Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Compact Pickup Comparison: Frontier, Ranger, Tacoma, S10, Dakota, B-Series, & Hombre

16781012

Comments

  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Once again, you are trying to make your own assumptions to sound like facts. I'm not jealous of Rangers real towhooks. I don't give a damn. Nor do I care for Rangers 6CD changer. It's just that simple: I don't care for any of it.
    Tacoma towhooks are also bolted directly to the frame.
    As for "it takes a real man": yep, it does. Thanks a bunch. I have no lift, stock tires, thanks.
    However, if you ever bothered to read trail classifications, you'd know that trails differ by level of difficulty:
    1. No 4x4 required.
    2. 4x4 Recommended most of the time.
    3. 4x4, 32s, locker required.
    4. 35s and so on and so forth.
    This is just an example of how trails in Del Rio are. Now....taking stock truck to 1, 2 and MAYBE 3 is fine. But you can't go where big boys play. It's that simple. No matter how much a "real man" you are, if the rock step is 3 feet tall, there's no way you get a stock Ranger up there. If you think you can, I'd like to see it. Come down to San Antonio and show us all how you can climb 3-foot vertical steps at the waterfall in stock Ranger.
    Lift and bigger tires are just tools that let you go places where stock trucks dream of going.

    I rode in 98 or 99 XLT Ranger once, from a rental company. Now that was a cheap-looking truck, inside and outside. Inside it had this poisonous yellow plastic and seat material. I guess Ford calls it "Oak".

    As for S/C Nissan: did the program have any Nissan commercials in the breaks? It was most definitely sponsored and paid for by Nissan Motors Co! (Which is actually a good thing to check: who paid for it. Microsoft has been guilty of running many "studies" they paid for that tend to lean in their favor).
    S/C Nissan is an underpowered heavy truck with styling thats 20 years ahead of its' time. Plastic spaceship, anyone?
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    is a bad thing to have scorp. too bad you are constantly defending your truck on here. it's clear you didn't get what you wanted. "if my truck don't have it, i either don't want it, or it isn't necessary."
    LOL
    just how far will those crap plastic belted $50 BFG's take you? how many towhooks you got?

    oh yeah, most rental companies get the cheapest vehicles they can. ie probably an XL with the cheaper interior materials. just like non-SR5 toyotas, but i bet that ranger you rode in had a clock, eh? LMAO
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    I guess being high on Ranger is clouding your better judgement when you can't understand what another person is writing, or believe it.
    The BFGs that I have get me far enough. Definitely further than you can get now. I'm planning to get new tires soon.
    As for the interior: Even non-SR5 Taco can't compare to the scary interior of that Ranger.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    how many times have you dented your bed because of an atv or snowmobile? weak, cheap pos tacomas. or should i say a camry with a t/c? LMAO
    and you call it a truck. yeah, whatever scorpio.

    wait until i get my liberty, and we'll see how far you can get then.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    I don't have an atv/snowmobile yet. When I get a house I will buy one. Until then, no.
    As for Liberty: when you actually get one, you can come back and start Liberty vs. Tacoma thread. If you think dash rattle in Tacoma was bad.....heh, just wait what your Liberty will bring you. I don't doubt the Jeep name, but since you take carpoint site for a bible (of course, it's bashing Tacoma), you might want to read what other people have said about Liberty. Not good. Forget the dash rattle....heh.
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    wow, I'm surprised you think a chevy interior is "plush." even on my dad's new Tahoe (which is a cool rig, BTW) the dashboard is cheap, flimsy plastic. it looks like Fisher Price "my first dashboard" or something. I'd personally rank Ford's as having the nicest interiors, followed by Toyota, then Dodge, and finally chevy way in last place. The biggest problem with the Yota's interior is that it's a little boring.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    eagle-im talking about the S10 interiors. very nice. i haven't seen the new full-size interiors.

    scorp-go drive a liberty. you'll probably want one. they have power, and don't rattle- opposite of what you're apparently used to (plus they come with dana axles as well). i know there were early production units with some problems, but those were the very first ones built. the one i drove was built in march and was the most solid vehicle i've ever driven.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    How do you know what I want? As a rule, I don't buy things just off the drawing board. Liberty is bound to have little annoying bugs: go read the alldata.com TSB info on it and weep. While Tacoma has dash rattle, Liberty has
    1. Loose ends on running boards.
    2. Long crank time <--I remember you citing this as a bad thing about Tacoma, and how your Ranger started right up.
    3. Evaporation Drain tube: water leaks onto the floor...Are you sure you aren't buying a Tacoma, as you have described it in the past?
    4. Wait...there's more :) Wheels/center cap: RUST streaking.
    5. Body: flip-up rear cover leaks.
    Lets see.....is there anything about rattling dash...no. But here's one
    6. Exaust: rattle.
    So lets paint a final picture:
    According to tbunder:
    Tacoma: dash rattle, water leaks around the firewall, long crank times, rusting bed.
    Liberty: exaust rattle, drain tube and cover leaks, long crank times, rusting wheels.

    So you see? The picture you have painted for Tacoma is the one you'll get with your Liberty. Have fun.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Unless I'm wrong (which is possible), there's only 1 midsize pickup: dakota.
    Tacoma, Frontier, Ranger and S10 are compact pickups. F150, Tundra, Silverado, Ram are fullsize.

    As far as compacts go:
    4-door Tacoma with 4x4 will be $25K at least.
    You can get an xtracab Ranger with 2 real doors and 2 half doors (it's not a double/crew cab, it's an extended cab).
    Best gas milage: Taco or Ranger. An xtracab 4x4 Tacoma is by far the lightest, 60 lbs lighter than a Ranger.
    Best on snow/ice: does not depend on the truck. Depends on the tires and the driver. My Taco handles fine.
    Least mechanical problems: recall and TSB info speaks for itself. Ranger's got a long list of everything. Tacoma likes to hide problems and tell customers its their own fault, BUT:
    There are only few problems people mention about Tacomas:
    1. Rattling dash. I haven't experienced that at all, and it's a $5 fix to begin with.
    2. Water getting through the firewall. Again, I haven't seen any of that, nor I think have any of the TTORA guys I've talked to.
    You'll hear about "1-star side impact ratings" that Tacoma got in 1998. Thats a load of crap.
    Head gasket problems, again, back in 1997.
    What do you need the truck for and how much money do you have to spend on it?
    I'd just say, go with Toyota. But there are some pros and cons.
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    As Scorpio said, the only real "midsize" truck would be the Dakota. Take a look at the Dakota Quad Cab. It's a good looking truck with 4 real doors and a real bed. Dodge has never been known for reliability, and the gas mileage won't be great (you're buying a truck, not an economy car) but I've heard good things about it.
    Other considerations might be the Tacoma Double Cab (a compact truck but might be big enough for your needs) and the Explorer Sport Trac. My beef with the Sport Trac is it's small bed. It's really more of an SUV than a pickup.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Taco DC also has a small bed, but aside from that, it is more truck than a SportTrac.
  • plutoniousplutonious Member Posts: 799
    Why do you always focus on numbers in brochures and not real world performance? Nissan these days seems to be completely focused on being able to advertise the largest horse-power figures. Yet when you drive their cars, you keep wondering, "where's the beef." In fact, if you go over to the car forums, there's a thread titled "The power of Nissan" where the general concensus among the hundreds of postings is that Nissans' performance aren't commensurate their hyped horse-power figures. The Nissan Spec V looks awesome on paper, yet it is continually shredded by the automotive world for its lackluster performance and numerous shortcomings. I even provided you with a copy of such an article. I've driven the Pathfinder and Maxima and quite frankly was expecting much more from the advertised 260 HP-range figures.

    You like to keep saying even the older Ford 4.0 had a slight torque advantage over the Toyota 3.4, yet in every performance test, the Toyota beat the Ford (and everything else). How do you explain that? You seem to be obsessed with brochure bragging rights and not performance.

    Why don't you save the time and effort involved in posting your long-winded opinionated crap and just provide us with links showing how the Ranger (or Frontier, LOL) outperform the Tacoma.

    That'll be the day!
  • 2k1trd2k1trd Member Posts: 301
    Power to weight ratio.
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    Are you sure about that?
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    that I've said.
    Today I could have used 1 more tow hook on the front, when I got hung up on a hill and damn nearly rolled over (all the way down).
    But I got winched up by 2 Tacos (one on the hook, one on the frame to straighten me up, then both hooked up to the tow hook), and the hook took the abuse of pulling a 3,500 hunk of metal up a hill.
    So now I'm gonna go and buy myself another towhook.
  • piutoniouspiutonious Member Posts: 1
    At least you were saved by two other Taco's. You must of been where other Rangers or lesser trucks couldn't get to you. Even if, the Ranger would have probably ripped off a bumper trying to tow anything out.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    I understand that some people could get fooled by the "clever" trick to emulate plutonious by using a name piutonius. Is this some disgrunted Ranger fans' idea of "revenge" by making Tacoma owners look like complete and total buttheads?
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    odds are it's Tbunder. Notice how we haven't seen him lately since his last blow-up.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    He's probably in some other forum telling everyone why his new Liberty is better than <.....insert your favorite comparable SUV here......>
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    not me bud.

    scorp, good to see you finally realized what i was preaching was the truth. also scorp, is far as the liberty being better than any other comparable suv in its class. well, in what category? gas mileage and highway ride? the escape wins hands down. in off-roading? well, the liberty nearly took its big bro the gc for four-wheeler's four-wheeler of the year. its quite the machine off-road im reading.

    you gotta admit that "plutonius" asked for it. he's nothing but trouble. and do you really think i'm that stupid?
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    You were right only on one point: having 2 hooks.
    I could have used 2 when I was getting pulled up, but since I didn't have them, both winches were hooked up to the one I have. No, I didn't lose or damage my bumper (so you're wrong on that). No, nothing happened to the tow hook (so you were wrong on that one too).
    You'll find some way to preach about how good Liberty is, and as for "do you really think I'm that stupid", I'm not gonna answer that. I didn't think it was you in a first place.
  • plutoniousplutonious Member Posts: 799
    This new guy "piutonious" or whatever is one clever dude. Really, I'm flattered that I've made such an impression on this fellow that he wants to impersonate me!

    So tbunder, how about some links or something showing that the Ranger outperforms the Tacoma?
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    whatever scorp. you yourself said you nearly rolled cuz you didn't have two towhooks. it's okay to just admit that ford equips their trucks with better retrieval gear than toyota does. and if you look, the towhook quality between the two favors the ford, as they are quite larger than the little toyota hook.

    pluto- no thanks. i won't take the bait. only thing ill say is look at the sales numbers. for some reason, more than a hundred thousand disagree that the tacoma is the better truck. why is that? like i said, my ranger would have gone anywhere your tacoma will go. period. good tires and a good driver is all it takes. not to mention that more horsepower and torque i had over you in the first place. go badger someone else will ya? looks like you have a new arch-enemy now anyways. scorpio has somehow taken your spot. even though he is somewhat a nicer of a competitor.
  • yellowdryellowdr Member Posts: 41
    When I finally decided on the Chevy I was a little concerned that the Edmunds review placed it 4/5 on the small pick up list. NOW even I don't buy the Dakota v-8 as a small truck, but the chevy got most of its poor rating for its "old design".

    Now that I have had it for several months and several thousand miles I had to add to this discussion that I have been very favorable pleased. The interior is by far nicer than the other crews that I tested although the seats do sit rather low.

    The MPG on the road has been a nice surprise 20-22 plus and 21.3 on a slow ride 60mph with a full load (full is relative term with a short bed...I had a full size washer and dryer plus the dog crate, and luggage).

    The truck seats 2 child seats with room for my wife in the back with the kids and the standard stereo is fine. The standard equipment overall includes just about everything and the price paid was the least of all the crew cabs in this area. NIssans were $22 plus, Toys were $24 plus, etc. The Chevy was $21 and change.

    I don't beat the truck off road and have had no challenges yet. ANYONE try the S10 in the mud, snow, etc? That is one of the few areas that even Edmunds thinks the S10 is equal to any in its class.

    I would recommend it.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Most people I know (including myself for my wife's truck) got the Ford because it was the best quality for the PRICE. I liked the Toyota better and ended up getting myself one a few years later. I'm sure that a great number of Ranger buyers, if not the majority, chose the Ranger over the Tacoma ONLY because of price. That would make your sales argument useless.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    so are you finally admitting that the toyota is overpriced? cuz you don't get anymore for more with the toyota. you actually get less, including lower crash results according to the nhtsa. im sure the sales advantage the ford has over the toyota is a result of numerous things. one of them probably being a lot more dealers and a better selection of trucks to choose from come shopping day. financing, deals, incentives, standard equipment, etc. and the thicker doors on the ford tend to sway a few im sure too.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Go back to 3rd grade, or whenever you were taught how to read.
    I nearly rolled my truck, but NOT "cuz" I didn't have 2 hooks. I nearly rolled it because I didn't think of the consequences of going up that mud hill.
    The only time I needed a second hook was when I was getting winched up, we needed to hook the second winch to something. Since there's no second hook, both got hooked onto the same tow hook.
    Now.....no matter how "little" the hook was, it accomodated 2 winch hooks, held on while I was getting pulled up. It didn't rip off the bumper. Did not damage it. The hook did not break. It did not bend. You are bullshitting again, but we are all used to it by now.

    As for the factoid statement about numerous things that put Ford over Toyota: Yeah, there's enough Ford dealers, alright. Billy Ford had to go on TV himself to sell the cars, and lure people with incentives just to do that. Just because 1 mil. idiots make McDonalds their restaraunt of daily choice doesn't mean that it's any good. Get the point?
  • plutoniousplutonious Member Posts: 799
    Maybe more "off-roaders" choose the Ranger simply because they are posers. Only a poser would rather have an MP3 player than a rear locker!
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Where did I say that the Toyota was overpriced? I think the Ford is a nice truck, however, the Toyota is worth the extra money and I would buy one again. In my opinion, if you intend to really use your truck off road (rather than just imaginary jumping), the Toyota is a better choice.
  • tgravo2tgravo2 Member Posts: 70
    I like the point scorpio made about the Ford commercial. Has anyone ever paid close attention to what Billy Ford says. He says everyone always tells him they cant find a used Ford truck these days in mint condition. Billy says thats because these trucks were made to work. Right after that he says his truck is in the same condition as the day he bought it, which would mean mint. Doesnt that kinda contradict itslef, Whats up with that?

    Also I agree with Allknowing on the price issue. If the price is no option I bet more people would opt for the Tacoma. I spent the extra money on a Tacoma and much rathered it than my ranger.

    Tbunder also said if you put good tires on a ranger it will outperform a Tacoma off-road, so you are saying the Tacoma is superior off-road stock???
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    tbunder likes to say things he can't back up.
    He turned down a request to offroad proposed to him by one of iowa Taco owners.
    Ranger may outwheel Taco offroad. And it needs better tires to do that (while Taco stock BFGs do the job fine). I've been going offroad 2-3 times a month on hte weekends since December, I've seen 2 Rangers during that time. One I helped pull out of mud, and another actually offroaded.
    As for Billy Ford: It's a commercial, it's not supposed to make sense. Media is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and so statements like "mint condition, 120,000 miles" are what Ford really wants you to hear and register in your head. Everything else is just used to tie those words together.
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    It's not supposed to be gospel, or anything.

    How many 20, 30, 40, or 50 year old vehicles do you see out there with a Toyota badge on them? Some Fords just don't die. I know that threatens Toyota's higher quality for a higher dollar mantra, but there are a great many Ford trucks that take the abuse and keep on running. Notice, I didn't say all Fords, but there are many that can still be found working the trails, farm, or highways. Even a friends truck that I occasionally use for towing on the weekend is 8 years older than I am.

    I'd rather listen to Bill Ford, than Tomoya Toriumi.
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    a little bit of our convo a week or so ago.

    446 of 483 hehe........ by tbunder Mar 31, 2002 (09:36 pm)
    the ranger is cheap? lol
    the tacoma interior looks like a book out of the '80's arcades. cheap straight dash, cheap flimsy doors, small rear window, no quad cab option on ext. cabs, where's the indash cd changer? crappy seats, etc.
    the ranger interior is classy and first rate in my book. nothing compares to the features one can get. not to mention it comes with real towhooks, not a little hook under the bumper. LOL
    and they call the tacoma a truck? with its pencil sized driveshafts? hilarious.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    #447 of 483 Interior by sc0rpi0 Apr 01, 2002 (08:29 am)
    This arguement about quality of interior is completely opinion-based.
    "I think Ranger interior is cheap."
    "No way! Tacoma interior is cheap."

    For all it's worth, Tacoma interior is nice and functional (except the clock). No flashy dash work, nothing. Nice, simple and functional design. tbunder, do you want the interior of a truck to look like you are sitting in an F-18 or something? Would you like a DVD player to go with that too?
    No 4-door extended cab? True. Does Ranger offer a full doublecab version? I didn't think so.
    Lay off the tow hooks, will you? It's a stupid point.**NO COMMENT HERE, LOL** "Oh, I have this extra bolt, and you don't! Haha, my truck rules!" **well, it would've that day now huh?**
    Taco hook does the job, and if you are a "real offroader", you'll not be sticking with stock version of the truck anyway **so you're saying you're not a REAL off-roader?**. A couple of month ago one of the trucks in our party rolled.....we didn't use towhooks to turn it over and pull it out of the hole. We used winches instead. And real steel bumpers (not the ones Ranger and Tacoma have). Your real tow hooks would have been useless there, no matter how many you had. *duh, towhooks are for pulling out, not over.*

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

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    #449 of 483 nah....... by tbunder Apr 01, 2002 (10:35 am)
    scorpio- you are wrong. the ford towhooks are bolted directly to the frame and are extremely thick. they would not have been useless. they would have come in very handy. it's obvious you are leery of your one now **ESPECIALLY NOW EH?** and very jealous you don't have real ones. who wouldn't? its just common sense. shoot, even the liberty im looking at has two real ones sticking out from the bumper from the frame.

    i love it when you say "lay off the towhooks will you? its a stupid point."

    and then you say this:

    #466 of 483 Alright, I'd like to take back some of the tow hook stuff by sc0rpi0 Apr 07, 2002 (02:32 pm)
    that I've said.
    Today I could have used 1 more tow hook on the front, **NAHHHHHH** when I got hung up on a hill and damn nearly rolled over (all the way down).
    But I got winched up by 2 Tacos **OF COURSE** (one on the hook, one on the frame to straighten me up, then both hooked up to the tow hook), and the hook took the abuse of pulling a 3,500 hunk of metal up a hill.
    So now I'm gonna go and buy myself another towhook. **HMMMMMMMMMMM**
    **BUT ISN'T THAT STUPID?**



    you say that i like to say stuff, and then not back it up (like what, id like to hear- let's hear it scorp, back up your little statement). YOU'RE the one who said two hooks didn't make any difference (just cuz your cheap toy doesn't come with two, hardly even one for that matter and then actually went wheeling for once and found out just how functional two may be) after i had already said that two should be the standard, as they are on every 4x4 'cept for the cheap tacoma. so i think you need to practice what you preach, and speak from experience next time you make a comment without knowing what you're talking about. why should i have to back up what i say, when i have people like you who will eventually see the light and do it for me? you make me laugh scorpman.

    aaah, and i was gonna lay off edmunds. but you just couldn't go w/o mentioning my name with me not even posting could you?
  • tgravo2tgravo2 Member Posts: 70
    Just because toyota doesnt have a commercial saying they have old trucks in good condition doesnt mean that there are none.

    I believe in the 99 or 2000 Tacoma brochure they had a guy in there with a 1984 single cab toyota with 1,000,000 miles on it. Id say thats pretty good. I have never seen a Ford with over 300,000 miles on it.

    Tbunder - now you are saying the Tacoma is cheap, you just finished saying how they were overpriced :)

    Ranger's have a second tow hook so more trucks can be used to pull them out of places they can't go. That should stir up some thoughts :)
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    exactly. right on. cheaply built, and overpriced. :o)
  • tgravo2tgravo2 Member Posts: 70
    I was in the 4Runner message board and someone posted this link saying they talked to someone from Toyota and they said the 4Runner's new V6 will be a 3.8L with at least 250hp!!! Wouldn't that be great for the Tacoma. I'm sure it would get the same engine. That would kill the other truck competitors in the power category and then tbunder would know that the Tacoma has much more hp than the Ranger.


    Here is the link, read the first post.

    http://www.outdoorwire.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=13;t=010199

  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    actually, i wouldn't really care cuz i don't own a ranger anymore. but actions speak louder than words. also, the ranger is going to be totally redone in a year or two as well. and it is also rumored to get a new V8. so we'll have to wait and see. hopefully, the new toyota engine will finally get a timing chain, and not another cheap timing belt design.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Those comments are extremely stupid. Did you feel good about yourself inserting neat little "NAHHHHHHH", "HMMMMMMMM" in my posts?
    I -->COULD<-- have used 2 tow hooks, but I got winched out on 1.
    Yes, it took 2 Tacomas to winch me up. Wow....Tacoma must suck, it takes 2 to winch it up a muddy 45-50 deg. slope full of ruts. I guess The King Offroad, Jeep Wrangler, sucks even worse, because it took -->4<-- trucks to winch him out. 3 Tacos and a Dodge, 1 Taco and Dodge were acting as anchors.
    It seems you are under your own dillusion that my truck got stuck because it did not have second tow hook, and you keep basing your " **well, it would've that day now huh?**" on that. I guess I can't help it if you can't/won't understand what seems to be plain English.
    Tow hooks did NOT make a difference when I got hung up. The only place they would have made a difference was when truck was straightened out and pulled up. The original setup of 1 winch on the tow hook and 1 on the frame was NOT due to lack of tow hooks: it was to stabilize the truck, which was sitting at about 60-70 deg angle to the slope of the hill (aka almost perpendicular).
    And once again: despite your claims that I would have 1. damaged the bumper 2. bent the hook or frame, nothing like that happened. I guess I was just lucky, because I was bound to have bumper ripped off, since puny little towhook is hidden so far under it.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    4Runner will get the new setup first in 2003. Tacoma is due to get it in 2004 (3.7L V6, possibly 4.7L Tundra engine). As for beating Ranger: Lets put it this way: 3.4L ruled since 1995.5 until 2001, when Ford finally put out an engine thats not a joke (waiting for tbunder to start talking about how old 4.0L had more torque. While you are at it, don't forget to mention all the problems it had) that could finally compete with 3.4L. I've read that 3.7L would be 230-240hp/trq, not 250, but thats for the 4Runner, and its' exaust is tuned (currently, at least) for a little lower performance. So new Taco could very well have even more power. But, rumor is that Tacoma will get redesigned and move into midsize category. We'll just have to wait and see.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    WIll someone explain to me in detail why they have a problem with the placement of the Tacoma's clock. I'm a little under six feet tall and the clock is in a perfect position for me. I never have any problem seeing it at all. Are the guys complaing here only four or five feet tall or what?
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    I'm 5'9" and have to tilt my head to see it. It could also depend on the tilt of the steering wheel. Many factors, but seems like passenger is the one mostly benefitting from the clock.
  • tgravo2tgravo2 Member Posts: 70
    I had never really thought about the clock in a bad placement, Im 6' and I could see it well, I guess it depends how reclined you sit in your seat and how low or high you tilt your steering wheel, I also had a cd player that I put in myself that displayed the time so I guess I never paid much attention to it
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    LOL, made ya mad eh? i never said the reason you got stuck was cuz you didn't have two towhooks. i just reiterated what i originally said, that two towhooks were better than one. and then reiterated what you said, that having two was stupid and to knock it off about the two towhooks.

    and then you totally change your mind about it. just admit you were wrong and i was right. two are better than one little hook under the frame. i dont care what you drive, if you dont have the means to pull it out, its useless. ie. you only having one little hook, and now saying you're gonna buy another one. as you say, its plain english. i posted everything you said. its right there. all you have to do is read it. if you didn't think you needed another towhooks, you wouldn't have come on here and said "i take back the towhook stuff." you evidently have a problem admitting you're wrong.
  • plutoniousplutonious Member Posts: 799
    "and then you totally change your mind about it."

    Kind of like when you bragged nonstop when you thought your Ranger had a locker, found out it didn't, then said lockers were worthless just because the Tacoma TRD has them?

    Have you changed your mind on your (bogus) claims that Rangers outweigh Tacomas by 600lbs? I would think that extra weight would really hinder the Ranger's "jumping" performance you kept bragging about here at Edmunds. OOOPS, that's right, according to your E-BAY advertisement you never "abused" your truck.

    Come on, keep up the posts, this is fun!!!
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    Key word is could. I didn't need 2 hooks. But guys told me to get another one upfront and hook/hitch in the rear, so if I get into a situation like that again, it's a little easier and instead of dragging my truck up they can winch it down.
    So, just to reiterate: Yes, I could have used 2 hooks. No, I didn't NEED 2 hooks. I got out with 1.
    You make it sound like the tow hook I got is totally useless. Somehow it's not the case, because I can see my truck from the office window, and it definitely does not look like it rolled down the hill. I'm gonna get another hook because older ttora guys told me to after I got pulled out (more like while I was getting pulled out), not because of you.
  • tgravo2tgravo2 Member Posts: 70
    I have to admit I do like the way all Ford trucks have the tow hooks set up, I like seeing them when you look at the front of the truck, especially the chrome ones on the FX4, but there is nothing wrong with the Tacoma one. You make it sound like the Ranger is better just because it has two tow hooks. I dont hear any complaints from Tacoma owners about thier single tow hook.

    The only thing I don't like about the position of the Ford's tow hooks is I have seen some Ford trucks with body lifts and after the lift is put on, the tow hooks are now below the bumper and it just looks stupid, I guess the Tacoma's hidden one can be an advantage.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Member Posts: 897
    tbunder does not believe in lifts: for him being a real offroader is to "take a stock truck far and beyong". Which is probably why he does not consider jumping a truck an abuse.
    So Ford towhooks are also for a showoff? I'm wondering, though, what point is having a chrome hook, because chrome is just coating. It'd get scraped off pretty fast.
  • midnight_stangmidnight_stang Member Posts: 862
    If you want to keep bringing up old arguments against tbunder, aren't you forgetting that you thought your part time locker was ALSO a limited slip differential when not fully locked?

    "The Tacoma's rear locker can be be engaged at will by the driver only when needed, then turned off. The rest of the time it's good old LSD, so you get the best of both worlds. I assure you, there's no hopping and tire chirping going around corners in my truck; the locker is turned off. I understand and can appreciate your point, however, on trucks with full-time lockers.

    Tblunder, you've proven to be TOO UNKNOWLEDGEABLE to have an intelligent conversation with. You can't even tell what tire sizes you have, the difference between lockers and LSDs, what swaybars do, ETC. "

    Let's not forget the design flaw on the Ranger where the door unlocks when open the door from the inside.

    tgravo--->I guess the main thing about the clock is that for most people it is in a place not too easily seen by the driver. Also that you pay 80 bucks for something that should be part of the radio to begin with.

    "I believe in the 99 or 2000 Tacoma brochure they had a guy in there with a 1984 single cab toyota with 1,000,000 miles on it. Id say thats pretty good. I have never seen a Ford with over 300,000 miles on it."

    So it's OK to brag about that in a brochure, but you can't brag about Ford trucks in commercials?
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    I think it's interesting that the 2 biggest complaints here against the Tacoma are the lack of two towhooks, and an ill-placed clock. Sounds like an endorsement to me!
  • tbundertbunder Member Posts: 580
    first and foremost, thanks stang. i find it amusing that pluto can't muster any kind of intelligent conversation on here other than bringing up old stuff. and i do mean old. yeah, i made a mistake. lots of people call lsd's lockers. look at jeep brochures or gm brochures. they call there lsd's traction-lok axles. whatever. he is just causing trouble and it totally backs up what i've thought about him all along, but i won't get back into that. if i were a toyota guy on here, i wouldn't like pluto coming on here just to cause trouble and deliberately picking fights. it was nice when he was in hibernation, wherever he was.

    but what you said, DITTO pluto. and i'll add get a life to it as well. and im still wondering if pluto ever got that special lsd/locker rearend in his tacoma? LOL

    tgravo- scorpio is right. i do not believe in lifts. i like the stock look. maybe some slightly larger tires like i had on my ranger, maybe some aftermarket shocks, a skidplate or too, a smittybilt bumper thumper like i had on my ZR2. but no lifts please. a crank on the torsion bars (if you have them, ford's and gm's are the only ones left i believe besides dodge i think) to lift the front a little is okay, but it has to be done carefully so each side will ride as high as the other. i like to make it down the beaten path with a relatively stock vehicle. im the same with cars and motorcycles too. all stock as far as one can see. now adding a trd s/c would be ok with me. just stealthy so to speak. i dont think there is nothing wrong with that. look at the new jeep rubicon due out this summer- this has been hailed as the most radical factory built 4x4-EVER. and it doesn't need a huge lift. ill concede that the toyota locker is nice, but my lsd did just fine. a locker can be added very easily as well if you want.

    scorp- ill drop this little rant we got going. but its good to know that you're getting another towhook. i'd hate to see your pretty tacoma roll down a hill. plus, you may need two if one breaks off and you don't notice or something.

    oh, one more thing about the FX4. the "chrome" towhooks, aren't really chrome. they're stainless steel polished. and they aren't the same design as a regular ranger 4x4. they're open on the top, like the jeeps.
This discussion has been closed.