Toyota TACOMA vs Ford RANGER - IV

cthompson21

"I SAW A RANGER PULL UP NEXT TO ATOYOTA CAMRY AND THEY WERE THE SAME HEIGHT."

Do you mean the amount of space in between the bottom of the tire and the road??? Hey, you're right! It IS the same!

cthompson21

TRD is an in-house tuner akin to the Special Vehicle Team (SVT) of Ford. It's too bad Ford doesn't have an SVT Ranger, though, to better compete with the TRD Off-road Tacoma. The SVT hasn't built a 4x4 yet. It'd be interesting to see what they'd come out with if they did. Everything they've produced has been top-notch with the exception of the low-pony pony cars (99 Cobras, at least they're fixing them).

benz88

I just received their catalogue and price list, they have a ton of racing stuff for Toyotas. I don't think any of it is available "factory order" like a "factory ordered" SVT contour. For instance, I can't order a supercharged TRD Taco for an extra 3K from the factory.

mmcbride1

Go visit the Lightning topic. Most of the guys in there paid 28-29k. NOT 24k, Vinny. Once again, talking out of your a** with no facts to back you up.

modvptnl

An aftermarket company will make specialty parts for more than one brand of vehicle ie; Eldebrock, Rancho, Holley, etc. TRD, SVT, Mopar, etc. are FACTORY supplied,single brand, high performance factory backed parts. Your supercharger comment is moot because the TRD SC is a FACTORY Toy part that is installed by the dealer and backed by the FACTORY. An aftermarket supercharger-Vortech, Paxton, ATI etc. would not be warranted by Toy or anyone else. Bottom line is factory is not aftermarket.

mviglianco1

"From the race track to the boulevard, Toyota Racing Development (TRD) U.S.A., Inc. plays a key role in providing Toyota with an enhanced performance image. A subsidiary of Toyota Motor Sales (TMS), U.S.A., Inc., TRD designs and builds Toyota racing engines in addition to building and promoting high-performance aftermarket parts for many Toyota vehicles."

"At TRD, we are proud to provide only "Toyota-quality" aftermarket parts and merchandise, which are available at Toyota dealerships nationwide."

I think we have run out of things to debate but I will take TRD's word on what they are and what they do. The definition of aftermarket from Webster's is as follows:
1 : the market for parts and accessories used in the repair or enhancement of a product (as an automobile)
2 : a secondary market available after sales in the original market are finished

If TRD says they are aftermarket and the they clearly fall under the dictionary definintion of aftermarket then to me they are aftermarket.

Does anyone have any knowledge of the amsoil airfilter?

modvptnl

It would be hard to argue. I still can't see how a factory that supplies parts to its own vehicles is aftermarket. Using that definition if you buy something from Toyotas parts counter after the sale-cupholder, floormats etc. it would be aftermarket. If that's the case I'm wrong.

scape2

mmc, wrong, not every person paid 29K+ for their Lightings. Read more, get on the internet and research.
smcpherr, obviously you must be talking about a 2WD Ranger not a 4WD when talking ground clearance? We have already gone this round in this room before. I have a Ranger with P265 75R16 all terrains and the ground clearance is about 1/4" lower than my friends TRD.
Pics spoog? I notice you keep dodging that one.
And the bubble bursts! TRD is aftermarket! LOL. And to claim their are more aftermarket parts for a Toyota than a Ford is showing true ignorance.
Off the topic. Has anyone else in here experienced the fullsize vs compact truck on the road scenerio? I had a guy in a Huge, I mean HUGE Ford F350 pull up behind me and ride my a.. for miles. I hate those damn big trucks that are for show only. Heck, you couldn't even fit those things into places where compacts/Jeeps go! They are only good for show, and to tow in my book. Have also had them try to race me, cut me off. Ok, I'm off my soap box.
See you in the hills.

Jocko

To vince08 - Some posts back you were telling what you all had on your Ranger, and mentioned a "chip on the engine" I too have a 4.0 Ranger 5 spd with K&N etc, but woule like to know more about any chips available to increase performance.

Jack

cpousnr

Aftermarket due to the fact that it is not a stock configuration, you have to add them on.

Oh boy, 600 MHz is REEEEALY fast! Dell is rather nice compared to the Packard Bell. . .

cthompson21

Before chipping your truck, there are some less expensive mods that will net a better performance gain.

(1) KKM Tru-Rev Kit (www.kustomz.com) or FIPK
(2) Cat-Back Exhaust (go Gibson or Borla stainless for extreme longevity)

A chip and the previous two mods work really well together and should get you about 30hp and 30ft/lbs of torque. After that you can look into headers, MAF's, TB's, ignition systems, porting/polishing, extrude hone, gearing, and superchargers. There are many other mods too. How much power you can get ultimately depends on the size of your wallet.

barlitz

I paid sticker for my lightning $30205 to be exact but I did get $12000 on trade that was only worth $10000 according to kbk so I realistacally got it for $28000.I have seen new ones going for $26500. which is close to dealer invoice but I have also seen them going for over sticker depends on where you live and the demand.I live in Boston where there not as much in demand as say Florida or Texas where the weather is nice most of the year.

cpousnr

I have the KKM Tru Rev on my 99 4.0. It works well, better acceleration and engine response. Not much HP gain. Have some pics of the installation and will put on my site if anyone is interested.
I think that exhaust referenced is about 250 bucks and the superchip from Kurtz Kustom is about 225 bucks. I splurged on the 25 dollar polished metal oil cap to dress the engine up a bit.

cpousnr

So spoog, if I get 19-21 mpg, is that a gas guzzler?

I think the 3.4 V6 is rated EPA at 16-19mpg.

Hmmmm, what does that tell me?

cpousnr

Not really defeat. Toyota MAKES the parts and DESIGNS the add-ons. They will stand behind them as good as original. But, I do not THINK you can order one from the factory with that stuff. You have to do it after the sale. It is closer than aftermarket as you and I may define it.

The reference to Ford SVT is as close as you can get, however you can order an SVT or buy an SVT new off the lot. I do not think that is the same on some of the TRD stuff, like the charger. I know that you can get TRD heavy duty suspension parts that exceed the normal parts and TRD brake pads that are not stock. The Toy parts place has those red and white boxes of the stuff.

It is not a bad idea for that stuff from Toyota.

OK will you buy borderline factory equipped and/or aftermarket?

To answer your question, if it is a Ford 351 but it is not a stock configuration, I would consider it aftermarket. Now the Mustangs today have a 302 but then there are Ford racing 302's. Different engine, then aftermarket.

Lets be more to the topic. If I dump a Ford 4.0L OHC Explorer engine in my Ranger, I am aftermarket even though I am replacing a 4.0L original engine.

Clutch cancel would have given me something to push while sliding back into that tree. Kinda take my mind off how bad my wife was going to be angry. . .

spoog

C writes:
"Clutch cancel would have given me something to
push while sliding back into that tree. Kinda take
my mind off how bad my wife was going to be angry.
. ."



That and an auto locking button for a locking diff probably would have gotten you out of that............................

anonymous

Perhaps. . .

cpousnr

something that would have helped more would be chains.

cpousnr

something that would have helped more would be chains.

cpousnr

The double post was for front and rear!

modvptnl

I hear you, my anal mind still can't grasp it. I realize if you buy a engine from a racing shop - Duttwieler, Lingenfelter(Chevy), RAP, even Summit it's aftermarket. But from the factory? This will be my last comment on this(thank God) Steve Salleen gets down right pissed when someone calls his specialty Mustangs and Explores tuner or aftermarket cars since he has jumped all the hurdles(both Federal and corporate to sell these cars through Ford dealers. He considers his ops a factory that makes specialty vehicles. Ok I'm done.
Spoog, I think the clutch cancel switch comment was tongue and cheek. But if you really think it would have helped I would humbly accept your knowledge and wisdom on what this feature does besides allow you to bump the starter with the truck in gear. I'm serious, I am an off roader-more high speed desert- and I don't know what a clutch cancel switch would help me with. I know on one of my friends early Broncos he did not hook up his safety switch to his auto and you got be real careful you're in park or neutral before starting it.

mmcbride1

Sorry, I should have phrased that better. Vinny is the one who talks out of his a** without any facts to support him, not you.

cpousnr

1. On a slope, stuck, cannot push in clutch for fear of falling.

2. To burn out a perfectly good starter motor and or drain a battery.

3. To put a kewl button on the dash so your girlfriend for the night can say "Was zat?"

Saw a segment on Trucks TV where they had a home workshop for you truck. Off the 80 amp alt. you get power for your power tools and an arc welder for repairing your frame on the trail. Can the TRD version be far behind?!?

spoog

Cspounser writes:


"1. On a slope, stuck, cannot push in clutch for
fear of falling.

2. To burn out a perfectly good starter motor and
or drain a battery.

3. To put a kewl button on the dash so your
girlfriend for the night can say "Was zat?"

Saw a segment on Trucks TV where they had a home
workshop for you truck. Off the 80 amp alt. you
get power for your power tools and an arc welder
for repairing your frame on the trail. Can the TRD
version be far behind?!?"




lol. Sounds like someone is jealous of options they can't get. Thats ok.

A clutch start cancel switch is useful in many ways. I guess you really dont do any serious offroading. That little switch has saved me a few times when I am driving like an idiot up a steep muddy hill and I let the engine bog out.
Im stuck in a couple of feet of mud, with the engine stopped. Now, if I depress the clutch, I will get wheel slippage, which COULD possibly get me stuck and in need of a tow. Remember Cspounser...wheel slippage is NOT good when in mud or slick situations. Its sometimes the very thing that makes you stuck. So, i just keep my foot on the brake, and fire up the ole' engine without any slippage at all, allowing me to cruis e on up the hill. This sort of switch was developed for safari and military toyotas in Africa and the Himalayan area. It's a hardcore option. A CLUTCH bypass switch..if you will.


Now imagine someone who doesnt have this feature. The bog out their engine on the hill, but they have GOOD ground under them. So, they depress the clutch, and as they do, the truck slides back just enough to hit the previous deep wheel ruts.....they fire up the engine and put on the gas as the momentum of the truck is going BACKWARDS..........causing it to spin EVEN more in its own previous ruts, greatly increasing your chances of being stuck.

In my old 22re toyota 4banger, I had this switch as well. It saved my butt many of times.


It's okay if you dont understand it Cspounser. You dont really offroad that much. Its a VERY useful feature for any one travelling in steep, slick terrain. This is one of the reasons toyota is so highly regarded. They offer TRUCK features. They emphasize TRUCK features, not vanity mirrors and heated seats.

Like 4wheeler says " The toyota tacoma offers TOUGH TRUCK features the others just dont, and they ALL WORK. So we introduce our UNANIMOUS pickup of the Year,
the Toyota TAcoma"..




TRUCK TV? lol!!! More like REDNECK TV. I have yet to see a foreign vehicle on either cAR TV or TRUCK TV. Makes you wonder.............

Heck, all of TNN is just a big redneck fest anyways.

spoog

As for the battery and starter draining bit, I had the 22re for 170,ooo miles and never had to replace the starter. The truck also required 2 batteries in that time period.

Perhaps you should read up on the Toyota design in starter coils...........gold plated anyone?

I NEVER had to worry about the battery draining too much from leaving my lights on all night either. I STILL dont with the Tacoma. Its called proper engineering. I used the clutch start switch COUNTLESS times, and it had no effect on those parts at all.

My neighbors would call me at night and wake me up telling me my lights were on in my truck, and that I better turne them off. I would always tell them " so. its a toyota. I dont care", and laugh. I wouldnt go out and turn it off.They would think I was nuts, but the next morning I would head off to work without any starting issues at all. lol. You just don't worry about those things with Toyota trucks.

reddogs

Another wild-eyed, stroke-inducing 100k+ toyo owner, how can this be. I was preaching to the masses the joy of trouble free toyo trucks, but you just go ahead and preach it, brother, and I'll just sit in the pews....

scape2

mmc, you really carry a chip on your shoulder for me don't you? I guess this is natural since I whooped you in the Explorer room with your 183HP/220ft/lbs of torque, underpowered 4-sqwatter@! LOL.

Spoog, you claim I don't give links? All over the first and second Ranger vs Tacoma room I gave tons! You and others (hind, wsn,) would just dismiss them, or better yet not read them. I gave facts, sites, reviews, I'm just tired of posting them over and over and over and over..... and too just have them dismissed.
Spoog, pictures? keep on a duck'n we all know you don't own this TRD supercharged. Go find picture at least in a magazine and post it!LOL.
And spoog the one who claims his so called TRD SC
can beat a lighting? LOL. Lets try www.F150online.com and see some stats. how about 0-60 in 6.5, 340ft/lbs of torque, .88 skidpad, 13th fastest production vehicle EVER! Nope Ford is not performance minded.
See you in the hills!

cpousnr

After number 1 I was kidding spoog. . .

Actually, I was off-road quite a bit this past summer. Whey I owned the 81 Toy P/U took it a few places that 2 wheel drives are not suppose to go. And the 71 Landcruiser I owned, well it can speak for itself as to where a cruiser can go. It did not need a clutch cancel switch.

There were just some nice trucks on that show this time, some hints on prep of a vehicle for water crossings and a real nice restored 55' Blue Oval F100 dressed out and powered by a 351cid Cleveland engine.

Say spoog, how many 1955 Toyota trucks have you seen in shows and on the road lately? Ranger comes from a fine line of tough trucks.

Seeing that 55 kinda remineded me of the chance I had in 1976 of buying a guys 54' F100. Regret not getting that truck now.

wsnoble

We read your "Link" Vince. It was the carpoint link

http://carpoint.msn.com/Vip/UsedRelOver/Ford/Ranger/Used.asp

But nowhere on the page does it say how it came up with those little colored boxes. Not to mention we have all beat the carpoint review people's opinion to death already. Remember accept both reviews (Taco and Ranger) or accept neither. So in answer to your post we didn't ignore your link we just found it to be not very valid. Don't you dimiss spoog's link because you beleive it has error in it? So your link is dismissed for the same reason. Case closed!

TRD Input

The local Toyota dealer here in NH has a SC 4Runner here on the lot. It is new. Does that make it aftermarket? I'm not arguing the TRD website quote, but it is coming from the dealer as part of the deal. Covered under the trucks warranty! Also if you get a cd player in most cars and trucks. it is called a dealer installed option or somtimes port installed. Does this make it aftermarket? Just a ?

-wsn

spoog

As for the 4runner(although I have some issues with it like shoulder room) it is considered to be the most bulletproof SUV made other than the Landcruiser. IT has the highest resale bvalue of any truck...other than the Landcruiser.
Why do you think a 96 4runner with 100k miles list for 14 grand? Because the darn things just go and go and go and go. As usual for toyota, they lead all mid range SUV'sin ground clearance.
They offer the best offroad options as usual, and the v6's can be fitted with the TRD SUPERCHARGER.

Many magazines and reviews consider the Explorer to be the wrost offroading SUV currently manufactured. It and the Expediion and EXCURSION have the dubious distinctions of being extremely poor offroaders ( check ot EDMUNDS land cruiser vs Expedition test). Also a recent review in MOtor trend had to have the Expediditon towed several times while the Grand Cherokee, Rodeo and Tahoe just plowed along.

If you like to tow and want people comfort, ford makes excellent SUVs. If you want sportiness, solid handling, responsiveness, and good offroading, steer very clear of the Ford SUV's.

The Ranger is by far a better vehicle off the trail although it too is hampered with a highway suspension and designed with that similar Ford philosophy.


The 4runner could be improved with more shoulder and leg room. But how can you go wrong with a vehicle that has such freakish resale value? The thing is a tank. It will take anything you dish at it. Very few vehicles are built to the standars of a 4runner.

Hey Vince......shall we dig into the NHSTA data on the Explorer verse 4runner!!!!! hahahahaha!
The runner is even more bulletproof than the Yota trucks. lol.

cpousnr

We are drifting off topic a bit.

But in line of Toyota reliability I can offer this comment. My 78 Corona with the 20 R engine required a starter at around 100K. It is an electrical component and is subject to wear and tear and on a 4X adverse elements. Also, it is only as good as the battery, which after 3-4 years in most cases is well into it's life. For example, if your stuck, starter under water and or your engine has sucked H2O you may not be able to use the feature.

I was mearly SUGGESTING spoog that using that clutch start cancel switch creates a strain on that component. If starters heat up too much damage could result. The book on my sons recently purchased 94 suggests to use it ONLY in a difficult situations to use the motor as a seudo winch to attempt to extract the vehicle from the situation. Notice I said "attempt". It is a nice but not necessary option.

spoog says:
"Many magazines and reviews consider the Explorer
to be the wrost offroading SUV currently
manufactured."(psst, I left the spelling errors)
Wile I do not dissagree that the 4Runner is a notch above the Explorer, I suppose you could cite quotes on your comments that directly compare the two. Otherwise it is only what you often accuse vince of:

Hearsay.

spoog

No problem.


Check out the review in Edmunds : " Battle of the Big SUV's".


Check out the 98 Motor Trend review of the "battle of the sport utes"

Check out the 98 Road and Track " Battle of the middle class sport utes"



Check out Petersons offroad 99 review of the 4runner.



Indeed, the most telling aspect is the inherent design philosophy put into the Explorer. It always has the lowest ground clearance, the suspension is always favored for the highway ect.

The fact that Ford was placing Taurus brakes on their Full size pickups and SUV's also leaves a b ad taste in the mouth.

Anyhow, this is all off topic. However, the design philosophy of the companies that make Rangers and Tacomas IS important to this discussion.

cthompson21

The Ford sport utility vehicles (explorer, expedition, & excursion) are little more than disguised mini-vans. I would never consider taking any of them into serious off-road conditions. About the worse I'd throw at them would be some snow or a gravel road. It makes me ill to see someone driving an expedition or excursion around as a commuter vehicle. They are inefficient and a danger to everyone else on the road. I've only known of 1 family that actually needs one (they need 10,000lbs of towing capacity and have 3 kids). OK, I'm done ranting about the stupid, status-seeking soccer moms and dads.

On the other hand, I believe the Ranger to be a capable off-road vehicle when properly equipped. It might not be the creme de la creme of off-roading, but it hasn't been castrated into a mommobile like the explorer. Ford doesn't build any serious off-road SUV's anymore. The old Bronco is gone.

I'm not getting down on explorers. I like them for what they are, a decent, safe family hauler that isn't hampered by the weather. I think the expedition and excursion appeals to those who are lacking in other areas. I wonder if they've ever read Freud...

scape2

Fact, over 90% of SUV's never even see a gravel road. Ford makes excellent SUV's for those wanting to tow a boat, camper, trailer, or haul 6+ passengers or just go skiing. Well, that accounts for 90% of the market!
Expedition vs Land Cruiser, LOL. And once again spoog fails to mention the huge price difference, along with the interior dimensions, available V8's, towing capacity, passenger capacity. The Expedition dwarfs the Land Cruiser.
OK, I'm off topic I'll stop.
And spoog ducks again, pictures?
And no rebuttle to the F150 Lighting? Truth hurts huh? Ford is not performance minded, right?

scape2

Almost forgot, I coach YMCA youth basketball. My neighbor and I do it together. A parent of one of the kids bought a Explorer Sport Trac in red. Of course I went through the vehicle with a fine tooth comb and asked tons of questions. He took me for a ride and the V6 is smooth and very responsive. Interior was nicely laid out and large enough to sit 5 adults rather comfortably. Toyota should be afraid, very afraid when Ford puts this V6 in its Rangers. Overall, the truck was nice. It would take me sometime to get used to the bed though, it almost looks like it just doesn't fit the truck. After riding in one, and looking it over, I don't know If I'll be trading the Ranger any time real soon.

cthompson21

Where'd this guy get a hold of a sport trac already? It's a '01 model year, which I thought begins production around May or so. I'm not quite sure if I like the styling yet. From the pictures I've seen the bed and cab do not seem to blend very well. I'm sure it looks different in person. Vehicles always seem to do that. I think the Frontier Quad Cab or Dakota Quad Cab do a much better job styling-wise than the Sport Trac. The engine and tranny are very nice, though. Smooth and power with lotsa torque. My father's explorer sport with the same 4.0 SOHC and 5-speed auto tranny is a blast to drive. Still waiting for them to put it in a ranger... It would be superb with a 5-speed manual tranny. Still wondering what they're gonna put in that SVT Ranger. I haven't heard anything conclusive yet. Rats if it's only 4x2. It would be nice to get ahold of Lincoln's 3.9L V8 or the new 260hp Mustang 4.6L V8. But, it will probably be some sort of enhanced (maybe supercharged) 4.0L V6. Well, BBK makes that Instacharger for the 4.0 for $2500...

modvptnl

Thanks for the info on the clutch switch.
Cspounser, I agree it's sort of like a winch. I don't think it will help you much if you're already sliding backwards with your engine stalled as spoog alluded to way back when.

wsnoble

So for those with problems with the landcruiser being to much $$ and the Expedition being less $$. Take a look at the Seqoia. Coming out fall 2k with the tundra's v6.

-wsn

spoog

Cthomp:

Good points about the SUV's.



Vince:


Are you SERIOUSLY telling this board that the Expedition is a better vehicle than a Toyota Landcruiser?

Did you read that Edmunds comparison test? Did you read the part about how the " Expedition felt like it would fall to pieces after three drives on rough roads"?



Come on Vince. You are talking about the LandCruiser here. It is a legend. The highest resale value of any vehicle, period. The things are absolutley bulletproof.

Also, I find it interesting that Ford copied the
third remove-able third seat idea from the LandCruiser.

There is about a 10 k price difference between the two vehicles, and it is worth every penny to get the LandCruiser.

spoog

Vince writes:


"Toyota should be
afraid, very afraid when Ford puts this V6 in its
Rangers. "


Once again, Vince plays the "waiting" game.......


"...If Ford did this the Toyota will be sorry...."


" Just you wait toyota when Ford does this....."


" NExt years Ranger will scare toyota........"


" IN a few years the Ranger will have this........"




lol. Lets talk about the TRUCKS WE HAVE NOW....you know, the one you BOUGHT that sits in your garage?

Or are you running out of straws to grasp Vince?????

cpousnr

Hmm. Well if you go here on Edmunds for an Edmunds review:
http://www.edmunds.com/newtrucks/2000/ford/explorer/xlt4wd.html

you get this and more about Explorer:
"
Since...1991...Ford Explorer...at the top of the sport-utility sales heap."
"...the Explorer gets just about everything right..."
"The interior instills a feeling of quality..."
"Ford has a philosophy of building vehicles that everyone can be happy with."
"...thinking about buying a sport-ute, chances are you've already checked out the Explorer. If you haven't, do yourself a favor and find out why there are so many of these trucks on the road."

and from here:

http://www.edmunds.com/newtrucks/2000/ford/expedition/xlt4wd.html

"...Ford Expedition...nice balance between comfort and function, and its ability to seat nine people makes it popular with large families and those who have to haul stuff around. Nevertheless, we can't overlook the Dodge Durango and the outstanding Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon when discussing big trucks. In the last few years, the mid- and full-size sport-ute market has gotten very competitive and the choices are much more difficult to make."

Hmmm where was Landcruiser mentioned in the compare?

Sooo, why don't you list your URLS that you are refering to that are not favorable to the Explorer and Expidition, ok?

Could it be that you are refering to the Town Hall compares between the two where people offer their OPINIONS?

spoog

Sorry, I figured you would have the mental capacity to find the article yourself since you are on the Edmunds website

Here is the URL:

http://edmunds.com/edweb/whitmore/99Full-Size.SUV.Comparo.rt.html

spoog

Here are some snippets from that review:

(note: some aspects of this conversation ARE relevant to the inherent design philosophy of the makers of the Toyota Tacoma and Ford Ranger)


"Helping us navigate Class I and II trails was probably no big deal for Tedeschi, but it proved to be more than enough for us to gauge the off-road abilities of our assembled troop of vehicles. When the dust settled, it was clear that there was one vehicle in the group, and only one, that was purpose built for serious off-roading: the Toyota Land Cruiser"



"Unfortunately, the Expedition was perceived to be the vehicle most likely to break during the off-road section of our test, and proved too difficult to drive confidently during the on-road section of our test. It was also the most difficult vehicle to load with our luggage, because there is little room behind the optional third-row seat. The third-row seat can be folded, which is what we did in our test, or it can be removed entirely. However, folding or stowing the seat knocks the Expedition down to five-passenger capacity.

The Expedition is a sales-leader in this growing market, and will remain so as long as people keep buying big sport-utes. Like many of Ford's products, the Expedition takes aim at a large group of people instead of a narrow, targeted market. The result is that the Expedition can win the sales crown without being the best in any single category. The idea is: appeal to a broad group, sell to a broad group. From a business standpoint, it's hard to argue with that type of idea. However, since we're journalists, not businesspeople, we'd like to see Ford concentrate more on a few specific areas, like on-road handling and off-road ruggedness.
"




" WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE FORD CONCENTRATE MORE ON A FEW SPECIFIC AREAS, LIKE ON ROAD HANDLING and OFF-ROAD RUGGEDNESS".


Pretty much what I have been saying all along.


IT WAS CLEAR ONLY ONE VEHICLE.......ONLY ONE VEHICLE..........ONLY ONE VEHICLE.........TOYOTA DESIGN PHILOSOPHY......ONLY ONE VEHICLE........TOYOTA DESIGN PHILOSOPHY........

spoog

"You are probably wondering if we are off our rockers, since Edmund's typically prizes value over pure performance, and there is a $6,000 price penalty for those who choose the Land Cruiser over the Denali. Is the Toyota really worth that much of an increase? You bet it is.

Although none of the trucks in this test was a slouch, none came close to matching the Land Cruiser's interior luxury, highway performance, off-road prowess, and all-around livability. Not the biggest, but by no means small, the Land Cruiser can haul seven people with its optional flip-down rear seats, or can move a considerable amount of gear. Beyond that, the Land Cruiser possesses an unimpregnable build quality that no amount of off-roading can tear apart. "





What was that you were saying about the Expedition and Land Cruiser Vince? Lol.



DONT even get me started on the 4runner vs explorer issue.


These design philosophies are passed RIGHT DOWN the LINE, wether you beleive it or not. All auto manufacturers stake out a philosophy with their more expensive models, and pass that engineering philosophy right down line. This has been proven and CLEARLY shows. The Landcruiser Expedition comparison tests mirror EXACTLY the Tacoma /Ranger comparison tests in 4wheeler and Petersons Offroad.

smcpherr

Spoog, aren't you the one who is always berating other people for introducing articles written by people who are not professional off-roaders? The people in your article are self-proclaimed car-reviewers by nature. You yourself have posted info from someone who found class I and II trails to be difficult enough to accurately test the off-road worthyness of each vehicle. Not saying the test is any less true, but if you are going to claim an article is false due to inexperience of the writers you shouldn't post an article written by inexperienced writers.

spoog

My gripe was not with the actual status of the reviewers, but the fact that the 4wd aspects WERE NOT TESTED, and that the trucks remained on the pavement 100% of the time during testing, and the 4wd systems were NOT EVEN engaged.

That was my main gripe.

scape2

Once again spoog concentrates on a specific aspect of a vehicle, offroad. Anyone here knows most SUV's, and 4x4 vehicles never see even gravel. What about comfort? towing? hauling, interior room? seating? options? price? This is why Ford leads the way in SUV's with the Explorer, Expedition, and Excursion. They perform well in town, will tow the boat or camper and haul the kids and friends at the same time. They will get you to your ski resort, tow your horse trailer and all for a fair PRICE. This one your gonna loose spoog. The Land Cruiser may have a great reputation for offroad, but the fact is most will probably never see offroad. :-))

cpousnr

That blue and white topped cruiser that Tedeschi had in the article was like mine.
Now THAT is a 4 wheel drive machine compared to the current landcruiser.

Oh by the way, it and I NEVER needed anything like a clutch cancel switch or a locker. . .

Just thought I would share. . .

spoog

Did you even bother to read what I wrote?
Did you even bother to read the link? Edmunds chose the Landcruiser "hands down"!

They picked the Expedition "most likely to break"!

They SINGLED out Ford and basically called them a good business marketing company, but not much else. They even went so far as t say that Ford needs to concentrate on making more rugged vehicles!


They picked the Landcruiser for its ON ROAD HANDLING, OFF ROAD PROWESS, EVERYDAY USE, COMFORT!! EVERY SINGLE CATEGORY AVIALABLE!

What is it you don't understand about the english language?


I am NOT concentrating on just offroad. The Landcruiser took the cake i nevery single category they offered in that comparison test!


HEre you go!


( all quotes taken from http://edmunds.com/edweb/whitmore/99Full-Size.SUV.Comparo.rt.html)

"but at the end of our journey the decision of who builds the best full-size sport utility was easy to make. "



"After a few minutes behind the wheel of the Toyota Land Cruiser, each of our editors agreed that it offered the best on-road performance of any truck in this segment.Nevertheless, there was nothing else in our test that even came close to offering this truck's level of control and ease of operation on the freeway and two-lane roads. "





Are you getting this yet?

NOTHING CAME CLOSE ON THE ROAD.


THIS is WAY too easy Vince:


"The Ford Expedition finished last in our on-road-driving test because it is simply too much work to drive. The Expedition's overly sensitive steering required constant correction and its body roll was the worst of the bunch. The Expedition wasn't just spooky on the two-lane portion of our test; it required two-handed steering on portions of the Interstate. A 5200-pound vehicle should feel more solid than did our Expedition. "


"The fact that our Land Cruiser proved to be the best off-road vehicle came as no surprise to our guide from Arizona Adventures, Drew Tedeschi. Tedeschi has guided off-roaders for nearly two decades, and has tackled some of the toughest terrain in North and South America, Europe, Africa and Asia. He thinks that nothing compares to Land Cruisers when the road ends. "




"When the dust settled, it was clear that there was one vehicle in the group, and only one, that was purpose built for serious off-roading: the Toyota Land Cruiser"




"Palmer agreed, stating that the Land Cruiser was so good that it was almost boring on the relatively easy trails we traversed. I found the Land Cruiser to be the most forgiving of our novice four-wheeler mistakes. The Land Cruiser refused to punish us for stupid approaches and departures, literally gliding across boulder-strewn terrain. "




Remind anyone of another review? lol!!!!!!
Design philosophy right down the line.........




"Unfortunately, the Expedition exhibited a great many creaks and groans when traveling over the rougher portions of the trail, prompting Wardlaw to wonder whether or not it would be able to stand up to the routine abuse of off-roading for any extended period of time"



"Wardlaw, who thought the Expedition's ovoid and protruding dash looked like a mass of melting Jell-O. "




READ VINCE:


"Unfortunately, the Expedition was perceived to be the vehicle most likely to break during the off-road section of our test, and proved too difficult to drive confidently during the on-road section of our test. It was also the most difficult vehicle to load with our luggage, because there is little room behind the optional third-row seat. The third-row seat can be folded, which is what we did in our test, or it can be removed entirely. However, folding or stowing the seat knocks the Expedition down to five-passenger capacity.

The Expedition is a sales-leader in this growing market, and will remain so as long as people keep buying big sport-utes. Like many of Ford's products, the Expedition takes aim at a large group of people instead of a narrow, targeted market. The result is that the Expedition can win the sales crown without being the best in any single category. The idea is: appeal to a broad group, sell to a broad group. From a business standpoint, it's hard to argue with that type of idea. However, since we're journalists, not businesspeople, we'd like to see Ford concentrate more on a few specific areas, like on-road handling and off-road ruggedness"




And FINALLY:


"The hands-down winner of our full-size sport-ute roundup was the Toyota Land Cruiser. Better on-road than many cars, better off-road than a mountain bike, the Toyota swept every driving test we could throw its direction.



You are probably wondering if we are off our rockers, since Edmund's typically prizes value over pure performance, and there is a $6,000 price penalty for those who choose the Land Cruiser over the Denali. Is the Toyota really worth that much of an increase? You bet it is.

Although none of the trucks in this test was a slouch, none came close to matching the Land Cruiser's interior luxury, highway performance, off-road prowess, and all-around livability. Not the biggest, but by no means small, the Land Cruiser can haul seven people with its optional flip-down rear seats, or can move a considerable amount of gear. Beyond that, the Land Cruiser possesses an unimpregnable build quality that no amount of off-roading can tear apart.

In the final analysis, it looks like Edmund's editors made the right choice on that fateful night last fall. Our choice then for best full-size sport-utility vehicle was the Toyota Land Cruiser, and, after a multi-day flog through all types of conditions, it remains so. Nice job Toyota. Now, if only we can agree on where to hold our next editorial meeting. "




Vince...I think it's time you turned your computer off and walked away........

spoog

Just in case you didnt get that last mesage I will sum it up for you:


From Edmunds:


"Although none of the trucks in this test was a
slouch, none came close to matching the Land
Cruiser's interior luxury, highway performance,
off-road prowess, and all-around livability. Not
the biggest, but by no means small, the Land
Cruiser can haul seven people with its optional
flip-down rear seats, or can move a considerable
amount of gear. Beyond that, the Land Cruiser
possesses an unimpregnable build quality that no
amount of off-roading can tear apart.

In the final analysis, it looks like Edmund's
editors made the right choice on that fateful night
last fall. Our choice then for best full-size
sport-utility vehicle was the Toyota Land Cruiser,
and, after a multi-day flog through all types of
conditions, it remains so. Nice job Toyota. Now, if
only we can agree on where to hold our next
editorial meeting. "