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

1246713

Comments

  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Ground clearance: Well, 2" less than on a stock Tacoma...and that is with the 2002 version, one that's standing tall. 2003s are even lower.

    Powerful and torquey engine: I believe that was covered few posts up, Libertys' power to weight ratio is worse than Tacoma, even DC.

    Dana axles: Dana is Dana, no question. It's not indestructable. For purposes of Liberty, Dana axles are an overkill. Lets not forget that it's also IFS.

    Departure/Entry angles and lower gear ratio: that's basically the only thing you got going for you.

    Offroad package with 4.10 gearing: so what? Manual tranny Taco is 3.93, and auto is 4.10. That's with or without TRD.

    Liberty HAD a chance to be a good offroad vehicle, but blew it.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    it seems as if you're mistaken.

    comparing torque between the 3.7 and 3.4:

    jeep: 15.74 lb/ft per CC.
    toyota: 15.45 lb/ft per CC.

    it seems that you toyota guys have forgotten what is important in a 4x4- torque. even the SOHC 4.0 Ford has the toyota beat at 16.32 lb/ft per CC. you bring up a pretty pathetic argument, and one you haven't done your homework on evidently.

    and please stop misleading people. the liberty has 10.2 inches of GC compared to tacoma's standard "claimed" 10.8. and a TRD with 12 inches. although im still trying to figure out where there is 12" of GC other from frame to ground, and in that case i have 13" on my jeep.

    and im still trying to figure out how jeep "blew it". same coil over your toyota has, dana axles, real towhooks and skidplates. please explain how jeep blew it, as you say.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    and your pre-runner was targeted at who? posers? with no t/c, i think i would keep quiet, wouldn't you? i still can't believe you slam a dana axled 4x4 lib. hilarious.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Yeah...bigger engine, more torque, no arguement there..Liberty needs it with all its weight.

    Ground clearance: Alright, the numbers I quoted are the LLL, which is 13" for you and 15" for Tacoma. You said it was because of bigger tires...there is not 2" of diff. between 30s and 31s. 2002 Liberty is sitting lower, and 2003s are sitting even lower.

    real towhooks: why don't you quit this stupid line. Your Liberty has towhooks as an OPTION. Same as me going to 4WheelParts and getting them.

    Jeep blew it because they had all this potential, and they ended up with a mallrunner. Heavy with luxuries, dinky tires, can't put a decent lift on it. Now DC came out with 17" Chrome wheels for it. It's not a "mini-Rubicon". Grocery hooks, lipstick holders....pretty plastic-enclosed lights on the roof.

    As for slamming a Dana-axles 4x4: (with IFS): it sounds good, but it's not all that great. Danas break. In fact, it was the Dana 44 that blew at Tellico, the only axle lost there. Toyota axles held, Dana gave up.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    There is actual use of pre-runners. Desert running, high-speed. I guess you didn't know that.
  • "jeep: 15.74 lb/ft per CC.
    toyota: 15.45 lb/ft per CC.
    it seems that you toyota guys have forgotten what is important in a 4x4- torque."

    >>Are you really going to tell us that your extra 15 lb/ft of torque is an advantage when your Liberty weighs a whopping 585 lbs more than our Tacomas?

    You're the first person I've known who's rated an engine using a torque/displacement ratio. The fact you're doing this, instead of using the universally standard torque/RPM ratio simply means you're grasping at straws. Remember your Ranger debate? How more torque at a LOWER RPM was the most important thing in the world? What happened to that argument?

    The most important thing in a 4x4 is power, lightweight, articulation and big tires. The winning formula isn't simply having a torque advantage.

    Come back and preach to us about your HP and torque advantage when your Liberty sheds 600lbs of Ken & Barbie foo-foo.

    -------------------------------------------------

    As a sidenote, let me tell you I think it's hilarious how you brag about one thing only to do a complete 180 degree "about-face" later. Need a few reminders?

    1. You bragged about your Ranger's locker, found out it didn't have one, then said they suck because that's what the Tacoma has.

    2. You bragged non-stop about how the Ranger had more torque at a lower RPM. Now you say that's a bogus comparison and use some lame torque/cc argument because the Tacoma's got you beat.

    3. You bragged nonstop about your precious Alcoa rims that were light-weight and reduced unsprung weight. Then you bragged about your bigger, heavier axles, A-arms and diffs, completely contradicting yourself with your asinine "reduced unsprung weight" garbage. Who would care about having lighter rims to reduce unsprung weight on a 4x4 with live axles and big tires, LMFAO!

    4. You griped non-stop about how Tacomas (supposedly) had a leaking problem but simply ignore your Liberty's TSB regarding interior leaks through a drain tube.

    5. You bragged nonstop about how tough your Ranger was and how you would literally jump it. Then when you sold it on E-bay, your advertisement stated "the truck was never abused."

    5. You're quick to call anybody around here stupid when they don't agree with you, while you're the only one here who forgot HIS OWN USERNAME AND PASSWORD and had to re-register.

    Need me to go on, or have you had enough yet?
  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    do you actually off-road your liberty? I think that's the real question.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    lmfao- pluto, you make a mockery of yourself daily here.

    you were the one who said the taco outweighed the liberty....quickly, you recant your quote calling it "a huge joke". alrighty........

    you were the one who claimed to have a 4" advantage over liberty rear diff......quickly learning you were misinformed- again........

    you were the one who said DOHC was better than SOHC designed engines, only to learn that the jeep engine makes more power and torque and is more efficient- you quickly quieted down......

    you were the one who claimed you had a lsd in your rear locked taco diff....only to learn you were wrong- again, quickly quieted down.......

    a long time ago when i mis-stated (see, i admit my mistakes) that the ranger had tacoma beat in curb weight by some 400 lbs., you and your toyota comrades quickly jumped on me saying i was wrong and that the ranger was pretty much even in weight to the lighter tacoma (obviously if being lighter was better- which is your theory now-, you would've agreed that ranger was heavier, and therefore not as good a 4x4).
    but now, you say that being lighter is the way to go. which is it? i know, whichever works in your favor, right?

    again, i just pointed out to you that the 3.7 makes more torque per CC compared to your wimpy 3.4- and then you totally change the subject to say that it doesn't mean anything.....well, it means that your theory on the DOHC design was DEFINITELY not plagiarized.....no one but you would think up such BS.

    only you quote a magazine article that is going on six years old where your precious tacoma tied a wrangler with an OPEN DIFFERENTIAL. now if that isn't pathetic, i don't know what is...

    daily your fellow toyota comrades sit in here and read your nonsense and obviously do not support you in any way.....half the time quietly trying to explain to you how things really are....

    my man, i won't call you s8u8i4, but you are the epitome of a trucker that knows nothing but what you think, and is totally blind to anything else or anyone's explanation of the truth.

    'Need me to go on, or have you had enough yet?'

    okay, ill go on....the reason im pointing out to you that the 3.7 makes more torque per CC is because of your claim that the DOHC design is better as a whole- iow, the engine. well, if that was true, where's the torque in the 3.4? after all, it is DOHC design, but the SOHC designed jeep 3.7 still has it beat in total lb/ft of torque per cubic centimeter. and it does all of that while being more fuel efficient. your theory just doesn't float my man.

    also, it's finally good to see you are accepting some of the ranger's advantages over tacoma.

    also, i never had alcoa rims; the FX4 levle II comes with them. i just said what someone else did, which their purpose is to reduce unsprung weight, plus they are FORGED which means they are a lot stronger than your TRD's cast.

    'The most important thing in a 4x4 is power, lightweight, articulation and big tires. The winning formula isn't simply having a torque advantage.'

    evidently you don't agree with your comrades like scorpio who brag up the toyota weakling 4-banger in tacoma. also, big tires aren't everything. it simply depends on where you're driving. for rock-crawling and mudding, taller tires will help. but for some trailing, smaller tires will actually be better. i can't believe you would make such a blanket statement like that one. im not surprised though, it's obvious that you think your 31's rule and they are the best simply cuz they look good. can you say inexperienced? also, torque is what pulls you up the hill or through the mud my main man. it will also pull out the torque low toyotas. peace bro.
  • **TBUNDY** I just don't see why anybody would want a Jeep Liberty. It's a cheap spin-off/imitation of the Kia Sportage with a few shiny accessories like 17" wheels. I guess they put those wheels on there because it attracts posers. Who would want a puny 3.7 liter V6 when the competition now has a huge 4.0 in comparison?? ESPECIALLY an inferior 90 degree V6 with a power-robbing counter rotating balance shaft. We all know a 90 degree V6 is just cost-cutting done by Jeep so they can make their small V6 on the same assembly line as their V8s. How stupid and cheap is that? Plus, Jeep's V6 is an ancient SOHC engine, not the much better DOHC design. Oh yeah, gotta love that Benz quality too. Like the drain tube leaking water into the interior. I mean, what is this, a brand new Jeep or an ancient rusted out VW Bug that leaks water? I got to hand it to Jeep, though. The Liberty is brand new and it already has 26 TSBs. That has to be a new record or something! Have you seen the rear pumpkin on that Liberty? It's, like, at least 4 inches smaller than a Tacoma's! The only reason why a Liberty has some ground clearance (which is pitifully low to begin with) is because there's no rear pumpkin in the way! And the rear door looks like it would dent if you looked at it funny. My Tacoma weighs 600lbs more than a Liberty because they used a TRUCK frame and real sheet metal! Take that Liberty on a trail, and it will twist up like a wound rubber band. So much for your Benz quality. Brand new Jeep and the fuel pump already went bad. What would have happened if you were stranded, LOL. See, buy a Tacoma and you'll never have to worry about it. We all know the Liberty isn't a REAL Jeep. That 73cjdude guy really busted your chops and told you like it is. New Jeeps suck, plain and simple. What you got is a Ken & Barbie Jeep with all the foo-foo. Drive over here and and I will challenge you - see if you can keep up with my trick TRD with its 31" tires and locker! Ha! You and your Liberty will eat my exhaust and go home ashamed! At least you will go back looking cool with your shiny 17" poser wheels, though LMAO!!! Looks like the all-knowing saddaddy and scorpio laid down the law on you, bud! Don't you ever learn? BTW, I like the grill on your jeep. It looks like a 1950s pipe heater! Let me know when you are ready to take on my super-trick TRD!

    END OF POST #42
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>If you try real hard and concentrate, you'll find this was a joke because I'm totally imitating your nonsensical garbage. You need to lay off the medication and learn to develop a sense of humor so you can recognize a joke when it slaps you in the face.
  • Try it again:

    AND FOR THE 100TH TIME, YOUR INSIGNIFICANT EXTRA 15 LB/FT OF TORQUE IS USELESS WHEN YOUR LIBERTY WEIGHS 600 LBS MORE!!! DO YOU GET IT YET???

    Repeat as necessary.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Yeah....you admit it now.....that was what? 6 month ago? Do you happen to remember why you tried to convince us it was 600 lbs heavier? "My Ranger is 600 lbs heavier because it is made of real steel, and not tin". Which still brings up the question of what was your Ranger made of (especially since it had overbuilt components so you could sleep better at night), but that's for later.

    As for winning formula:
    We brag about Taco RC because it is lightweight, at mere 3000 lbs, the 2.7L engine is more than enough for it. With a short wheelbase that truck spanks everyone with Xtracabs.

    Now.....can you specifically name that "some trailing" that small tires are good for? Gee.....all those people spending their money on getting 35s, 37s and bigger.....when you could have 30s!
  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    "only you quote a magazine article that is going on six years old where your precious tacoma tied a wrangler with an OPEN DIFFERENTIAL. now if that isn't pathetic, i don't know what is..."

    -actually it was just a year ago, the wrangler DID have a limited slip, and the taco beat the wrangler.
  • PF_FlyerPF_Flyer Pennsylvania Furnace, PAPosts: 5,890
    Same guys making the same points, referring to the same information, over and over and over...


    NOBODY is going to change any minds here. That's pretty obvious. Time to give this up and move on before the real mudslinging starts and this gets shut down again...


    PF Flyer
    Host
    Pickups & News & Views Message Boards

    MODERATOR
    Need help navigating? pf_flyer@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    if the shootout between tacoma, wranger, and hummer was just a year ago, can you direct me to it? just fyi, it was a 1998 four-wheeler article i believe. you know, the first year for the TRD pkg., and you know what scorpio says, whatever is new and hot in it's first year usually wins the awards.

    pluto, yeah you have the weight thing down, that im not arguing. im arguing YOUR theory on how the DOHC design of the 3.4 is better when it's clear that the 3.7 of the liberty makes more torque per CC, gets better mileage, and is the old SOHC design which according to you, is old hat. i concede weight to the tacoma, why wouldn't i? there isn't much that doesn't outweigh the thin tacoma. i assume you will dodge this question for the umpteenth time. you'll probably say that they had to squeeze so much torque out per CC due to the liberty's heft, right? whatever. either way, your tacoma is still down on power and torque to the liberty, not to mention the all important mileage thing. and that's hilarious.

    yes i do remember why scorpio, i was thinking of frontier crew cab's weight. which is around 400 lbs heavier than tacoma and ranger. the thing is stout.

    and for the love of god (as the late great chris farley would say) pluto, just admit you were wrong. and stop referring to every mistake you ever made or mistyped as a huge joke.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    And until I hear of one Toyota axle breaking, the Dana axle stuff doesn't mean jack to me. I mean really.
  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    FourWheeler, May 2001, I have the issue sitting at home.
  • smgillessmgilles Posts: 252
    Better gas mileage..right? Pull my other leg it plays jingle bells. You must have gotten some "super" fuel pump that the other pre-lowered Libertys didn't get. I still get 21 on the interstate and that's with a S/C.

    As far as fender flares falling off you need to get your info. correct. The problem involves a litte rubber gasket (1/4") between the fender and fender flare. The gasket starts to come loose in varying spots. How do I know...? I had to get my gaskets replaced. You go to Toyota and they put 4 new ones on.

    Can I come and visit you in that world you live in..? I am tired of reality.
  • It's not MY theory that DOHC is better than SOHC. Go read the Multivalve article at http://autozine.kyul.net/technical_school/engine/tech_engine_2.htm#Multi-valve

    Pay special to attention to the parts that read:


    "Improving breathing is one of the keys for power enhancement. Unquestionably, in the 2-valve era valves used to be the bottleneck, hence the need for more valves...A typical 2-valve engine has just 1/3 combustion chamber head area covered by the valves, but a 4-valve head increases that to more than 50%, hence smoother and quicker breathing. 4-valve design also benefit a clean and effective combustion, because the spark plug can be placed in the middle...Formula One cars and even the Ferrari F1 cars which was once famous for 5V engine has switched back to 4-valve design a few years ago...In the mid-80s, both Honda and Toyota made 4-valve engines standard in virtually all mainstream models. The Western car makers did that some 10 years later!"


    Also consider this:


    Your extra .3 liters in your Jeep SOHC is only giving you 20 more horses and 15 lb/ft torque (at 800 RPMs higher) more than the Toyota's 8 year old 3.4.


    By comparison, the Toyota's new DOHC 4.0's extra .3 liters is making 35 more horses and 48 lb/ft torque (at only 3400 RPMs) than your SOHC 3.7.


    Why is the extra .3 liters in the Toyota DOHC making so much more power than your extra .3 liters?


    You stated "if the shootout between tacoma, wranger, and hummer was just a year ago, can you direct me to it? just fyi, it was a 1998 four-wheeler article i believe. you know, the first year for the TRD pkg., and you know what scorpio says, whatever is new and hot in it's first year usually wins the awards"


    Nope, the Tacoma has been winning awards since its first year and continually thereafter. Sorry.


    You stated "either way, your tacoma is still down on power and torque to the liberty, not to mention the all important mileage thing. and that's hilarious."


    Nope, we've already been down this road. The Tacoma has the better power to weight ratio. Your extra 600lbs more than cancels out your miniscule torque advantage you keep bragging about.


    Better mileage? Nope, in V6, 4x4 trim and auto tranny, the Liberty gets 16/20, the Tacoma 17/19 (manual Tacoma probably even better). Please explain to us all how the Liberty gets better mileage. I'm dying to hear this one!


    "Can I come and visit you in that world you live in..? I am tired of reality."

    -----smgilles


    I couldn't agree more!

  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    sad- why would it mean "jack" to you, im not directing it at you. you don't even have a front axle.

    pluto- the '03's get 17/21 mpg. better than tacoma auto. check it out, you're incorrect.

    at least you didn't plagiarize that article now huh? your article doesn't say anything. basically it says that the more valves, the better breathing. well, not in this case eh? your DOHC design is still down. break it down all you want, you're still on the losing end einstein.

    stop comparing the new 4.0 engine to the 3.7. it's not even available in a tacoma. it's too bad you have to live in the future to beat todays jeep engines.

    smgilles- ok, so if you don't fix it it will fall off. big difference there eh? either way, my ranger's nor my liberty's flares aren't even loose. toyota can't even get a little flare to stay on. pretty sad. awesome quality though, right?

    pluto, if the tacoma keeps winning awards like you say, how come it only managed to get third in four-wheeler's pickup truck of the year contest this year? is that what you call winning? and the liberty finished second only to the grand cherokee in the four-wheeler of the year shootout. they hated the tacoma's suspension and even recommended switching shocks. and this is on your awesome TRD, factory off-roader. pathetic. if you call that an award, i understand your rantings.

    i guess im the only one who doesn't live in a world full of blind consumers who drive toyota vehicles. the ones who call loose fender flares and sludged up engines common maintenance. lmao
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    1. If you don't fix it it will fall off: You know.....you are the one with a busted fuel pump and leaky interior drain pipes. And our Tacomas didn't have to be recalled because their diffs exploded.

    2. 4-wheeler: Blah blah blah blah blah. Tohico shocks are stiff, so what? They hated the suspension....that was it. So it took a 3rd place. Do you know an easier way to stiffen up the suspension so that extra weight does not cause sag, other than to put stiffer shocks? TRD package is awesome for a starter, it makes a Taco very offroad-able off the showroom floor.

    Sludged up engines: no comments about the sludged up engines in Mercedes Benz? I posted a link....I guess their practices don't sound so good anymore.
  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    "pluto, if the tacoma keeps winning awards like you say, how come it only managed to get third in four-wheeler's pickup truck of the year contest this year? is that what you call winning? and the liberty finished second only to the grand cherokee in the four-wheeler of the year shootout"

    -probably for the same reason that the Wrangler never finishes 1st year after year, when it really should. I mean, is there really any vehicle that can compete with the TJ for off-road ability? no, not even close. But no one would buy the magazine if they had the same winner every year.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    benz engines and the jeep production facility in which manufacturing techniques (ie. assembly techniques) mirror those of MB factories in germany are two totally different issues. benz engines and chrysler engines have nothing in common. nice try though. i wonder if all those indy car teams with mercedes-benz engines would agree with your implication on quality.

    otoh, toyota built those engines that they tried to escape fault with. is that all you can drudge up on jeep engines? and concerning the hvac draining in the jeep on early models, at least chrylser adopted a tsb to fix the few problems. toyota doesn't even accept that some firewalls leak inside on tacomas. that's their whole philosophy, keep the tsb's and recalls down to make their products look better. the sludge issue is the perfect example of this. it caught up with them.

    it's good to see at least someone accepts that the tacoma can't hang with a TJ. now, the new rubicon is a TJ on steroids, and to be quite frank, is the most capable stock 4x4 production vehicle ever mass produced. end of discussion. anyone want to argue that? i can't see an argument for it, but im sure pluto will put his TRD against one. anyone who is a 4x4 nut and hasn't seen one in person should go look one over. they are truly awesome. dana 44's front and rear- locked at both ends, diamond plate body sills and skidplates, a 4-lo crawl of 4:1, etc. only jeep could build such a hardcore vehicle.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Benz engine was an example that sludge happens. By the way, Benz is also telling customers that it's their fault.
    Toyota agreed to fix 3000 engines, didn't it?
    And yes...there was TSB on the Lib leaks. It's just that I fail to find any problems involving leaky firewalls on Tacoma. You keep saying that.....now show some posts where people say they are leaking.

    Ford hasn't acknowledged the "persisting" problem with rear glass leaking, has it? Or is it that there is no persisting problem, but rather just one truck that got a defect? Think about it.

    TJ: Yes, it rules offroad, but how would you describe Jeep behavior onroad? I have one word for you: brick. While Taco combines best of both worlds, Jeep is the king of one, and a joke of another.
  • Regarding your theory on Toyota keeping their TSB and recall numbers low to make their products look better: BULL. If that were the case, Toyota wouldn't sell record-breaking numbers of cars - today's consumer is smarter (uh, there are exceptions...) than that. Consider the Corolla is one of the world's best selling cars, Camry has been #1 seller in America many years now, and it only took Lexus 10 years to become America's most popular luxury car. You don't achieve this success simply by refusing to issue TSBs and recalls. Sounds to me like you're jealous. And why no link supporting your theory?

    I don't deny the Rubicon is very capable (it should be, it's only designed for off-roading) - in fact, I've already told you that numerous times. But the very fact you're comparing it to a Tacoma (a TRUCK, LOL!) seems like an endorsement to me! BTW, do you think it's just a coincidence that only now Jeep is offering stock lockers? Or maybe they're trying to keep up with the competition? Hmmmmmmmmm....

    "they (Rubicons) are truly awesome. dana 44's front and rear- locked at both ends, diamond plate body sills and skidplates, a 4-lo crawl of 4:1, etc. only jeep could build such a hardcore vehicle."

    Your last sentence is wrong - "only jeep COULD build..." Puleeeze. You make it sound as if Jeep has the best engineering expertise in the world simply because they did what your average shade-tree mechanic can do - swap lockers and axles and weld skid plates. Give me a break!
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    we've hashed it out enough.

    have you seen the 2003 FX4 level II rangers? available in new sonic blue with blue/black two tone seat trim. this a freakin awesome truck.
    not to mention thicker glass, larger brake rotors. still dont see a full size spare though. could be mistaken however.

    also, the regular FX4 ranger (previously just "off-road pkg") now comes with a LSD standard. about time.

    gotta love that totally manual t/c in the level II.
  • smgillessmgilles Posts: 252
    http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/otf0999.html


    More Tacos than Rangers were sold in September.

  • kbtoyskbtoys Posts: 62
    Have anybody drove a vehicle with a front locker? Yes it will crawl over anything but there is just no turning the wheel.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    Its hard to turn with the locker engaged, but once its unlocked, steering is no heavier than a 4wd is over a 2by.

    And tbunder -- I care about front axles even though I don't have one, just like you seem to care about tuff vehicles even though your favorite "truck" was designed for women. Go make a run to the mall! Sorry, you just keep harping on my wimpy 2-tire pull truck. They lowered liberties cuz women and girly men like ___ complained about them being top heavy. Oh yeah, they were designed with offroading in mind - sure. MY BUTT, what a load of crap. Give me a break. For what they are, they are great for leaving the pavement but thats it. I like your company here immensely, but this is getting really old. Can you please go back to arguing for or against Tacos and Rangers? One a side note, tell me about your new Blaster.

    By the way, my new favorite 1/2 ton truck is a FX4 supercrew, but only in one color, white with tan bottom. Gorgeous truck. Also, no truck lover can help but like those Superduties. So don't say I am a complete Yota loyalist.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    that hurt. in any case, i know my girly jeep will traverse places that you could only dream about. with dana axles front and aft, trac-loc rear end and 13" of gc from frame to ground, there isn't a whole lot of places i cant go. plus, my jeep climbs like a leopard.

    blaster is a well, blast. cheap and fun. redesign helped 100 percent.

    the new '03 super-duty's are in a class by themselves. they stomp any gm or dodge truck with any tranny or engine. pickuptruck.com just did a huge test with all three. the ford trounced them. the new power stroke diesel will probably be one of the best truck engines ever produced.

    and just fyi, it was some magazine that wrote a bad article on the liberty that spawned the lowering issue. that's why DC lowered them. CR couldn't get one to roll however. and they even said the pre-lowered ones behaved better on road than the one they got after the raping took place.

    i looked at a new level II FX4 today in sonic blue, and a TRD in white. both trucks are truly awesome. i'd have a hard time choosing. id probably go with the ford simply cuz of the more powerful engine, bigger underbody hardware, dana axles (you can't beat them), and better interior mapping. the toyota, imo, looks cheap and plasticy and stuck in the '80's on the inside. but imo, the white TRD is probably one of the nicest looking trucks on the road. the new yellow ZR2's are sweet too. but the FX4 level II just has an aura about it. pretty rare to begine with, manual t/c, and some pretty cool white faced gauges and cool black and blue/red interior with buckets. plus, with that alcoa sticker on the wheels, you know it's special. just one of the little things the FX4 will be remembered for. specific off-road hardware. yeah, and the rear axles on early built examples.
This discussion has been closed.