Howdy, Stranger!

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

Toyota Tacoma vs. Ford Ranger, Part XII



  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    I saw my first FX4 in person last night in a parking lot. I was checking it out as best I could without drawing too much suspicion from other passersby. Overall, it looked pretty good, although I do have 2 complaints: I didn't like the wheels at all. I'm not sure if they are part of the FX4 package or not, but they were kinda ugly. Also, it had these plastic bed rails that I didn't like all that much either. -Again, not sure if the owner added this later or if it's actually part of the FX4 package. Anyway, just thought I'd share.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Those things would be hard to prove.
    1. Explorers don't roll over more often. Probably Mitsubishi Montero holds that record now, with sucky handling.
    2. They don't explode just because they are on Ford. Just seems that Ford was at the wrong place at the wrong time, and got shafted for it. Someone had to.
    3. Pluto covered that one with Expedition lugnuts. You can't just say "all". Not all, but some, and having a persistent problem on some is enough.
    4. Axle snap or LSD blowup: doesn't matter in case of FX4, because entire rear axle has got to go. So in a sense, it's equivalent.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    here is Toyota doesn't have some kind of magic dust that makes them a better offroading vehicle. Granted the locker is an advantage. But, lets look at the locker a minute. A locker is only to be used offroad, in a straight away motion and at slow speeds under 15 mph or so. How often do you take your truck into a spot that a locker is going to get its full use? Maybe 2% of your entire driving time?
    As much as Toyota owners want so badly to believe Tacoma's are "better" than Rangers its just not true. I have over 50,000 miles on a 1998 Ranger 4x4 that has been used as a 4x4 to prove it. I also don't believe the Ranger is any better than the Tacoma by the way...
    See you in the Cascades......
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    on that one Scape. The locker is not for everyday driving. It is, however, the best diff configuration offroad. That is why it is only available with an offroad package. The only thing is that too many buy the TRD and have no idea what they have. I think its pretty queer too. I have a prerunner with a locker (no TRD sticker though). I could not afford 4x4 cuz of insurance and other things, but I can say that they locker has helped out numerous times. My truck is awesome offroad and the locker never ceases to amaze me. I do alot of driving in fields with terraced hills, and the locker climbs those better than my dads 1/2 ton Chevy 4x4. It is impressive. You were exactly right, though, it is only a benificial option in offroad situations (it also helps to do some mean donuts). Just to clear some things up, it can be used at any speed, and when turning as well. It just causes one tire to spin when turning which, offroad, is already happening, so you lose no traction. have a good one man!
  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    how 'bout those Gophers?? off topic I know, but it needed a bump.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    I was driving by and saw a what looks like 1996 Taco 4x4, lifted (3" not more) with mud tires at a used car dealer lot. I didn't stop by to ask the price though, might do that tomorrow.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    where do you live??
    I can give you dealer names and addresses to about 12 dealerships that have dozens of used Tacoma trucks on their lots..
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Austin, TX.
  • kbtoyskbtoys Posts: 62
    Has anybody hear anything about the new Tundra's coming out? I heard a rummor that it will have option of a 5.4L V8 and a diesel option. Now that would be cool.
  • allknowingallknowing Posts: 866
    Interesting link. In 1999, the average repair costs of the Ranger were more than six times the average of the Tacoma. It also shows that the Ranger is only a bit below the average mark for repairs while the Tacoma was over 6.5 times below the average in repair cost. How many studies and surveys do we need to demonstrate that the Tacoma is superior in quality to the Ranger? It's obvious!! Mr. stang, tbunder, scape2??? Is this just another biased source? The Ranger is a good truck but it's clearly got a way to go to get close to Toyota's general quality.
  • All re: that link--->I'm curious about the methodology of that link. I wonder why you don't see any Tundra's in there at all?

    Also answer this question seriously, if consumer A owned a vehicle with no problems, and Consumer B owned a vehicle with many problems, which consumer would be most likely to complain or post their beef with the vehicle, say by taking an online survey?

    Factor that in with the amount of vehicles on the road.

    If you look at the breakdowns, they become convoluted. For instance, 1999 Fords compared with 1999 Ranger shows an average of 580 Dollars spent on Fords, and 360 spent on Rangers. But the breakdown into system components become suspicious. Ford Cooling system, exhaust system, and Air conditioning show little to no problems (well below industry average). Engine, Brakes, transmission(auto), Electrical and suspension all show above 1999 industry average costs. However in each instance, the Ranger shows 0 cost per category.

    So how does 0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0 = 360 for the year of 1999? Is this factoring in old 1983-1999 Rangers with repairs made in 1999, and comparing that to 1995-1999 Tacomas? Something doesn't add up.

    I'm not discounting the Tacoma has a better reputation, but I don't think we are looking at a broad population of consumers to make this one of those rules to live or buy from. It does make a good supporting argument, however.
  • allknowingallknowing Posts: 866
    Give me a break stang. You're too intelligent of a guy to resort to "politician type" excuses like that. I like the Ranger too, however, my experience of owning both the Ford and the Toyota supports the quality superiority of the Tacoma that most (if not all) publications conclude. I'm obviously not alone in my finding. There's too much supporting evidence to the contrary to take your point of view.
  • plutoniousplutonious Posts: 799
    stang doesn't just simply posts links saying the Ranger is better. Perhaps lack of such information is the reason?
  • OK, Since EDMUNDS wants to limit words to 115 Characters (which sucks), Goto WWW.AUTOVANTAGE.COM

    Under Car Buying and Research, Select Ford or Toyota, select "New Car Summary", and then check it out.

    The Tacoma gets a "Recommended" label,
    The Ranger gets a "Best Buy" label.

    And I Agree. :)

    Can we all be friends now?
  • No mention of Toyota here

    I wonder what's the best way to earn loyalty?

    Ranger#17 Tacoma#21

    Edmunds most wanted 2000-2001

    Tacoma did earn most wanted in 2002 I believe.

    So here's just a few more opinions. Not everything puts Tacoma over Ranger. More can be posted if requested...

    Remember, I would recommend the Tacoma. But I still think the Ranger is the Best Buy.
This discussion has been closed.