Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Ford Ranger vs Toyota Tacoma
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
AND FOR THE 100TH TIME, YOUR INSIGNIFICANT EXTRA 15 LB/FT OF TORQUE IS USELESS WHEN YOUR LIBERTY WEIGHS 600 LBS MORE!!! DO YOU GET IT YET???
Repeat as necessary.
As for winning formula:
We brag about Taco RC because it is lightweight, at mere 3000 lbs, the 2.7L engine is more than enough for it. With a short wheelbase that truck spanks everyone with Xtracabs.
Now.....can you specifically name that "some trailing" that small tires are good for? Gee.....all those people spending their money on getting 35s, 37s and bigger.....when you could have 30s!
-actually it was just a year ago, the wrangler DID have a limited slip, and the taco beat the wrangler.
NOBODY is going to change any minds here. That's pretty obvious. Time to give this up and move on before the real mudslinging starts and this gets shut down again...
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
pluto, yeah you have the weight thing down, that im not arguing. im arguing YOUR theory on how the DOHC design of the 3.4 is better when it's clear that the 3.7 of the liberty makes more torque per CC, gets better mileage, and is the old SOHC design which according to you, is old hat. i concede weight to the tacoma, why wouldn't i? there isn't much that doesn't outweigh the thin tacoma. i assume you will dodge this question for the umpteenth time. you'll probably say that they had to squeeze so much torque out per CC due to the liberty's heft, right? whatever. either way, your tacoma is still down on power and torque to the liberty, not to mention the all important mileage thing. and that's hilarious.
yes i do remember why scorpio, i was thinking of frontier crew cab's weight. which is around 400 lbs heavier than tacoma and ranger. the thing is stout.
and for the love of god (as the late great chris farley would say) pluto, just admit you were wrong. and stop referring to every mistake you ever made or mistyped as a huge joke.
As far as fender flares falling off you need to get your info. correct. The problem involves a litte rubber gasket (1/4") between the fender and fender flare. The gasket starts to come loose in varying spots. How do I know...? I had to get my gaskets replaced. You go to Toyota and they put 4 new ones on.
Can I come and visit you in that world you live in..? I am tired of reality.
Pay special to attention to the parts that read:
"Improving breathing is one of the keys for power enhancement. Unquestionably, in the 2-valve era valves used to be the bottleneck, hence the need for more valves...A typical 2-valve engine has just 1/3 combustion chamber head area covered by the valves, but a 4-valve head increases that to more than 50%, hence smoother and quicker breathing. 4-valve design also benefit a clean and effective combustion, because the spark plug can be placed in the middle...Formula One cars and even the Ferrari F1 cars which was once famous for 5V engine has switched back to 4-valve design a few years ago...In the mid-80s, both Honda and Toyota made 4-valve engines standard in virtually all mainstream models. The Western car makers did that some 10 years later!"
Also consider this:
Your extra .3 liters in your Jeep SOHC is only giving you 20 more horses and 15 lb/ft torque (at 800 RPMs higher) more than the Toyota's 8 year old 3.4.
By comparison, the Toyota's new DOHC 4.0's extra .3 liters is making 35 more horses and 48 lb/ft torque (at only 3400 RPMs) than your SOHC 3.7.
Why is the extra .3 liters in the Toyota DOHC making so much more power than your extra .3 liters?
You stated "if the shootout between tacoma, wranger, and hummer was just a year ago, can you direct me to it? just fyi, it was a 1998 four-wheeler article i believe. you know, the first year for the TRD pkg., and you know what scorpio says, whatever is new and hot in it's first year usually wins the awards"
Nope, the Tacoma has been winning awards since its first year and continually thereafter. Sorry.
You stated "either way, your tacoma is still down on power and torque to the liberty, not to mention the all important mileage thing. and that's hilarious."
Nope, we've already been down this road. The Tacoma has the better power to weight ratio. Your extra 600lbs more than cancels out your miniscule torque advantage you keep bragging about.
Better mileage? Nope, in V6, 4x4 trim and auto tranny, the Liberty gets 16/20, the Tacoma 17/19 (manual Tacoma probably even better). Please explain to us all how the Liberty gets better mileage. I'm dying to hear this one!
"Can I come and visit you in that world you live in..? I am tired of reality."
-----smgilles
I couldn't agree more!
pluto- the '03's get 17/21 mpg. better than tacoma auto. check it out, you're incorrect.
at least you didn't plagiarize that article now huh? your article doesn't say anything. basically it says that the more valves, the better breathing. well, not in this case eh? your DOHC design is still down. break it down all you want, you're still on the losing end einstein.
stop comparing the new 4.0 engine to the 3.7. it's not even available in a tacoma. it's too bad you have to live in the future to beat todays jeep engines.
smgilles- ok, so if you don't fix it it will fall off. big difference there eh? either way, my ranger's nor my liberty's flares aren't even loose. toyota can't even get a little flare to stay on. pretty sad. awesome quality though, right?
pluto, if the tacoma keeps winning awards like you say, how come it only managed to get third in four-wheeler's pickup truck of the year contest this year? is that what you call winning? and the liberty finished second only to the grand cherokee in the four-wheeler of the year shootout. they hated the tacoma's suspension and even recommended switching shocks. and this is on your awesome TRD, factory off-roader. pathetic. if you call that an award, i understand your rantings.
i guess im the only one who doesn't live in a world full of blind consumers who drive toyota vehicles. the ones who call loose fender flares and sludged up engines common maintenance. lmao
2. 4-wheeler: Blah blah blah blah blah. Tohico shocks are stiff, so what? They hated the suspension....that was it. So it took a 3rd place. Do you know an easier way to stiffen up the suspension so that extra weight does not cause sag, other than to put stiffer shocks? TRD package is awesome for a starter, it makes a Taco very offroad-able off the showroom floor.
Sludged up engines: no comments about the sludged up engines in Mercedes Benz? I posted a link....I guess their practices don't sound so good anymore.
-probably for the same reason that the Wrangler never finishes 1st year after year, when it really should. I mean, is there really any vehicle that can compete with the TJ for off-road ability? no, not even close. But no one would buy the magazine if they had the same winner every year.
otoh, toyota built those engines that they tried to escape fault with. is that all you can drudge up on jeep engines? and concerning the hvac draining in the jeep on early models, at least chrylser adopted a tsb to fix the few problems. toyota doesn't even accept that some firewalls leak inside on tacomas. that's their whole philosophy, keep the tsb's and recalls down to make their products look better. the sludge issue is the perfect example of this. it caught up with them.
it's good to see at least someone accepts that the tacoma can't hang with a TJ. now, the new rubicon is a TJ on steroids, and to be quite frank, is the most capable stock 4x4 production vehicle ever mass produced. end of discussion. anyone want to argue that? i can't see an argument for it, but im sure pluto will put his TRD against one. anyone who is a 4x4 nut and hasn't seen one in person should go look one over. they are truly awesome. dana 44's front and rear- locked at both ends, diamond plate body sills and skidplates, a 4-lo crawl of 4:1, etc. only jeep could build such a hardcore vehicle.
Toyota agreed to fix 3000 engines, didn't it?
And yes...there was TSB on the Lib leaks. It's just that I fail to find any problems involving leaky firewalls on Tacoma. You keep saying that.....now show some posts where people say they are leaking.
Ford hasn't acknowledged the "persisting" problem with rear glass leaking, has it? Or is it that there is no persisting problem, but rather just one truck that got a defect? Think about it.
TJ: Yes, it rules offroad, but how would you describe Jeep behavior onroad? I have one word for you: brick. While Taco combines best of both worlds, Jeep is the king of one, and a joke of another.
I don't deny the Rubicon is very capable (it should be, it's only designed for off-roading) - in fact, I've already told you that numerous times. But the very fact you're comparing it to a Tacoma (a TRUCK, LOL!) seems like an endorsement to me! BTW, do you think it's just a coincidence that only now Jeep is offering stock lockers? Or maybe they're trying to keep up with the competition? Hmmmmmmmmm....
"they (Rubicons) are truly awesome. dana 44's front and rear- locked at both ends, diamond plate body sills and skidplates, a 4-lo crawl of 4:1, etc. only jeep could build such a hardcore vehicle."
Your last sentence is wrong - "only jeep COULD build..." Puleeeze. You make it sound as if Jeep has the best engineering expertise in the world simply because they did what your average shade-tree mechanic can do - swap lockers and axles and weld skid plates. Give me a break!
have you seen the 2003 FX4 level II rangers? available in new sonic blue with blue/black two tone seat trim. this a freakin awesome truck.
not to mention thicker glass, larger brake rotors. still dont see a full size spare though. could be mistaken however.
also, the regular FX4 ranger (previously just "off-road pkg") now comes with a LSD standard. about time.
gotta love that totally manual t/c in the level II.
More Tacos than Rangers were sold in September.
And tbunder -- I care about front axles even though I don't have one, just like you seem to care about tuff vehicles even though your favorite "truck" was designed for women. Go make a run to the mall! Sorry, you just keep harping on my wimpy 2-tire pull truck. They lowered liberties cuz women and girly men like ___ complained about them being top heavy. Oh yeah, they were designed with offroading in mind - sure. MY BUTT, what a load of crap. Give me a break. For what they are, they are great for leaving the pavement but thats it. I like your company here immensely, but this is getting really old. Can you please go back to arguing for or against Tacos and Rangers? One a side note, tell me about your new Blaster.
By the way, my new favorite 1/2 ton truck is a FX4 supercrew, but only in one color, white with tan bottom. Gorgeous truck. Also, no truck lover can help but like those Superduties. So don't say I am a complete Yota loyalist.
blaster is a well, blast. cheap and fun. redesign helped 100 percent.
the new '03 super-duty's are in a class by themselves. they stomp any gm or dodge truck with any tranny or engine. pickuptruck.com just did a huge test with all three. the ford trounced them. the new power stroke diesel will probably be one of the best truck engines ever produced.
and just fyi, it was some magazine that wrote a bad article on the liberty that spawned the lowering issue. that's why DC lowered them. CR couldn't get one to roll however. and they even said the pre-lowered ones behaved better on road than the one they got after the raping took place.
i looked at a new level II FX4 today in sonic blue, and a TRD in white. both trucks are truly awesome. i'd have a hard time choosing. id probably go with the ford simply cuz of the more powerful engine, bigger underbody hardware, dana axles (you can't beat them), and better interior mapping. the toyota, imo, looks cheap and plasticy and stuck in the '80's on the inside. but imo, the white TRD is probably one of the nicest looking trucks on the road. the new yellow ZR2's are sweet too. but the FX4 level II just has an aura about it. pretty rare to begine with, manual t/c, and some pretty cool white faced gauges and cool black and blue/red interior with buckets. plus, with that alcoa sticker on the wheels, you know it's special. just one of the little things the FX4 will be remembered for. specific off-road hardware. yeah, and the rear axles on early built examples.
I wish you would stop mentioning the "trac-loc rear and 13" LLL", because it sounds really sad when I have a locker and 15" TLL....you try to make it sound special, and it isn't. You can say that the difference is all tires, but it isn't. And if it is, you can't put 31s on anyway without lifting it.
running ground clearance:
Liberty 4x4- 8.9
Wrangler- 8.8
also, remember that these are lowered liberty's. add another 3/4 to an inch on pre-lowered ones. (i got one)
approach/departure angles:
Liberty- 36/31.5 degrees
Wrangler- 41.8/31.3 degrees
breakover angles:
Liberty- 21.8 degrees
Wrangler- 22.3 degrees
track- front/rear
Liberty- 60/59.7
Wrangler- 57.6/57.8
transfer case:
Liberty- NV231
Wrangler (non rubicon)- NV231
what does all this mean? well, imo, it means that the liberty has a little wrangler blood in it. i didn't know they both shared the same t/c. also, interesting that the liberty has more ground clearance.
like i said earlier, go sit in a liberty, drive one, or just look at one close. slam the doors, check out the door mounts. the thing is thick, and the door mounts are huge. especially the one in back. it must be 1/4 inch back there. trust me, i am very anal about my vehicle selection, and the jeep is not a cheaply built vehicle. everything was thought out very cleverly on the liberty. it does what it was supposed to do. provide good on-road driveability, while providing off-road performance that will play with the best of them.
the cool thing about the new sd diesel, is the new 5-spd auto tranny. it senses when the brakes are applied and immediately downshifts to help slow the vehicle. read the article on pickuptruck.com. it's pretty thorough.
As a sidenote, I would like to add that though I'm not a fan of "American" compact trucks, I think that Ford makes, bar-none, the best full size truck out there but only in diesel trim and manual transmission. Their gassers (and everybody else's) don't impress me much.
I've been around enough horse trailers and rodeos in my lifetime to know what people who do serious towing and hauling drive, and they drive powerstrokes. I estimate I see 8 powerstrokes towing horsetrailers and backhoes (20,000lbs and up) for every Chevy or Dodge. And that's not coincidental. It's nice to see Ford hasn't compromised its trucks like Chevy has and still uses a solid front axle.
Because I'm a traditionalist and would rather buy something with an established and proven design, I would be skeptical about buying the new 6.0 powerstroke. Let them work out the bugs first. Besides, with the amount of torque we're talking about with these engines, do you think you'll ever pull anything heavy enough to appreciate the new engine's extra 35 lb/ft?
i don't believe in the theory of "working out the kinks" in a new anything. if you guys really knew all of the testing and prototyping that goes on before a vehicle is released for sale, i don't think you'd have that theory anymore (the liberty had been prototyped in some form or another since back in '97). sure, when the general public buys thousands, it's different than testing because everyone does different things to their vehicles. but an engine can only run or not. i haven't had one problem with my liberty aside from a part that im sure has been used in dc vehicles for years. and the engine is smooth as butter and runs harder than my ranger's SOHC.
i stop talking about the liberty when everyone else does. i had to defend it to others who don't know jack about it and stereotype it as a ford escap/hyundai santa fe/rav4 type of vehicle. it isn't. not by a long shot. it has the same transfer case as the wrangler comes with, and has better running ground clearance than wrangler, has better departure angles than wrangler, better breakover angles than wrangler (pre-lowered '02 liberty's), and only takes two feet more to turn in a circle. not to mention it shares dana axles in the rear with the wrangler (non rubicon- it has 44's all around) and has a ifs dana 30 up front. how many escapes or rav4's or even tacomas do you know of with dana axles?
Believe you me, I know exactly how you feel!
pluto- hehe.
And I love this one--> "i stop talking about the liberty when everyone else does." I guess you are right! Hehe.
Has anyone seen the specs on the new Colorado - the Ranger and Tacoma have nothing to worry about. I was expecting alot more -- and its gonna be stepped up to midsize??? Good luck.
liberty just surpassed escape as #1 seller in its market. just fyi.
Perhaps if they would redesign the small trucks they would sell more. Toyota and Nissan are both selling well. When was the S10 last redesigned? 1994? Ranger? Can't even remember.
and the S10 was refreshed in '98 with a new front end. each year, there have been minor improvements. and i will also blanket that the S10 is second in sales.
the ranger got re-designed in '98 with SLA suspension and a larger cab. in '01 it was again re-designed a little with an all new front end, new braking system, larger engine, etc. also in '98, it got a larger frame from front to middle of truck. it is fully boxed.
in comparison, the frontier design got refreshed (plastic all over) in '01, but same as the '98 totally new design.
the tacoma was new in '95, it hasn't changed at all except for front end treatment.
S10 maybe second in sales now, but not by much. Next month Tacoma could be in second place, the way S10 is selling.
This is from the S-10 future vehicles page here at Edmunds.
scorp- it's still third hat in sales. it will never be #1. or #2. take that to the bank.
The new Ranger may have a V8, but lets see.....it was first supposed to come out in 2003? Then 2004? Now it is pushed back to 2005? With all the headlines about "restructuring" in Ford...who knows.
sad- i dont know nor do i care. i won't buy a new colorado. it will be a new ranger i assume. as i expect the new one to kick [non-permissible content removed] whenever it comes out. there's always something new and better around the bend. no matter when or what you buy.
However for the Year of 2002, Ranger is still over 181,000 vs Tacoma's 117,000.
But Yes, again, the Tacoma did sell 618 more trucks in September...
See what I see?
Avalanche vs Tundra: who cares?
Ranger still sells more, but it is no longer the "hundreds of thousands" more units. I'll be laughing when Tacoma tops S10 in sales for this year. Tbunder said to take it to the bank that it would not. We all know how much his "facts" are worth.