Howdy, Stranger!

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





Ford Ranger AND Toyota Tacoma AND others

124

Comments

  • plutoniousplutonious Posts: 799
    Why do you want a hand-count? The argument was between you and I, that's it. Just because you were proven wrong doesn't mean you can't learn something beneficial. We don't expect you to be infallible like the pope, you know.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    Im a redneck that drives a Yota, your confusing people now -- be careful...

    LOL, just kiddin man. ;)
  • I just don't understand how you can bring up old business and count it as a victory. Actually the previous exchanges of words on any topic relating to shock absorbers are both convoluted and confusing. You can think you proved me wrong, but I just think it's all a bunch of misunderstandings and mostly miscommunication. Generally you don't understand what points I try to make, and they are often ignored or misconstrued. If you do respond, they are typically addressing the wrong issues (re: 90 degree v6's vibration, or me defending the choice of rear shock mounts and you enlarging the subject to angled vs. vertical shock placement, etc) You know this, and I see the games you play. Even if they are in jest, you know you are trying for some type of moral victory. So just consider yourself the victor by any count (like you need my input to consider this) and move on, please.
  • rlafaverrlafaver Posts: 70
    Check your neck, saddaddy. You might find some little rice plants in there.
    And midnight, what is that flag beside the pluto person's name? Just curious, but not enough to look it up.
  • If you're from a different country, it'll show that nation's flag there. Pluto is hispanic, and that is the flag of mexico.
  • h0udinih0udini Posts: 118
    absorber debate that happenened a long time ago? I seem to remember some bickering relating to the Tacoma's rear shock placement, as compared to the Ranger's. Of course, pluto favored the Tacoma's design with the shocks placed at the axle ends, while stang favored the Ranger's with its shocks placed towards the rear differential. I'm no enginner, but I am mechanically inclined, and I would think having the shock absorbers closest to the wheel would be the best arrangement. Distancing the shock from the wheel by placing it further away along the axle doesn't make much sense. Sounds like a packaging compromise to me. You have to admit, the redesigned F-150 seems to support pluto's "theory," whatever that was. I must have missed that one.

    I don't want to get in the middle of this between you guys, but I for one do not recall any mentioning of angled versus vertical shock placement or shocks hanging below axles. Maybe somebody is intentionally trying to confuse and convolute the issue to save face. And I don't see the relevance in pointing out one's race or occupation in these discussions, which has happened several times now.

    And tadoah, I find it odd somebody would register themselves in Town Hall and their very first (and only) post was written against pluto just to agree with stang's statements. Sounds like somebody is trying to confuse and convolute the issue with multiple identities, too.

    I personally like both Toyota and Ford trucks, though they both have their strong and weak points. If Ford is adapting some of the Toyota's strong points into their new design, what's wrong with that? I say quit arguing and be glad competing manufacturers are improving the trucks we buy.
  • This one covers it:
    midnight_stang "TOYOTA TACOMA vs FORD RANGER- Part XI" Nov 28, 2001 8:18pm

    midnight_stang "TOYOTA TACOMA vs FORD RANGER- Part XI" Dec 13, 2001 11:29am
    plutonious "TOYOTA TACOMA vs FORD RANGER- Part XI" Nov 30, 2001 11:44pm
    midnight_stang "TOYOTA TACOMA vs FORD RANGER- Part XI" Nov 30, 2001 9:46am

    and finally to quote pluto:
    "Basically, you guys are saying it doesn't matter that the shocks protrude below the rear axle because they're no lower than the bottom of the differential."
    plutonious "TOYOTA TACOMA vs FORD RANGER- Part XI" Nov 30, 2001 12:00pm

    Yes Basically that was what I was saying, but who cares now. You and Houdini are on your own tangent. Reach your own conclusions, for what we said back then isn't what you bring up now.

    Also, you would think that strictly vertical shocks would be best, and they may well be. However, none of you are engineers. Period. You do not know if it was more important in that design to fight horizontal axle movement vs vertical movement. You cannot even begin to compute the weighted leverage at any multitude of tests a automotive designer may contemplate when deciding where and how to mount shock absorbers. GENERALLY speaking, you are probably right, that vertical shocks are better than angled ones. But you have NO CLUE how or why the ford engineers designed the Ranger (and Toyota the 4-runner) with such shocks.

    It's a F-150 design change (nothing to do with Rangers, Tacoma's, etc), and pluto brought it up solely to throw it into my face.

    Again. Let the subject rest, it's old, and tired, and quite frankly pointless.

    P.S. H0udini, welcome back to the forum (after your 5 month hiatus of zero posts). You seem to read everything here, but not claim to understand much, but yet you comment on it all. Now who is "trying to confuse and convolute".
  • Seems the whole topic has taken a different tone and attitude. If I would pick a date, I would say somewhere around June 30th. Anybody else notice this?
  • h0udinih0udini Posts: 118
    nothing do with any shock absorber debate, but like you say, who really cares?

    Maybe what's more important is the fact you continually have to mention the race and occupation of certain posters. What conclustions should be drawn regarding your character and credibility? I'd especially like to hear what you have to say about federal employees...but then again, that doesn't have anything to do with this topic, does it?
  • tadaohtadaoh Posts: 2
    Tim, I am sorry if I acted out of turn. I thought you guys were all about putting each other down. I did not want to be a mommy figure as you put it but I thought I made some good points. Oh Well it already appears to be a big political debate to me.

    Michael, thanks for the links, but I was hoping for something more concrete like interior plans or numbers on mile per gallon, and et cetera. I hope we can get something more concrete, as my interest is piqued.

    Roy, I am not too brand loyal that I would just buy a Honda truck if they made one. I just had heard that there was one in the works, and wanted to know all I could about it first. I just would like something cheap and reliable to put some miles on, and maybe put to use during the weekend chores (aka the Honey-do list). I would think it would be similar to the odyssey in more aspects than one. Those links above seem to indicate the same. I was also considering a non-full size truck as I don't need to tow anything. Just the occasional home depot trip, or pick up whatever the Mrs. thinks we need next. I am still open to suggestions and input but essentially I just want a cheap reliable and low maintenance vehicle. I hope to talk to you more in the future about this.

    Grant, Like I said to Tim, I am sorry if I stepped on your toes too. I didn't mean to butt in and this is second post so I'm trying! Can you elaborate more on the Toyota strong points that are now in Ford trucks? If this is the case, then Ford is looking better and better because I thought the Toyota was the more refined, although expensive of the two. Also I am not interested in the F-150, like I told Roy, just the ranger as I don't want the full size.
  • You had to read through the posts see the subject matter, but it's won't be obvious unless you read it.

    And maybe what is more important is the person who is directly involved state that I crossed a line involving occupation or race. Should Pluto be the one to judge what is inappropriate, not you? Seems to me you are a third person party trying to stir up some trouble, when it's probably none of your business to begin with. Draw any conclusions on my creditibility if you want to, but let me remind you, this is the internet, not life. You won't hurt my feelings no matter what conclusions you make... but this should be a discussion about trucks. Right?
  • rlafaverrlafaver Posts: 70
    Tadoah, I like your criteria. Like I said, I did not have good luck with Honda, but most people seem to, so I'm sure it will be a good one. You will definitely get better pricing from Ford/Chevy/Dodge and probably from Toyota, unless the Honda is even smaller than the usual small truck. We will learn all this soon enough, I guess, so good luck with it.
    h0udini, I've read most of this stuff, and I didn't see anything about race. And if I had I would have left it alone. Is any place safe from guilt-ridden white crusaders? I'm sick of hearing about it, so I will just bow out of this place. So long, m_stang and saddaddy. Enjoyed it.
  • Sorry to see you go, rlafaver. We will certainly miss your input and collaboration, especially amidst the current population.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    -- even my purdy red neck will miss you. ;)

    Tadaoh -- we are not ALL about putting each other down, just a couple chosen ones.
  • plutoniousplutonious Posts: 799
    OK, here's my last words on the subject:

    We did in fact have a long winded discussion with shock absorbers. I simply brought the subject up when I saw the redesigned F-150 confirm what I had been saying earlier. If this is so upsetting to you, maybe you shouldn't participate in discussions where people have opinions backed by facts.

    Don't assume the role of moderator and place blame on me for what sometimes happens in these discussions. If I was guilty of even half the nonsense you accuse me of, I would have lost my membership privileges long ago. Much to your displeasure, I'm sure, that hasn't happened. It "takes two (or more) to tango," as the saying goes.

    If other members here, myself included, don't care to hear nonsense about race and occupations, why do you continue to bring the subject up? I certainly never have.

    Want to know what's really funny about all this? Everytime you see a new F-150, you'll be reminded of how you lost our little debate, which, of course, you deny ever took place. And everytime I see one, I'll smile...
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 10,867
    Any more conversation along these lines will be deleted on sight, and put this discussion at risk of closure. Thank you.

    kirstie_h
    Roving Host & Future Vehicles Host

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

  • Whatever you want to believe pluto. I understand your assertions, but do not believe in them. You think one way, and I another. Thanks for playing.

    Every time I see an F-150 or a Ranger I'll smile. And I will smile more often because 1. I love both trucks. 2. More people like them too because 3. People choose Ford over Toyota.

    Have a nice day, and don't fret the small stuff.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    you don't want me to jump in this too. ;)
  • spleckspleck Posts: 114
    So, anyone know if Toyota might throw a manual V6 on the DoubleCab before or after the redesign?

    That's the one thing holding me back from buying. Although its much better now, the typical assumption was that you would lose 15% power for a manual and 30% for an automatic. Based on that, the 2.7L manual and the 3.4L auto are within about 5HP/5lb-ft.

    I won't drive another auto (had a Ford so I understand transmission failure).

    Just to stay on-topic: are the shocks on the Taco a good design? :) And what is it about rlafever complaining about his Tacoma all over the townhall forums? The seats aren't made for the human body, the PreRunner is too big-I bashed my knee, I wish I had a Toyota when they built their reputation, etc.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    About the shocks:
    They seem to be perfect on Tacomas: they are vertical (which means they get the most travel and do the most damping....when shocks are placed in a V, they are less effective), the shock hangers are on u-bolt plates, so you can't hurt them without damaging the entire setup on that side (and look underneath a few other vehicles....SUVs that have shocks protruding down nearly 1/4 of tire height make me laugh).

    B*tching and whining:
    Hey, he can complain all he wants. Some people aren't satisfied, some are. I have no complaints about my seats (and I believe I can speak on the subject, I have quite a few 10-12 hour trips under my belt, and a 18 hour one), nor that my truck is too big (I just raised it another 3"). So....take whatever people say with a grain of salt.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    Have you driven the auto. Tacoma? I bet you will be surprise if you are a someone who knows their trannies. I have read alot about Tacomas over the years and I can't remember ever reading about the auto tranny going out. They are about the best 4-speed use in pickups. They use the same tranny in Tundras pumping out 300+ lb/ft of torque, so it is really overbuilt for Tacomas. I even read yesterday posts from some die-hard man. auto fans that said that they actually really like the Tacomas auto.
  • The automatic transmissions soak up less and less power output from the motors. And of course it varies from drive train to drive train, but lately I've been seeing quotes of 20% loss of power through automatic transmissions. Manuals are better, but the gap is closing. Combine that with the automatics near instant shifts, and the manual's small delay of no power delivery in between shifting gears, and many a automatic can beat a similair manual in a head to head race. Of course driver skill does apply.

    So basically I'm saying they are both very much the same, the driver is the biggest factor.

    Only downfall in automatics are heat, which require larger radiators and or supplemental coolers. There are also more frequent maintenance required that mandates automatic transmissions need fluid and filter changes. But if not abused and maintained properly, any automatic transmission can outlast a manual, but that is not typical due to driver's negligence.
  • spleckspleck Posts: 114
    Yes, I've driven the auto V6. I've also driven the manual 2.7 4cyl. I'd probably agree that losses are more like 20%, but I didn't think the auto V6 had much on the manual 2.7. The auto did have a solid feel to it and had quick shifts.

    I'm just really hooked on the manuals. Hopefully Toyota won't make the decision for me. I'm holding high hopes for a manual V6 in the 4x4 Double Cab. They've gotta do something if they're waiting till 2005 for the redesign.

    I'll drive them again before I make a decision. The auto would be convenient, but the manual gives me peace of mind and that extra kick.
  • whatnow2whatnow2 Posts: 24
    Be careful what you wish for. Recall, or revisit, all the postings about the problems with toyota 5 m transmissions re notchy shifting and refusal of dealerships to fix it.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    with the manual than the automatic -- it seems to me. As backward as that may be, it seems to be the case. Good luck with you decision, Spleck, and keep us posted. You can't really go wrong, thats the good news!
  • spleckspleck Posts: 114
    Until I know more about the 2004 models, I can't be sure which way I'll go. From the tranny problems I saw mentioned, it looked like the manual had synchro problems and the auto had thunking issues.

    Anyways, it will be interesting if Toyota adds a 3.7L or a 4.0L to the lineup. I'm thinking that if I don't see a manual V6 DC, then I may just pick up a used XtraCab that I can rough up for a while. I know its only a matter of time before the DC has all the options considering its sales versus the regular and xtracabs.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Given the lack of publicity, I doubt there'll be any changes to Tacoma for 2004. I was hoping there would be, but oh well.

    About tranny problems: I think nearly every Tacoma with manual tranny has notchy shifting from 1 to 2.

    The thumping sound that's heard from below is axle wrap. Ever since I've installed my lift, the thump has gone away.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    y'all's fight, but has anyone looked at the new chevy colorado at their website? i think it's pretty nice. you can view each cab style with each suspension option. the reg. cab Z71 is downright tough looking. 31" tires on 15" wheels is a definite plus. not too sure on the 5 cylinder engine though. they claim to have an automatic locking diff as well.
    no plans to get rid of the rock solid jeep though. just turned over 12000 miles and is tight as a drum.
  • Took my truck to the 1/8th mile drag strip. First run was against a 90-93 mustang 5.0l. I beat him by 3 hundredths of a second, but only because he bogged at the start. My time 11.25 (estimated 17.3 in quarter) Best of night: 11.24.

    All the 4.0l's and 4.3l were running 10.40's. No representation from non-domestic trucks, but saw my first SRT-4 in person. Those cars are fast!
This discussion has been closed.