached over 142,000 miles, and showed no sign of stopping anytime soon. My 2003 is an even more refined version that is a simple pleasure to drive. The Tacoma is known for Toyota Reliability. The Ford Ranger is known for more options available, and a better value of a truck. You simply can't purchase an equal Tacoma for a the same price of a Ranger, and this is especially true with the current rebates and financing specials.

    My advice is to define your budget, take a look at the models currently offered in the market, and see what fits your definition of needs and wants in a truck.
  • "Any analyst will remember that a larger proportionate number of vehicles in the market will lead to more reports of complaints."

    Yes, and the reliability surveys (in the Tacoma's favor, or course) take that into account, so that's a cheap-shot. Some people around here seem to think mass-produced vehicles will lead to more complaints and problems. Over 22 million Corollas have been produced and is the most recognized car in the world, yet it has a sterling reputation for reliability. So does the Camry, one of America's most popular cars. So much for that theory.

    midnight_caballo is right, you must define your budget before your purchase. But you must also take a hard look at your vehicle ownership habits. A lot of the Ford guys buy vehicles and trade them in every couple of years. I guess the theory is some people simply feel a car payment is part of their budget, so they might as well have a new vehicle all the time. I think that's a waste of money, personally. If that's what you do, you'll probably come out ahead with the Ranger. In comparison, Toyota buyers generally keep their vehicles longer. If you own long-term and will sell the truck someday on your own, odds are the Toyota will be a better choice.

    As the saying goes, "Buy cheap, buy twice."
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    "Reliable, powerful, cheap"
    Choose two. This seems to be the best way to pick your truck.
    Ranger is cheap and powerful, Tacoma is reliable and powerful, Nissan is cheap and reliable, S10 is cheap.
    Here's my opinions on this:

    Ranger: If you want a cheap truck, you might as well buy this one. Yeah, it's been a bestseller for 18 years, and yes, it may have the strongest naturally aspirated V6 in its class (not by much, though), but seeing all the recent troubles and pages of discounts/cashback options Ford gives out, one should simply wonder if it's a safe bet.
    It may seem like a good investment to begin with, but few years down the road, you may have trouble selling your truck. Look around the used car lots and see how many Rangers you see. I see a lot out here.

    Tacoma: I drive this, so it may sound biased. It's got a nice engine that's 8 years old now (3.4L) and still packing a punch (.6L less and 20/15 less than 4.0L by Ford). The only downside to Toyota is that it's expensive, but doesn't have to be. I picked up my Tacoma well-equiped for 21.4K plus TTL (that's for Xtracab, 2 door). If you don't want a 4WD, you can get one definitely for less than 20K. Plus, 2003 is the last year for this generation of Tacoma, and you may be able to pick one up in 6-8 months even cheaper.

    Nissan: 3.3L V6 has been around for ages, and is reliable. Unfortunately, it's pretty powerless if you compare it to others. Combined with heavier weight of Frontier, it's even worse. Don't fall for the "210hp supercharged V6"'s just something Nissan engineers slapped together to temporarily keep up with the competition. Charged 3.3L Nissans are slower than naturally-aspirated Tacoma V6s.

    S10: I've owned a 1993 S10, and I'm never buying a Chevy again. Enough said.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    scorpio- you are misstating info about rangers. id like you to let us all know what trouble the ranger line is having concerning quality. only thing i can think of was a rear differential problem that affected something like 800 trucks.
    and concerning all the used rangers vs tacomas, how many mustangs vs corvettes do you see for sale? when you build more of any one vehicle, there will be more of them for sale. how many Honda CBR motorcycles do you see for sale in the paper vs ducati 916's? even you can figure that one out.

    pluto- a bunch of people are pointing at you and laughing their respective asses off. you have ODD in it's worst case. yeah, go ahead and look it up. also, the focus is now the world's #1 selling car. what's that say about the corolla?

    and ford would never build a truck like tundra, they only build trucks that are able to work while at the same time go to the grocery store. not ones that just pick up groceries like the tundra. i would hate to think that one day i would have to accept a ford truck to be just a truck with a special purpose or place in consumer's hands, and not a work truck. that's sad.

    what about those 20" ram rims being wimpy? im still waiting on your results, or proof.
  • Ya ! but know one in their right mind would sell
    there Duc !!
  • "when you build more of any one vehicle, there will be more of them for sale."

    >>What does that have to do with the fact a Tacoma is still easier to sell than a Ranger, as Scorpio pointed out? That was the point and, as usual, it went over your head.

    Besides, your theory isn't exactly true. I don't see many Toyotas, especially Camrys and Corollas (of which there are a zillion out there) for sale because people don't sell them. But when they do, they're hot items and command a good price. Ranger's don't even command a good price when they're NEW, LOL! And in a used-car market saturated with Rangers, what makes you think a Ranger is going to be an easy sell?? But oh yeah, the Ranger's sales numbers......

    Sometimes, Ranger owners even have to rely on misrepresentation and lying to sell their truck. Like claiming on E-bay it was never abused, yet in fact the owner has "jumped" and four-wheeled their truck. I've never had to lie to sell any of my Toyotas.

    "what about those 20" ram rims being wimpy?"

    >>Tell you what, why don't you show me a heavy duty low profile tire? Why don't you show me pictures of somebody four-wheeling with some aired-down low profile tires, too! Have fun!
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    This is getting too much.

    About the 20" rims... I was shooting fireworks with a buddy that got a new Dodge Ram Sport with dubs. 4WD and loaded to a T. He said what I had assumed when we asked him if he would like to follow us down a VERY muddy road, "Man, they don't even MAKE a tire for my truck that could get ten feet in that stuff." The smallest rim he can fit is a 17 which they do make a few tires for now.

    About 1:00 AM we started to leave. Where we were parked you could either climb a wet grassy hill to the road or back down to another road (we were parked in a tight turn). He put it in 4wd and moved about an inch forward and decided he would have to back down the hill, much to his dismay. Well I, not being one to back down to a Mopar, locked my rear end and climbed that grassy hill with my bald ATs along with some of my other 4x4/MT equipped buddys. The guy with the new dodge felt kinda crunchy but at least his truck stayed nice and *pretty*!

    Oh and the same night I witnessed an 80s Toyota pickup pull out a stuck F250 SD PSD 4x4. I kid you not. The yota had the 22re engine and about 31" tires and did struggle a bit, just not nearly as much as the brute he pulled out. The diesel driver was prolly only stuck cuz he ran off the road having had a few too many adult beverages, but still. The Yota was on pavement but the pull was up a steep incline and over the wall of a deep rut, so it wasn't that great of a feat, however, it was quite amazing to the untrained eye to see this little thing pull out that huge loud stanky beast. I was surprised to see that little truck do it.
  • obyoneobyone Posts: 8,065
    "Well I, not being one to back down to a Mopar, locked my rear end and climbed that grassy hill with my bald ATs along with some of my other 4x4/MT equipped buddys."

    Exactly how bald were they?
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    i never said a ranger is easier to sell than a tacoma. but obviously they must be since they outsell them every year. what i was saying is that the reason there are so many rangers for sale compared to tacomas is because they build so many more rangers vs tacomas. as usual, you change everyone's words around to say what you want them to say so that you can argue with them. PLEASE, PLEASE back up what you say about the wimpy 20" rims and tires on new rams. yes, i know they won't do the baja, but that has nothing to do with payload capacity and towing. provide some facts so you won't look like a total dilrod.

    sad- ill believe a little 22re toyota pulled out a 6500lb SD when i win the lottery. he may have moved him a little so the SD could power himself out. but if you expect us to believe that a little POS 80's toyota truck pulled a huge SD up a steep incline all by itself, you really are in toyota fantasyland. all those little 22's do is buzz around and cry when they see hills. i had a friend who pulled two jet skis with a '94 toyota 4x4 with that engine. the trip was 25 miles to the lake, he had it in 4th gear the whole way. i, otoh, had a nice powerful vortec 4.3 in my ZR2 and cruised at 60mph laughing at any hill. he also had to put his in 4lo when pulling his skis out of the water. i left mine in drive with no engagement of the t/c. so don't go telling me this tall tale when i know what that engine is like. it is gutless. yes, it may last a long time, but so does a singer sewing machine, but i doubt it could pull a SD out of a steep ravine.
  • "so don't go telling me this tall tale when i know what that engine is like."

    >>Tall tales!?!? You used to brag everyday about how you would jump your Ranger and go stump-pulling in the woods to everybody here at Edmunds. Yet on E-bay, you advertised your truck as "never having been abused."

    The rest of your post sounds like a classic *tbundy* tall-tale, too.
This discussion has been closed.