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 - II

13468921

Comments

  • cpousnrcpousnr Posts: 1,611
    Thank you for your opinions on vince8 and his justification for Ranger. Your opinions. . . Hmm.

    Consider this. With consistence, repeat, consistence, Consumer Reports magazine, of the Consumers Union a non-profit, non-advertising agency there for the "consumer", you and me, looking at all configurations of light trucks, 2X's, 4X's, longbed, shortbed, 2.5L/3.0L/4.0L for Ranger and all Toyota/Nissan/GM truck configuration/engines, given all the government studies/reports and most importantly, given the input from users of the product, read into that "owners" of the trucks, selects Ford Ranger as a "Best Buy", year after year. Inputs from owners suggest that the defect rate for the two vehicles of this topic are basically equal.

    Also, Four Wheeler magazine selected Ford Ranger XL 3.0L as one of its "Best Buys".

    I assume that you feel that this independent agency that WILL NOT accept advertising or allow their ratings to be USED in advertisments is also wrong?

    Unlike some people on this board you can, at any time, see documentation of my truck, what it can and does do. Objective evidence my friend.

    The board awaits your comments.
  • "Over here" is So. Cal., and I got my price over the internet without ever going into the dealership. But the closest dealership is the one I visited to see how Tacomas are all but gone, while Fords are plentiful across the street. I also noticed that they are the same Fords every time, while the Tacomas have sold 2 4X4 4cyl only to be replaced by the same type truck. The dealer said that they keep getting the smaller engine trucks, and he doesn't know why. But he thinks it's an end of year thing (leftovers). But looking at both dealer's lots, I'd say that the Ford dealer is going to have quite a few leftovers, and have to lower his price more. As far as Rangers having Toyota parts in it or not, I don't know if that's true or not. I heard it from a friend 3 years ago who did a lot of research on his Ranger before he bought it, only to have the engine blow with 60k miles on it later.
    I just want a reliable truck, and I don't have a lot of faith in Fords, because almost everybody I know has had many problems with Ford vehicles. I had one 10 years ago and it was a lemon.
    I have a 10 year old plymouth sundance now with 96k miles on it, and it's falling apart on me --- doesn't start sometimes, engine problems, etc.
    The car's just getting plain old! And it's time for me to get a new vehicle, and I've decided on a vehicle with a good reputation for reliability. That's why I've picked the Tacoma. I've looked in the conferences in this site at Rangers, Dakotas, and Tacomas. It seems very obvious after looking at these conferences, that the FEWEST complaints people have are from Tacoma owners. I also checked the consumer complaints section at the nhtsa.dot.gov site, and Tacomas again had the lowest number of reported complaints (I think it was Ranger-90, Dakota-40, Tacoma-13). So I'm getting a Tacoma. At a great price!!!
  • spoogspoog Posts: 1,224
    OKAY IM posting the NHSTA stats ONCE again!


    LEts see.....that will be 290 Ranger technical bulletins and 70 or so toyota pickup bulletins.....



    That will be 100's of Ranger safety recalls.....
    and 15 Toyota pickup safety recalls.......




    As for Toyota engines, everyone with a brain knows they make the most rock solid engines in the Business. Ever watch those safari documentRIES i nthe artic or Africa?

    How about Himalaya?

    All landcruisers or toyota pickups with the occasional land rover tossed in.

    There is a reason why.
  • barlitzbarlitz Posts: 752
    Don't want to stir up problems, I own an american truck and would consider buying a japanese truck if Japan would import as much american products as they export thier japanese products to us, I didn't make this comment to cause an uproar its just an opinion.
  • Does best buy for the Ranger mean that it is the best truck? Or I could say it this way, " Does the higher price of the Tacoma mean that it is the worst buy?

    Well I had a 89 Camry I sold to a person I know with 174,000 plus miles on the odometer that didn't burn oil. He has 216,000 plus miles on it now and it still doesn't burn oil. Only problem is that the light for the temp & AC controls doesn't work when the exterior lights come on.
  • Barlitz,
    No uproar with that comment. It is an accurate statement about the Japanese trading practices.
  • wsnoblewsnoble Posts: 241
    I don't beleive my post about Vince's ?'s were an opinion. I don't think the Ranger is bad a truck. I like it. It would have been what i bought if the Tacoma did not exist. But in regards to The price issue, Rangers sell because of their lower price, Fords agreesive finance programs (0.9%) and all the other reasons mentioned in my previos post. My post was based on facts. Maybe you could elaborate on which parts you though were opinion.

    -wsn
  • cpousnrcpousnr Posts: 1,611
    Ranger has the Mazda Tranny. It is a weak point as it is considered medium duty and has those darn rubber vs steel plugs on the top. Do not know of other foreign parts.

    Check the reported troubles for Ranger in Consumer Reports and you will find them basically equal to the Toyota truck.

    spoog:
    Maybe tell people where to Go rather than posting. HMM you HAVE told me where to go often. . .!
    8^).

    Best Buy to me means for the money, it goes the longest way on this vehicle considering price, quality, features, reliability. It is tough to beat a 4X4 XL for 12-13K vs 20-21K due the math and that is 7-9K in your pocket and your still out 4 wheeling.

    Camry is a VERY bright spot in the Toyota line from the mid 1980s but read the Edmunds long term test and there have been some problems.

    Toyota does make good engines, with the exception of that 81-82 diesel which, I will repeat, self destructed around 35K and was not backed by Toyota at all. And maybe the 3.4 that had a head rather than a headgasket problem? The 76 Corolla I owned still ran at 136K but that engine leaked/burned oil badly.

    Well wsnoble, I cited my source, Consumer Reports and Four Wheeler. I was just adding those to your comments. What were your sources? No sources, they are opinions. And I know you have never said it was a bad truck.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Posts: 1,611
    You can get recalls/service bullitens here:

    http://www.therangerstation.cjb.net/

    You can ALSO search on the Tacoma in some cases.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Posts: 1,611
    http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
    BEST
    Pronunciation: 'best
    Function: adjective, superlative of GOOD
    Etymology: Middle English, from Old English betst; akin to Old English bOt remedy -- more at BETTER
    Date: before 12th century
    1 : excelling all others
    2 : most productive of good or of advantage, utility, or satisfaction
    3 : MOST, LARGEST

    buy
    Pronunciation: 'bI
    Function: verb
    Inflected Form(s): bought /'bot/; buy·ing
    Etymology: Middle English byen, from Old English bycgan; akin to Gothic bugjan to buy
    Date: before 12th century
    transitive senses
    1 : to acquire possession, ownership, or rights to the use or services of by payment especially of money : PURCHASE
    2 a : to obtain in exchange for something often at a sacrifice b : REDEEM 6
    3 : BRIBE, HIRE
    4 : to be the purchasing equivalent of
    5 : ACCEPT, BELIEVE
    intransitive senses : to make a purchase
    - buy·er /'bI(-&)r/ noun
    - buy it or buy the farm : to get killed : DIE
    - buy time : to delay an imminent action or decision : STALL

  • I looked back from the past 2 years on the NHTSA's defect investigations lists, and it seems to me that Rangers are being investigated for many more defects than Tacoma's. How can anyone say that Rangers are better????
    1998 1999
    Ranger-8 Ranger-6
    Tacoma-1 Tacoma-0

    Looks pretty obvious (at 14 to 1!!!) that Rangers have more defects, and therefore, more problems, than Tacomas....
    And all this info comes from the NHTSA, instead of someone's Ford homepage. Hmmm....
  • I've got only 600 miles on my new Tacoma, and the real deal is the pleasure that we derive from our rides, right? Well, the Tacoma is fun fun fun, and it looks hot, too. I have the '99 prerunner, V6, Xtra cab, FX pkg (TRD offroad) with all the other stuff that I wanted, and have no regrets whatsoever. I have a friend that bought a new Ranger at about the same time. It is a nice truck, someone's gotta buy 'em - but I feel that I have the best buy! Betcha it's more trouble-free than my American designed car was, too.
  • Ford Ranger Pickup- Rollovers & Defects

    The past and present models of the Ford Ranger pickup truck have been the center of legal disputes for years. Many lawsuits have been filed concerning the Ford Ranger Pickup Truck's high rollover propensity, excessive amount of roof crush to the roof pillars or roof supports, significant excessive seatbelt slack (looseness) problems with the shoulder belt, suspension problems contributing to steering and handling, poor directional control due to inadequate / malfunctioning shock absorbers and too high of center of gravity contributing to the high propensity to rolling over.

    Ford Ranger Pickup Truck- Rollover Problem

    The original Ford Ranger Pickup was designed to replace the Ford Courier pickup, which was a downsized pickup manufactured by Mazda and sold in this country with a Ford label. Ford's decision to replace the Courier was based on the anticipated CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency) rulemaking that would have excluded domestically imported vehicles from industry calculations.

    Most Ford Ranger Pickups have a Twin I-Beam and Twin Traction Beam suspension system used since the early 1970's. This suspension system has been a noted problem in many rollover cases, due to the fact that the Twin I-Beam can actually enhance the jacking or lifting during sideway movement during a hard braking , steering / avoidance manuever. This jacking or lifting increase the height of the center of gravity ,helping to encourage a rollover. The rollover is just the beginning. When the pick-up rolls onto its roof, the many times the weak roof pillars collapse, trapping or crushing down onto the seated upright occupants with CATASTROPHIC CONSEQUENCES. The magnitude of the vertival compression onto the occupants, can result in severe head /brain damage, spinal cord damage, brusting fractures to the spinal cord, causing quadriplegia, paraplegia, closed head injuries and even death.

    The roof supports were not designed to act as a roll bar, as the industry states that rollovers are not foreseeable events, capable of being tested and reproduced in a controlled testing enviroment.If one examines the inside of such roof supports, one find them hollow, with made up of nothing but folded/ corrogated light gauge metal. Not designed to withstand the force of a rollover. EVEN THOUGH FORD KNEW BY THEIR OWN TESTS THAT THESE RANGER PICKUPS HAD A HIGH PROPENSITY TO ROLL AND THAT THESE ROOF WILL COLLAPSE IN MANY ROLLOVERS!!!

    Ford Ranger-- Seatbelt Injuries

    The seat belt system in the Ranger for the two outboard seating positions(driver & passenger) consists of a 3-point belt with a lap and attached shoulder restraint and the middle seating position having only a lap belt.In some older models the shoulder belt has what is known a a comfort feature or window shade retractor device that allows for slack to be introduced into the system as one moves about in the vehicle.The problem is excessive slack in the shoulder or lap belt can cause serious injuries in case of a frontal collision or a rollover. Good engineering practices teaches that a safety belt should be so designed and positioned that it allows the body to move forward and ride down the deceleration of the impact in order to protect them from moving forward and possibly striking an unfriendly object or structure inside the vehicle.

    In 1979 NHTSA proposed an outright ban to these devices, but U.S. auto makers including Ford fought the restrictions but,finally agreed to voluntarily limit the amount of slack and to poist warnings in new vehicles, instead of fixing the problem !In one such case in Texas a young boy properly seated and belted in the front seat of th Ford Ranger Pickup Truck was rendered a quadriplegic when during a frontal collision his head impacted the dash , due in part, of TOO MUCH SLACK in the belt belt system. The Ford Ranger Pickup trucks of the 1990's are not equipped with this dangerous slack producing belt system.

    Middle Seating Position Lap belt can also be a killer in frontal accidents in that it allows the occupant( usually a child) to be severely whipped or jack-knived, in the sudden deceleration of a frontal collision. Many times severe abdominal injuries, spinal cord and head injuries can result from the upper torso being violently thrusted forward, instead of restrained with a shoulder belt.THIS TOO WAS WELL KNOWN TO FORD even as early as 1967.

    Lack of Head Restraints. Most of the early Ford Rangers and the earlier Ford Courier pickup trucks were not equipped with head restraints or high back seats. The failure of Ford, General Motors and most of the truck industry in deciding NOT to install these safety devices, costs 100's of occupants their lives , in moderate to severe rear end collisions. For $15-20, head restraints could have been added , but the auto industry fought this safety regulation, until 1988, when it was mandated, that all outboard seating positions be equipped with them.
  • Now that Cpousnr clarified that the Ranger is the best buy, but that it doesn't necessary mean best truck. I guess best truck goes to Toyota just like what Petersen's 4Wheel mag claimed..

    Put it on your web site. I don't give a hoot, but if you constantly have to jibe that you have a web site you sound kind of pathetic to me. Pictures can be copied from other sites.
  • spoogspoog Posts: 1,224
    Cspousner writes

    " Why dont you just tell us where to go to find the sats, and not posat them".


    Cspousner? Have you been paying attention? I have posted the NHSTA link throughout this thread.

    Awhile back weh nI posted the 270 technical repair bulletins to the Tacomas 60, I gave the link.



    Here you go Cspousner, for the 300th time:



    http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/



    A completely unbiased, completely up to date inventory of defects and safety recalls for every vehicle ever made.


    This site has always been my source. Its the site where I proved you wrong way back on the 70 Ford safety rcalls and the 11 yota recalls
    (89-99)

    ,and the site where I got the 270 Ranger technical bulletins, and the 60 yota technical bulletins(89-99)

    YOu might want to bookmark it so you dont look like a fool again.
  • spoogspoog Posts: 1,224
    lol. if your going to quote used car value, why dont you cite Edmunds as a source?


    what are you hiding?
  • cpousnrcpousnr Posts: 1,611
    spoog:
    Who is Cspousner?

    Spell check, please!

    Yes I know you posted the link a while back just was requesting you not copy the whole 9 yards again. And in #168 I posted the place off of Ranger Station where you can get to the site you reference. Why did you waste precious space repeating what I just did?

    Unbiased? Well one would THINK that some of those submissions would flow over to the Consumer Reports assessments. And if you READ the text of some of the NHTSA posts, they refer to, what I consider, minor issues such as missing labels, chattering windows, etc. Now the one BIG issue, the fuel rail line, was promptly repaired by Ford, simular to the head design/head gasket (no one has told me which it is) problem on the 3.4L Toyota engine.

    Sure, I can quote Edmunds but you cannot sell a vehicle for what Edmunds says. They said my 94 Intrepid was worth $8500 well it sold for $7400. That is a 13% error in their estimated value vs reality. Also, I was offered $4K trade-in value where $5.6K was reported by Edmunds for trade-in value, a 29% error. Read into that that you cannot sell or trade for what Edmunds lists as the value of your car.

    hindsite:
    First, for future history of the Ranger, you might try here:
    http://www.homestead.com/therangerstation/RangerHistory.html You will find such things as:

    1985:
    Ford also continued to stress that the Ranger was truly a small scale version of the F-150, down to the same ladder-type frame construction and twin I-beam front suspension, a Ford trademark for more than 20-years.

    1998:
    Another '98 change that positively influenced the ride and steering quality was the front-suspension's overhaul. Ford replaced the veteran twin I-beams with a new wishbone-style front suspension that uses coil springs or torsion bars. New "Pulse Vacuum" hub-locks enables virtually silent 4x4 engagement on the fly with a flick of the dash switch.
    Is there such a thing for Toyota?

    Web site? True I could copy but. . . Well I am not ashamed of showing the beauty of my state and just happen to have my ugly mug but pretty truck in the pic. Next time out, I will give you and spoog a personal message on a pic to let you know its me.

    Clarification, read my post again. Consumer Reports and 4 wheeler mag state the "best buy" on those particular vehicles, not specifically the 4 wheel drive. Over all assessment.
    I have never said the Tacoma was a bad vehicle nor questioned its ability as a 4X, other than mine will basically go where it goes too. But have agreed with most assessments that it is fine but 1. Expensive, 2. uncomfortable front seat and 3. questionable vehicle control.
  • You said to me:
    (ziggy10)
    Well, first, there are more Rangers sold so more
    reports would be expected. Second, READ THE REPORTS...missing labels...glaze for glass...how to SERVICE break rotor...power window chatter...do not put these refrigerents in...

    Now I can agree on your first sentence -- barely (considering the FACT that more Japanese cars are sold than American worldwide, probably means that Toyo sells MORE trucks overall --- prove me wrong!!!)
    In your second sentence "READ THE REPORTS", I did. AND YOU DIDN'T- Obviously, because besides the "small" stuff in there, there's also MAJOR EXPENSIVE problems, such as fuel injector leaks (potential fire hazard), sticking speed controls (that could definitely cause accidents), and the transmission not going into park (not safe on a hill is it???).
    The evidence is overwhelming, and if you can't see it now, then you don't have an open mind. Or you're saying things just to try and get the last word in, or whatever. If you like to argue so much, become a lawyer.
    All I know is that I WAS going to buy a Dakota, and then started researching and checked every small truck there is (Dodge, Ford, Chevy, Nissan, Mazda, and Toyota) and quickly came to the conclusion of which truck offered the better
    1. Engine
    2. Power
    3. Hauling capacity
    4. Best reported customer satisfaction
    5. Lowest number of customer complaints
    6. Resale value
    7. Reliability

    Tacoma

    Plus, mine is almost the same price as an equally equipped Ranger --- 900 dollars more if you get the 3.0 engine, and ONLY 100 dollars more if you got the 4.0. Now when I trade it in, according to you, I'll get 1,500 more back than you would on a Ranger. Hmmmm. Sounds to me like I'll get more than my money back and eventually (because of the higher trade in value) I'll actually PAY LESS than a Ranger buyer would overall. Want me to do the math for you???
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    Wrong, Tacoma is more option for option, read it right here at Edmonds on there Tacoma review. I priced the Tacoma option for option and it was anywhere from 2-4K MORE than a comparably equipped Ranger. A co-worker bought a Tacoma 4x4 SC with the 2.7, he paid almost 18K! for a Truck with no A/C, and just a AM/FM stero. The inside was bland, nothing special. I showed him my Ranger XLT 4x4 4.0 for 19,600 loaded. And he was a bit surprised at what I got. He admitted he never even test drove the Ranger, Chevy or Dodge.
    Also, Ranger doesn't have twin-I beam anylonger. Come into the new Ranger please.
    The excuses that the Ranger is less expensive and its Ford financing that creates all the sales is a joke. Toyota also offers financing and rebates in the NW.
    Fact is the Ranger offers more of what people want. A good, reliable, quality product at a FAIR price. Sales continue to show this. The Ranger is in the top 10 vehicles/Cars sold, where is the Tacoma after all these years?
    The Ranger has been the number 1 seller in its class since introduction. Toyota has had plenty of time to reverse this, why hasn't this happened?
    Tacoma owners are just miffed because they paid too much!
  • cpousnrcpousnr Posts: 1,611
    You can get a top of the line 2000 Tacoma 4X4, extracab, air conditioned, 3.4LV6, ABS, tach, AM/FM CD, cuise, rear bed light, skid plates, digital clock, chrome bumpers, rear seats, trailer electrical connection and heavy duty mud guards. .
    . . .for around $18,000?
    If so, buy it, its a deal.
    Man, tell me where and I will come buy some for resale down here and make 3 grand a vehicle.
  • Carson Toyota, Long Beach, CA. At auction price through the fleet manager. All done over the internet. Just tell 'em what options you want and they'll try and put it up for auction. They did for me, and no-one else bid on it!!!!
  • Cpousnr's quote
    "The 1998 Ranger changed from the twin I beam to IFS. Please come to the future."

    Well that is true and the head gasket is old news, but yet you like to bring it up. It is fair game to put on Edmunds anything negative about the Ranger if you choose to rehash old news. If you want to play the game it can go either way.

    Ford does have a trademark for recalls and technical bulletins. Take that to the bank.

    Just like you have said in the past Spoog does not have the truck. I can say in the same vane that your web site is a fraud. How do you like them apples? Photos can be copied from other sites.
  • spoogspoog Posts: 1,224
    Csnousner writes:


    "But haveagreed with most assessments that it is fine but 1.
    Expensive, 2. uncomfortable front seat and 3.questionable vehicle control."




    Questionable vehicle control? The tacomas
    suspension and steering control are top of the line. Didn't you ever read the Four Wheeler
    pickup of the year comparions? Please dont tell me
    we have to go into that again. Also, your ranger wont go everywhere my tacoma can. I have the optional locker and the 4:10 gearing which basically leaves you in the dust(or mud).

    Its options like that that seperate vehicles.
  • Plus Cpousnr does not have the clutch cancel switch. Yeah, remember he said once he does not like mud. Guess he knows his truck is basically limited to gravel roads.

    See you in the hills
  • Hey, I really want to know more about the Supercharger for the tacoma. I just found this info. on the net last night and really want info on how powerful it is and how the truck reacts to the added horsepower. I need to tow a boat but I dont want the cost of a 30K truck without the balls. Can you guys tell me by experience how it is working for you and is it worth it. Gas mileage? 0-60 improvement over stock? Towing? Overall Balls? Im going to buy soon but is this a special order that the factory will have to make and will I wait forever to get the S/C.

    And how come I never have heard of the under the hood balls before. I would have never known unless I was on the edmunds site. Is there more sites besides toyota talking about it.

    Thanks
    From a man that wants to drive a reliable truck with balls.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Posts: 1,611
    (ziggy10)
    Well it appears to be a good deal you got.
    First, you forgot to mention that the base engine on the Tacoma is, an I quote from Edmunds, 2.4L I4 DOHC MPI 16-valve engine. And the prices for the 99 2WD V6 Extra cab are, directly from Edmunds:

    7153 Extended Cab Base V6 (5M) 2-Dr
    Invoice = $14,690
    MSRP = $16,208

    Sooooo, they are selling the 2000 Tacoma for less than the 99s?

    I will be direct. You are just flat wrong on your prices and anyone with access to Edmunds or Kelly Blue Book can see you ar.

    hindsite:
    Well, when I develop the roll, there will be a picture of the 1999 Colo Aspens with a note above my bumper stating:
    EDMUNDS #867 227
    Look, I do think anyone can bring up whatever they want and if the bulletins are the deciding factor, so be it. With the exception of the wiper switch, NONE effect my 99 XLT, many are service alerts on HOW to accomplish service of the vehicle. How do you address a complaint on a chattering window when it effects a small number of vehicle and MAY be c
    My comment on the Ibeams was just that the suspension has changed. MANY on Ranger.com or Ranger Station hate the new suspension as they like the twin I beam in a 4X situation.

    I was in the mud last and this weekend, 100-200 feet sections last weekend on some roads, forest service road 360 San Isabel forest to be exact and a few short spots this weekend, forest service road 206 in Routt and Arapahoe NF. And yes, if i was in places that was mud boggs, a locker might help, but I do not go there.

    I didnt see you in the hills this weekend, just an F250 and F150 and a couple of ATV's, 2 deer an elk 3 falcons and a load of chipmunks.

    Got pics of the deer and elk.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,119
    Come to think of it when I go out into the Cascade Mountains I RARELY see any Tacoma's in places that I go. I see plenty of them in the city or parked by rivers but never actually on trails. Wonder why?
  • spoogspoog Posts: 1,224
    Vinnie writes:

    "Come to think of it when I go out into the Cascade
    Mountains I RARELY see any Tacoma's in places that
    I go. I see plenty of them in the city or parked
    by rivers but never actually on trails. Wonder
    why?"




    Figure it out. You yourself said the ranger outsells the Tacoma 7-1.

    You answered your own ignorant question.
  • Am I to believe those pics that you are to develop to be yours? You want to wrangle over tone I can say to you that your web site is a fraud. Yeah your Ford trademark is Found on Road Dead or Fix or Repair Daily.

    Those animals you did see now are probably dead.
  • How old are guys. Can anybody reflect back to the #187 and answer my questioon. As much as all of you brag, maybe one of you can brag a tacoma supercharged and give me some info. rather than knocking each other. Yello?. I didnt know this was some twelve year olds chat line. Help a guy out would you. Im beginning to believe you guys dont own a truck, you just own computers that you play on all the time. How about it. Some relivant info.
13468921
This discussion has been closed.