Options
Toyota Tacoma vs. Ford Ranger, Part XII
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Don't even say the the new Ranger outperforms the Tacoma until they go head to head in a comparison.
As far as your knowledge of 2 and 4 valve engines go...do you know that Toyota pioneered the variable intake manifold concept and that it eliminated the lack of low end grunt associated with 4 valve engines?
But your dumbest statement is "For almost 10 years I've (meaning me) been through the worst, roughest, flooded, dilapidated "streets" in Mexico. Wow, that's pretty cool for a 1998 truck that you had owned since 1992"
Did it ever occur to you I was in Mexico long before I bought my truck??????????????????????
"MOST people don't buy the offroad package.
MOST people that buy the offroad package want an off road truck.
MOST people who buy an offroad package want their truck to excel in that arena more than street racing, handling, and towing. "
1st point I'll agree.
2nd Point, may or may not be true. A lot of TRD and 4X4 decals never leave the payment.
3rd point sure, people want their truck to excel in everything, but I don't see how an off-road package directly relates to towing.
I'm talking real world, always active traction help. You're talking about the few seconds a boat is pulled up a wet ramp, or the ultimate off-roading situation. I also was making fun of drag racing a stock compact truck.
"What good are they when in the REAL WORLD the Tacoma outperformed the Ranger in every performance test, despite the Ranger's torque advangtage?"
Are we talking the out-dated 1998 performance test, or a current year one?
"do you know that Toyota pioneered the variable intake manifold concept and that it eliminated the lack of low end grunt associated with 4 valve engines?"
I guess they "pioneered" it before the old 160 horse 4.0l? Because they had them too.
"But your dumbest statement is "For almost 10 years I've (meaning me) been through the worst, roughest, flooded, dilapidated "streets" in Mexico. Wow, that's pretty cool for a 1998 truck that you had owned since 1992""
Ok, so you were talking about off-roading. But how did the Tacoma exist "since 1992".
And a lot do. Like mine, for example. Who cares anyways? Most people who buy a Corvette won't drive it at 150mph, and most people who buy a Land Rover aren't going to take it on an African safari. But you don't hear people saying that a Miata and a Subaru AWD are just as good as a Corvette and Land Rover because the latter most likely aren't going to be used to their potential. Lame-o- argument there!
"3rd point sure, people want their truck to excel in everything, but I don't see how an off-road package directly relates to towing"
What? The TRD's heavier duty suspension handles the rigors of hauling and towing better than the standard suspension. That one should have been obvious! Why do you think an F-350 has a heavier duty suspension than an F-250? Better towing and hauling, maybe? Anybody home?
"Are we talking the out-dated 1998 performance test, or a current year one?"
Well, the current Ranger only has 17 more horses than the 1998 Ranger. Is the 17 horses really going to give the Ranger a land-side victory over the Tacoma, assuming it even beats it? How is that going to help the Ranger dethrone the Tacoma in braking, suspension performance and off-roading?
And once again: Ford's taking 8 years to make a 4.0 finally outperform (and only by 17 horses) Toyota's 3.4 should be a source of embarrasment, not bragging.
"I guess they "pioneered" it (variable intake manifold) before the old 160 horse 4.0l? Because they had them too."
Nice try. The 4.0 is a SOHC design, not a DOHC 4 valve design. Toyota developed the variable intake manifold to eliminate the lack of low end grunt in DOHC 4 valve engines. How could Ford have done the same if they don't have any DOHC engines - at least in mainstream truck applications?
"Ok, so you were talking about off-roading. But how did the Tacoma exist "since 1992"
I don't even know what you're trying to say with that. Your assumptions are making you look like a, well, you know...
And finally: IF YOU DON'T CARE THAT MUCH ABOUT OFF-ROADING, DON'T GET THE TRD! GET THE REGULAR 4X4 WHICH IS MORE COMPARABLE TO THE RANGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!GOT IT????????
Anyways I'm picturing a big bulbous vein in his right temple and neck throbbing and pulsing with increasing rate. His eyes locked wide open, teeth nashed, sort of like a guy getting his first prostrate exam.
Tact, Empathy, respect? Ever hear or practice these terms?
Where's the love?
"Well, the current Ranger only has 17 more horses than the 1998 Ranger. Is the 17 horses really going to give the Ranger a land-side victory over the Tacoma, assuming it even beats it? How is that going to help the Ranger dethrone the Tacoma in braking, suspension performance and off-roading?"
207 (new 4.0l) - 160 (old 4.0l) does NOT equal 17. It's 47. Like I said a 30% increase, and that would probably make a huge difference in any contest. The point was the torque has been the same, always over the Tacoma. Torque moves the vehicle. Torque is how much the vehicle can move, horsepower is how quick it can do it. If you want a truck for towing, off-roading, whatever, you should be after torque. Which is what the Ranger had all along.
Braking is different, I don't know the results of any contest (albeit from 1998) and if anything might of significantly changed. However I can say that the Ranger is no slouch when braking. A few feet may be all the difference.
Steering, trucks drive like trucks, but nowhere have I seen anybody complain about on-road manners of a Ranger. In fact, most praise the Ranger's handling (suspension, steering, etc)
"Nice try. The 4.0 is a SOHC design, not a DOHC 4 valve design. Toyota developed the variable intake manifold to eliminate the lack of low end grunt in DOHC 4 valve engines. How could Ford have done the same if they don't have any DOHC engines - at least in mainstream truck applications?"
Did I say that the 4.0L is DOHC? No I did not.
I did say that the vacuum driven plenum has been available before 1998, and more likely since early 90's. I just don't see anything online to back that up, yet. So it's not Toyota specific technology, Ford has been using it for close to, if not over, a decade.
Toyota did this to help give the 3.4l some more guts at lower RPM's, and help counteract the 4-valve tendancies. Ford does this to make the 4.0l breathe better at either high or lower RPM's. A vacuum driven plenum divider doesn't benefit only DOHC.
""Ok, so you were talking about off-roading. But how did the Tacoma exist "since 1992"
I don't even know what you're trying to say with that. Your assumptions are making you look like a, well, you know..."
In your Tacoma preaching, you said something about off-roading since 1992. I said, that's amazing, because the Tacoma didn't even exist back then. If you were trying to defend your off-road experience, I just miss-understood you.
When you were talking to scape2 about LSD and lockers, you were talking about how you drove all over the mud and flooded places in mexico. Then you basically say you can't beat a Locker for off-roading. Then you say...
" If you want to classify what I've been driving in the last decade, be my guest."
That led me to believe you are either full of it, (as how can you be driving a Tacoma for over a decade, because They don't exist), or the last option is you were typing about another vehicle which is subsequently unnamed. What am I supposed to believe?
"And finally: IF YOU DON'T CARE THAT MUCH ABOUT OFF-ROADING, DON'T GET THE TRD! GET THE REGULAR 4X4 WHICH IS MORE COMPARABLE TO THE RANGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!GOT IT????????"
Ok, I will do exactly what you tell me to do. I trust your ASCII text better than anything I have ever heard or known...
Ok, I got it...
Oops, I lost it...
LOL, so if I say I've been off-roading since 1992, that automatically means I've been using a Tacoma? You live in a funny world, one in which the sun rises in the west and sets in the east and pacific and eastern time are reversed!
And the sun only rises in the west on Tuesdays here... £Ç
By the way, thanks for the correction about the 1998 Ranger having only 160 horses. You're reminding me of why I bought a Tacoma :-)
Good night and be sure to set your alarm clock in the proper time zone! Hint: Central...
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
Most of your answers the those 3 points were pretty much off base from the idea I was trying to convey because I as directing them towards scape. He might have understood better than you did.
Take care...........Steelman.
The TRD package is a marketing gimmick and Toyota has played it well. It proves it in this chat room. A locker is so limited in its use, its owners don't even realize it. And I notice the owners don't like it when someone who actually knows something about lockers tells them that thier precious lockers are NORMALLY OPEN, SPEED LIMITED, and you can't make hard turns with them locked in! Toyota owners hate HP/Torque curves because they know a RAnger will plain stomp the hell out of a Tacoma when having to pull a heavy load up a steep grade.
Fact is most TRD owners buy the Toyota for the TRD sticker and would not know when, where or how to use a locker. Fact is the Ranger is the best all around truck for the everyday user, 13years in a row.
Fact is the Tacoma has beaten the Ranger is every performance test, including towing and hauling.
Fact is you can take a sharp turn with the locker on, as long as you do it off pavement which is what the TRD is all about.
Fact is the Ranger appeals to the everyday user who values MP3 players and mini-van derived LSDs more than real 4x4 equipment.
You use the excuse that so many people get the TRD for the sticker, and as untrue as it is, still is an irrelevant statement. They want to pose as an offroader, so what better way to do it than have the best off road axle setup offered. I also know of people that never offroad, yet buy hilift jacks, airlockers, lifts, and mud tires. Im sure you do too. Do you ever see anyone who claims to be an offroader yet still claims that his LSD is as good as a locker? If not, take a look in the mirror. And if you have never been in a situation where a locker was needed, then you just wheel pansy places, simple as that.
Just tell me how many rockcrawlers you know of with LSDs, plain and simple question. And don't give me the same BS about "most" people don't really off road, that's as much of a cop out as an LSD on an "off road" pickup. Stay in the grocery store parking lot, please.
Maybe we need a Toyota Tacoma vs Ford Ranger OffRoad Part 1? The limits of my off-road experience or needs is getting through an occasional 4 inch pothole, and maybe a dirt road here and there. That may be sad in some people's eyes, but I don't need 200 horsepower, 4 huge wheels, and ruts carved into the path I take to see the wilderness or nature. I just want the ability to haul stuff around. Either a toolbox, a trailer of motorcycles, a sofa, etc.
Most people don't offroad saddaddy. That is closer to fact that all people with 4x4 do. Some people buy the off-road or 4x4 package because it is needed for their climate's ice or snow covered roads. Others have no choice because it's part of the vehicle they want, or they get a good deal if they "option up".
If I start out looking for a V6 in a regular cab, then I can only choose one vehicle from the title of this forum to begin with... Actually my next purchase will have to be a motorcycle. Looks like I'm the only one here that will see 10 years of service with their vehicle of choice, and willing to keep my ride for another year or so.
Because it is saving me money, practically earning it for me. (I'm about to hit 140,000)
Second, Colorado doesn't seem to believe in snow removal in the winter to any degree. Big storms create havoc on the streets. Therefore, owning at least one vehicle with 4-wheel drive is almost a necessity if one desires to reach their place of employment every day. Employers don't like to hear "I'm staying home cause I can't get to work due to the snow."
Third, we like to own a pickup for hauling stuff (no towing), but find that a small truck meets our needs better than a full-size.
So, we have an on-going requirement for a 4-wheel drive, small pickup. For many years, all we bought was Toyotas, the last being a 1999 Tacoma SR5 with TRD. At that time (aside from the locker), the rest of the TRD package looked like things I wanted my truck to have. Big wheels & tires and better shocks. In the eight months owning that Tacoma, I NEVER engaged the locker and didn't see myself ever engaging it. Did I buy the wrong truck? I didn't think so at the time.
My PERSONAL OPINION is that Toyota has developed the current Tacoma as primarily a 4-wheeler, at which it excels. The flip side of the coin is that the Tacoma is no longer a very good general-purpose truck, and that purchasers pay MUCH more for the off-road capabilities the Tacoma provides.
So, if you are a serious off-roader, and do LOTS of really narly four-wheeling, the Tacoma is a good choice. Although you could surely build a better and cheaper 4-wheeler by purchasing an older vehicle and customizing it to meet your precise requirements.
But if you want a good, all-around small truck for thousands less than its Tacoma equivalent, the Ranger is a better investment. Our new Ranger meets our needs MUCH better than that Tacoma did, with a HUGE savings. Did I buy the right truck this time? Only time will tell....
On the topic of LSDs vs. lockers: I'm much happier with my LSD in the Ranger than with the locker in the Tacoma, as the LSD provides substantially better traction on wet, icy or gravel roads, where a locker CANNOT be engaged and the Tacoma is left with only an open axle.
It sure seems to me that this topic constantly gets bogged down in an endless debate about off-roading, which the majority of small pickup buyers will seldom, if ever use their trucks for.
Thanks, stang, for pointing this out ONCE AGAIN!
If you're like rickc5, either a Tacoma or Ranger with the LSD and softer suspension would be ideal. In fact, if his needs were mine, I'd probably go get a Subaru AWD wagon - it excels in the snow, can haul stuff, and is much more usable as a people hauler.
But for the small percentage of people like me who have a REAL need for a REAL 4x4, the Tacoma TRD simply can't be beat. It's like having a modern day Jeep Scrambler with a locker and all its off-road prowess, but with a bigger bed and much better build quality/reliability.
Read and reread this until it sinks in: "The Tacoma offers the LSD for those not interested in the locker." Repeat as necessary!
I think you are wrong, or at least the 2002 Tacoma brochure says nothing about a Limited Slip. Perhaps you are thinking of the Tundra?
Also I'm not debating anything here about the LSD/Locker. I would say it's more of a clarification or discussion of both differential's benefits and applications. I'm not the one saying "Hurrah Hurrah, locker can do everything, it's all I ever need". I'm saying a locker is great is you just want to off-road, while the LSD is great when you want traction on slippery on-road conditions (ice, rain, etc). Or if you want to turn or go faster than 20 mph, and still have traction. The Locker isn't made for speed or turning, the Limited slip isn't made for one wheel getting up in the air. Which do you think would be most beneficial to most people?
So I'm saying they are both good, for their intended application. One off-road and one on-road, even thought both can help in the opposite situations.
As for the original question again - no I'm not an offroader, but I would most likely but an off-road package. I like getting the beefier tires and shocks, and the traction enhancements. (be it LSD or locker) Also, as I stated in an earlier post, it's very difficult to find a 4x4 truck where I live that doesn't have the off-road package.
If you can provide evidence from Toyota that the LSD is an option, then I'll believe it.
http://www.huntingmag.com/dynamic.asp?intSectionID=330&intArticleID=2203
There IS a distinct difference between the people who need a locker and the ones who need an LSD. Those that need the locker HAVE to have one -- point, blank, period. Scape, the one who has been saying no one knows about a locker, does not need one.
Sure, I understand there are some people who buy trucks, even 4wds, and should have an LSD, no a locker. But at the same time, Stang, I question the rationale of your saying that some people buy the locker-equipped TRD package just b/c that is the truck that has the right options. That makes little sense and is a poor excuse. Its their fault and they are the ones who know about as much about when to use a locker as Scape.
And no Stang, you aren't the only one who will see 10 years of service from their truck.
Rick ---> Hehe, I think anyone could have told you that for on-road traction in ice and snow, the locker was not for you. Don't feel bad, too many were miseducated just like you. The LSD was the thing for you, sure.
Just a quick question for ya'll, especially Scape: When the Jeep Rubicon comes out with factory front and rear lockers, will you then say that it sux because most people "don't really off-road?" That is, to me, the same as what you have been saying here. Again, real off roaders are built, not bought, but come on -- where will the idiocy stop?
How can I be missing that point, if I agree with it and have said essentially the same thing in post #1126? Here's an example "I'm saying a locker is great if you just want to off-road, while the LSD is great when you want traction on slippery on-road conditions"
"Stang, I question the rationale of your saying that some people buy the locker-equipped TRD package just b/c that is the truck that has the right options."
If you define "some" as a certain percentage that is not as great as "most" but not exactly the "smallest" or "least" amount, but somewhere in the lower middle, then Yes. Just drive by any mall. See the clean underbody that has never seen dirt, or the side rails that have never touched a plant or stick.
I'm not saying it's the right options for the soccer mom and family. Just some people are just trying to buy a macho ride, even if the wife only uses it to pick up kids.
Again some, not all, not most, but certainly not only just a few.
BTW, I just e-mailed a local dealership about the LSD in a Tacoma...
They replied "Yes the Tacoma is avaliable with the limited slip differential. The locking diff. is the same as limited slip."
I have just gotten off the phone too. Asked him what he meant, he said they are both used for the same thing. After a little further probing, it is only the Locker that is sold on the Tacoma. The salesman, the article writer, and Plutonious got confused on the differences between the Limited Slip and a Locker. (And that is not the first time too).
Don't believe me? Check Toyota.com, your local dealership, or any Toyota brochure (2002).
SADDADDY: trust me on this, I KNEW what a locker was when I bought my '99, and I know what its intended purpose is, but I was still myopic at that time, and felt I HAD to have another Toyota, and was therefore willing to put up with the open axle for 99.9% of my driving. Not any more....
PLUTO: Subarus are totally gutless at altitudes, are only good on PLOWED roads (no ground clearance), cannot haul much stuff, and can't go off-road, except for dirt/gravel roads. They are CARS, for Christ's sake, and IMHO, junky ones at that. Real popular with the ex-hippies in Boulder, for some odd reason. Are you an ex-hippie by chance??? Or, was this whole Subaru thing just your idea of a joke. If it was a joke, I got a giggle out of it.
If Toyota offers a LSD in the Tacoma, it must have been announced just yesterday, as that site you posted is the ONLY place it has EVER been mentioned, and that MUST be a misprint/mistake.
STANG: I agree with you 100% on your post #1123.
ALL: Just like eagle has mentioned, when I was shopping for my '99, the ONLY non-TRD Toyotas available in the Denver area were 4-cylinder standard cabs. If you wanted a V6 and/or the extra-cab, you got a TRD, whether you wanted one or not.
There is NO MENTION of a Limited Slip Differential (LSD) ANYWHERE on this site! Not as an option, nor as an accessory.
Also, 1) the buckets seats in the crew-cab look to be an improvement over those in a '99. 2) If you buy a TRD crew-cab, you get Tokico shocks, NOT the Bilsteins. 3) no photos of the steering wheel (?).
You guys are right. 99% of people don't need lockers. However, it seems to me that if you drive like half-way intelligently most of the time, the LSD is not a must-have either. I understand that it is a safe addition, though. Just, don't forget that for some, a locker is a safe addition as well.
Watch a locker equipped vehicle take a rough hill and compare it to an LSD equipped vehicle. With the locker, there's no drama, no wheel spin, no dirt/rock flinging, no engine revving, no having to use momentum to get up the hill. Just a nice, slow, easy controlled ascent, even if a tire lifts off.
Look guys, there's trade-offs on both lockers and LSDs. 99.9% of the time, while driving on pavement, you would never know the difference between the open differential and the limited slip. Heck, I kind of like the open-diff, taking turns hard and fast and having the inside tire lose a little traction and having some throttle induced oversteer. That's fun, especially on a wet road. But off-road, the difference is absolutely huge and there's just no comparison. Having a manually operated locker gives you awesome off-roading potential, and when turned off while on pavement, 99.9% of the time you wouldn't distinguish it from the LSD.
But the fact remains that when you buy a truck advertised as being 4x4 and an off-roader, such as the TRD or FX4, don't you think you should be getting a package that's more specialized for off-roading than your typical LSD equipped minivan?
but here's why im posting: pluto pretty much disregards any function in the lsd, as well he should since he has a locker. but i have spoken with a torsen engineer and was told that the fx4 torsen lsd is SPECIALLY designed for one wheel in the air traction.
but here is the REAL reason im posting: pluto, could you please tell me what current mini-van comes stock with a lsd? i mean, any lsd in a front wheel drive car is pretty rare, but when it comes in a mini-van, that would be almost as rare as seinfelds chrome porsche or something wouldn't it? maybe im way off on this, who knows. but im just curious. i know the nissan specV and mazda protege3 have lsd's.
Winch.
"I just don't understand your logic with this TRD/locker vs. Ranger/LSD debate. The Tacoma is available with an LSD just like the Ranger, which negates any advantage the Ranger has over the Tacoma in that department."
So I guess you realise there is a use for Limited Slip Differentials, and that there is an advantage for Ford offering them, yes?
"99.9% of the time you wouldn't distinguish [an open diff] from the LSD."
I think 99.9% of the time is a little high, but sure you shouldn't really know when it is in use. That is the beauty of it, however. No waiting for it to engage, no having to press a button to activate it, and no speed or turning imposements. But you do get divided traction when one wheel slips, which if you drive any slippery roads ever(oil, rain, ice, snow) you will appreciate the always on protection instead of sliding into a ditch or oncoming traffic.
I think we all have stated our views on the applications of both the locker and the Limited slip differentials. I also think we are in the majority in agreement. Is it possible to put this one to rest?
stang, stang....now this is becoming really silly with that winch comment. You and I both know that anybody who goes through the trouble of installing a winch on their 4x4 probably has a rear locker too. And a winch is only good if there's something to anchor it too.
But that's besides the point. The point is if you find yourself stuck in "normal" situations, the locker will be a push-of-the-button lifesaver, whereas the LSD isn't going to do squat. Just wait till you or wife get stuck and have to flag down other drivers, dig the truck out or have it winched. You'll be watching your tires spin helplessly wishing you could simply push a button and put some power to the wheel with grip. All it takes is once, and the locker will make you a believer.
Yes, I acknowledge there is use for LSDs and Ford's offering them, but I would rather have a locker.
Please, give me a break with your sliding into a ditch or uncoming traffic because you don't have the LSD. The LSD probably helps, but it's marginal at best. I would say operator ability and most certainly tires provide the greatest advantage in winter driving conditions.
And, I hope you finally realize that the TRD package is currently the best stock offroad package offered by any manufacturer for pick up trucks. If not, then I give up on trying to convince you of anything.
Take care and I'll see you up at camp where life is so, so good...........Steelman.
Yes the majority of critics seem to pick the Tacoma as the best off-roading compact pickup truck. Kudos for Tacoma.
This is no final realization on my part, but what I have believed in since day one of joining edmunds.com.
I am simply one of those included in my first statement that most people don't want or need a 4x4 truck. A limited slip is all I would want (or need) in a traction control device. I had a friend who wrecked his S-10 or sonoma (Forget which) because he downshifted during a fairly high speed turn at night. He hit some slick asphalt and spun out. The truck was totaled. Could a Limited slip differential saved it? Maybe. Could a locker save him? No way. Hence my choice and preference.
I accept and approve of everyone's opinion of the best stock compact off-road truck you can buy. I hope you accept my opinion that a Ranger is not a off-road cripple either. New off-road packages such as the FX4 with it's limited slip differential immune to the "one wheel in the air" criticism. I also hope you all agree with a later synopsis of mine in which I stated that the Tacoma is a highly recommended truck, and the Ranger is ranked as one of the safest, and one of the best values in a compact truck. Take it as you want, the Tacoma is a tough truck, with a great reputation for quality, and the Ranger is another tough truck with lots of options and standard equipment, which I personally believe gives you more bang for the buck, hence the best value accolade.
There, that should make everyone happy to a degree, and please note I have never contradicted any of my previous statements ever made on this board. I still am placing my money on the Ranger for my next compact truck purchase, because with all the details argued on this board and off added together, the Ranger is still the better truck for me. Many others are like me, and the sale figures only back up that statement. But there is no wrong or right, just different strokes for different folks. Take that as you will.
I talk to a guy with an FX4 that wheels with some guys at the Tacoma off road site, and as soon as he gets the cash, he's replacing the Torsen with a selectable locker like his tacoma counterparts. This locker will be purchased b4 any lift, tires, sliders, or any other off road performance accessories, just to show how much of a priority it is to him. He wheels it a ton, so that has me thinking that the Torsen is really not much different than a normal LSD, just a little more viscous. Again, this is all great, just not for someone who really wants a truly capable off road truck.
as i have stated, i was going to replace the lsd in my ranger (with the torsen), and so i was in touch with torsen on the stats of the fx4 axle and lsd. ill say it again, it was designed for one wheel in the air action exclusively- straight from a torsen engineer. either you're making up this "guy who wheels with tacomas and wants a true locker", or this "guy" doesn't know what he's driving.
either way, with a locker and no four-wheel, your truck still would have been left behind on any trail i used.
sorry guys, but i hate ignorance. and the way tacoma boys downplay the fx4, it's shelled out daily here.
Take care and I'll see you where only Tacomas dare to tread.............Steelman.
tbunder: We downplay the FX4? Excuse me.....but how do you expect people to take a "truck designed specifically for offroaders with deep-water crossings in mind" seriously when that marvel of engineering blows its' lockers in a parking lot? Maybe if Ford could finally put out a product (Perhaps better communication between partners? Seems like Ford's been having quite a few troubles with their business partners) that does not get double-digits of recalls in first 2 years (while it is not exactly true, I'm just using it to make a point, although Escape comes close with 7 in 1 year), and does not get pulled out of showrooms in 2 weeks (FX4), then we could take a look at it seriously.
It is trivial to characterize it as blowing up in a parking lot. I guess burnouts weren't the first priority in testing a 4X4 compact truck, go figure.
I have heard that only 4 units had failed, Will try to confirm this later. NHTSA lists only 1096 units Potentially affected.
The automatics are still available, and are fine.
Where do you Ranger fanatics get your logic. I think the proper way to design any vehicle is to make sure it can handle what an owner can dish out (within reason). It is not unreasonable to expect (and design) a vehicle with the expectation that somebody (do you have Teenagers?) might try some burnouts or even (can you imagine) rapidly accelerate a vehicle! If the FX4 couldn't handle that, then I guess I really know why I chose a Tacoma over a Ranger.
Please, can somebody help these Ford fans with their logical progressions.......Steelman.
The facts of the issue are mostly unknown to all of us. The only known facts are 1. Manually equipped FX4's were pulled from sale due to a potential break down in the rear differential. 2. A maximum of 1096 were affected, and just under 300 of which were in customer hands.
You don't know if there were any "teenagers" with FX4's accelerating as rapidly as they can, without any failures. You don't know the exact cause. You don't see the nature of statistics, 1096 vehicles with the part that could fail. Maybe only 4 of those vehicles had a too low nickel content in the gears or casting of the differential? We don't know. But they all have to be recalled because they all have the same part. This is the firestone recall on a much smaller scale. Torsen, the supplier was responsible for the new Rear Differential. The rear Differential failed. How do YOU know who's fault it is? You don't.
Get your shots in now, while you still can.
Take care and I'll see you in the woods in my trustworthy (and reliable) Toyota Tacoma..........Steelman.