straight from www.fordvehicles.com build your own section. from doing the math, the difference looks to be about $500 more for the FX4. so tell me, how do you come up with $7000-8000? are you high?
I'm wondering, did Ford specifically come up with FX4 to compete with Tacoma? As you said, the regular 4x4 doesnt put up too much of a competition with crappy tires and shocks, so Ford had to go out and design a new kind of Ranger, specifically targeted at offroaders, just to compete with all-purpose Tacoma?
if you check, the FX4 uses the same gearing, springs, and axles as the regular off-road XLT 4.0. the prices i posted was an FX4 which there basically is no options. and a loaded 4.0 auto like the one i bought. there is another off-road package, but it does not include the 4.0 engine or the other "yuppie" stuff like step bars and 6 disc cd changer. so to put it simple, the real differences are wheels/tires, and shocks. same skids, a lsd, i have the same kind of tires like i stated. im not taking anything away from the FX4 as it is way cool, but if you want to get down to the nitty gritty, its not that much different than if you would add shocks and tires to your off-road equipped XLT 4.0.
i really do not see the logic in the FX4, other than its a new model. if i slapped on the 15's and some bilsteins along with an FX4 decal on my truck, id have an FX4 really. not much engineering in adding tires, shocks and some shiny tow-hooks. to be honest with you, i think they came up with it to compete with the ZR2 looks-wise, which is closer to the ranger in sales competition than the tacoma. with the 31's and BFG tires, it resembles the Z more than the TRD. all three are very capable trucks, ill say that. i like them all. when i think of the three of them, i see the ZR2 as a body-builder on steroids with no brain, my ranger is like an ironman triathlete, and the tacoma somewhere in the middle, maybe a marathon runner.
Maybe its not 5-7K, but I am seeing a 3K difference in prices on Edmunds: 2002 Ford Ranger 4dr SuperCab XLT FX4 4WD Styleside SB (4.0L 6cyl 5M) is 25415
2002 Ford Ranger 4dr SuperCab XLT Off-Road 4WD Styleside SB (4.0L 6cyl 5M) is 22765. is this the right Ranger? I can't tell very well, there's too many of different variations.
go to www.fordvehicles.com like i said. i would have posted the link, but due to edmunds limitations, i couldn't. like i said, there are two or three off-road packages to get the off-road group itself. a fancy 4.0, a semi-stripper 3.0, and another one in flareside i believe. trust me, the numbers i posted are STRAIGHT FROM THE HORSES MOUTH (Ford), NOT EDMUNDS OR SOMETHING.
go to www.trdusa.com that should tell you any and all you want to know about the S/C they put in tacomas. Why are you so interested? Don't you drive a Chevy?
tblunder: You think that your bed is welded to the frame? So, if you got into an accident they would have to torch the bed off to fix it? I would like to see a truck that has the bed welded to the frame. The bed couldn't flex or give when in binding situations. I think you are way off on this one.
Ranger=ironman triathelete? Interesting analogy
So, for the fx4 you are saying they are just charging more for it because of the sticker? Odd marketing don't you think??
>go to www.trdusa.com that should tell you any and all you want to know about the S/C they put in tacomas. Why are you so interested? Don't you drive a Chevy?<
Yes, but inquiring minds want to know. I assumed it was a centrifugal, not positive displacement roots type blower. You know what they say about "assume."
I never thought I'd see the day when people are arguing about who donated more money to the NY relief effort. unbelievable.
tbunder- "and the SOHC has been employed since fall of '96 in explorers" -actually it was '97, and I think it was ported over to the ranger in 2000 or 2001.
"So, for the fx4 you are saying they are just charging more for it because of the sticker? Odd marketing don't you think??"
Sort of like a certain other Three letter sticker option group for another truck? You know TRD?
But seriously, it's a loaded Ranger. Take the XLT 4X4 with Off road package and add: - "Torsen" Brand Limited Slip Rear Axle (w/ 4.10s) - 24-inch water fording capability. - Manual transmission with manual transfer case or automatic transmission with electronic transfer case. - ALL Power accessories, (tilt, speed, windows, Keyless entry, &all others) - "Bilstein" Brand Shocks - Tougher Skid plates - 31x10.5 BF Goodrich All Terrain T/A KO tires - Cool front seat buckets unique to the FX4 - And the FX4 sticker...
Scorpio--->I can't speak for Ford, but would have to think that the FX4 isn't Ford's answer to the Tacoma. Ford's engineers listen to Ranger owners and listen to their wants and desires. This new model is designed to appeal to the more off-road focused group.
Even though I'm not interested in buying a 4X4 truck, I would love to see what the FX4 can do!
The TRD package on the Tacoma's RETAIL value is $1650. I believe Tbunder said the TRD was around $3000 more. Misinformation, as usual...
Tbunder, just curious, why do you care if I want to install a supercharger, even though I've already had my truck for 50K miles? You've had your Ranger for a whopping 7K problem free miles, now you already want a Frontier or F-150, LOL!!!
Just curious, is the FX4 package only a $1650 upgrade, or does it cost more? Somebody said the FX4 retails for over $26K. Either that FX4 package costs A LOT, or you guys have been underestimating the low price on your Rangers we keep hearing about. The FX4 package is Ford's version of the TRD package, but at least with the TRD you get the locker...I guess I'm wondering if you're getting more for your money with the TRD package.
Oh, and that link I posted a while back with the 1998 Tacoma being pickup of the year? The Ranger was part of that shootout.
Somebody here said that only 1% of people really care about serious off-roading capibility when we posted links on the Tacoma's winning performance off-road. If that's the case, why would have Ford developed the FX4? There just wouldn't be any profit in it...
I can't wait until a comparo is done between the TRD and the FX4. My money's on the TRD - it's beaten everything compared to it so far...
stang-the fx4 uses the same skidplates as an off-road ranger. exact. in regards to the 24-inch water fording capability, this is probably the larger tires providing this capability. so basically it narrows down to shocks, tires, for the functionality of the equipment. the lsd is different brand, but still an lsd.
smgilles-please repost my post saying that all the fx4 was is an added sticker. id like to see when i said this. and dude, open your eyes. is your bed bolted to the frame? no, i dont think so. is the S10 bed bolted to the frame? no. they're both welded. why do you think ford brags about their beds being bolted AND welded?
eagle63- like i said, the FALL of '96 is when the '97 explorers came out. i had one myself. came to ranger in 01. had to raise the hood to make it fit. hence, the raised hood, it does function, not all for looks.
pluto- also, tell me where i said the trd package was $3000. i said that it is that much more than an off-road xlt ranger option for option. which it is, and i can provide proof if you want. also, please re-post that link so i can see how the ranger did, for some reason i dont remember reading about the ranger. but even so, remember that was then, this is now. ranger is more powerful than tacoma now, and comes with better off-road stuff. as i posted earlier, the differences in price between a loaded to the hilt xlt off-road, and an fx4, is around $500. and one last thing pluto, you say the tacoma has beaten everything compared to it so far. what about the new for 2002 shootout in four-wheeler? pickup truck of the year? the new ram stomped both trd's that you brag so heavily about. thats got to be embarassing. is it? they actually dogged the trd both on the tundra and tacoma. at least the F150 included had the most powerful engine and was noted for how well it articulated, (and it wasn't even a new FX4 F150)as well as the editors saying they couldn't find one negative thing to say about it. gonna comment on this one? i doubt it. how was your day off from your multiple postings? funny how someone talks how you post around here 24 hours a day, and suddenly you stop for a day. hilarious.
Did you read about the blower yet? The TRDusa site says that turbo lag is non existent. This is because this blower is a roots type blower -- the kind that you were sure it couldn't be. Why did you think that? You just "assumed" it was the bad kind. The catalog that has some specs on the blower is performanceproducts.com - but they are down now, so I can't post the direct link to the blower.
So, Ram beat Tacoma. Wonderful....I would have been surprised if Ram didnt beat Tacoma, after all, Ram is supposed to be a fullsize pickup, and Taco is a compact. Now, Ram beating a Tundra, thats another story. Lets keep it within the vehicle class.
Had to take a "break." That's what happens when the end of month reports come across my desk and figures don't jive. That means I'm busy, not fooling on the computer...
There's no link covering the entire article with the Tacoma and Ranger. It was Four Wheeler's Pickup truck of the year, which came out in January of 1998, if you care to go to the library and read it...
Please post your link from Four-Wheeler. Are you making stuff up again? I find it hard to believe comparos were done with two Toyota trucks, one a full-size and one a compact. That must be something new...
What he is talking about is the comparison test of major pickups. Tacoma that participated in it was a DoubleCab with Tohiko shocks, which is why they lost, I think Tundra had the same. The main concern of testers was the rough ride that came with Tohikos. I don't know why Toyota didnt leave Bilsteins on.
"like i said, the FALL of '96 is when the '97 explorers came out. i had one myself. came to ranger in 01. had to raise the hood to make it fit. hence, the raised hood, it does function, not all for looks."
-my bad, I thought you were talking model year, not actual year.
out the new four-wheeler magazine, its not a link anywhere. and the tundra DID have Bilsteins, and the DC had tokico. either way, they both sported the TRD badges on their beds, and got stomped by a dodge. something you're happy with? in your defense, i will say that the shootout is bogus anyways, as it always makes the new truck that year the winner. the article really does not make sense anyways on its final ruling. all along the article it praises the F150, but then scores it lower than the toyotas in off-road when right before, it notes how well the F150 does off-road with good clearance and articulation. but it totally dogs on the TRD trucks. just shows how political it is.
scorpio- basically all your little link proves is that buyers of toyota trucks can get them cheaper over the 'net. this is not news to me, considering everytime i go to a toyota dealer, they act like they are selling mazerati's. check out www.pickuptruck.com to see who is really happy with their truck purchasess, the trucks that more people buy than any others combined.
Where in that article did it say anything about buying trucks over the net? "Altogether, the APEAL study examines 15 vehicle categories. Results are based on responses from vehicle owners after three months of ownership. Among the areas probed are why consumers feel the way they do about their vehicles, and what they think about vehicle styling; engine and transmission; comfort and convenience; ride and handling; seats; heating, ventilation and cooling; cockpit and instrument panel; and sound system. " Seems to be this sort of measured how much people were satisfied with their purchases initially. If Ranger is so great, why didnt it make it in, given it's volume of sales?
I believe you were posting previously that a fully equipped 4X4 Ranger could be bought for somewhere in the area of 18-19K. It's also been stated here that the FX4 is pretty expensive at about 26K. That's a difference of 7-8K for math prodigies like yourself. I may know jack (as you say) but I do know that you continue to be a wealth of misinformation. In the slim chance that you aren't Vince with a different name, I'll give you the same advice that I gave him which I suspect that you'll also ignore. You currently have little to no respect in this forum based on your continuous erroneous information and personal attacks. Most here are pretty forgiving if you back off a bit and do a little research before you make a post. If you continue in your present direction, however, you'll generally be ignored as vince8 was in the past. If you at least make an effort in this direction, you'll find that most here will respect your opinion.
Pick up beds are not welded to the frame. Go under your ranger and look(why would you have to remove the bed liner???) There's 6- 8 hi torx bolts that go through an approximate 2" square tubing that bolts to the frame. The square tubing is welded to the bed but not the frame. You simply remove the bolts, remove your filler neck, unplug your lights and the bed will be removed in all of 15 minutes. When you post erroneous info credibility gets lost.
Pluto, you happy? I'll call out a Ford guy if the info is wrong.
"Oh, and that link I posted a while back with the 1998 Tacoma being pickup of the year? The Ranger was part of that shootout."
True statement, the 1998 Ranger they used was a non-offroad optioned (that means a 3.73 open differential vs a 4.10:1 locker in the Tacoma and 225X15 tires vs the 31X10.5X15 tires on the Tacoma), automatic transmissioned (that means that the final reduction ratio of the 4X4 system was about 27:1 vs 40:1 in the 5 speed manual transmissioned Tacoma)vehicle.
Now, the Tacoma won in 1998, but do you feel based on what I told you that the test was fair? The Ranger was out differentialed, out tired, out transmissioned, out shock absorbered, and out final drive ratioed. . .but it was not outpriced to the tune of maybe 5-6,000 bucks.
I was surprised that the Ranger kept up with the Tacoma in that test.
Hmmm 4th place in the Jan Four Wheeler mag Pickup Truck of the year test. Is this the same vehicle that beat the Hummer?
that a section of the attachment to the rear wheels, a flang, sticks down a good 3-4 inches under the differential bottom. It sticks out a good 2-3 inches to the inside.
Based on your opinion of the 2 inch drop of the shock mounts on a Ranger, still not as low as the bottom of the differental, is the 4Runner a bad off-road vehicle?
I await with batted breath. . .8^) your answer . .
I would say an outright yes -- the 4runner is a bad offroad vehicle. Unless a lot of mods are involved, I think most would agree. I mean how desperate are you guys?
let me know the post where i said this. id like to see for myself where i said a ranger like mine stickered for the amount you're saying. now out the door price is another thing. something you toyota guys wouldn't know anything about, since you all got raped with your toyota's overpricing. $23000 otd price for a 5-spd trd tacoma? gimme a break.
you know, there have been alot of arguments made on this forum, and alot of them unanswered. but ill make these comments and lets just see how you toyota guys defend these (erroneous im sure someone will claim) statements im about to make.
ranger outsells the competition by a landslide. tacoma not even close in sales.
ranger has more available power and torque.
ranger comes with larger standard tires. 245/75/16 vs. 225/75/15 on toyota. toyota actually charges $300 for STEEL 16" rims. aluminum 16's are standard on ranger 4x4.
ranger comes with more options standard, while toyota charges you more for the same stuff.
ranger tows more than tacoma. 5600 vs 5000.
ranger comes with larger rear axle, and a higher gvwr.
ranger comes with a LSD rear diff, not just a locker which is limited to manual operation and minimal speed usages. lsd engages automatically and thus is more operational in the real world, on or off-road. how good is a locker driving in the snow? uh-huh.
ranger can be had with little goodies not offered on toyota. fog lights, two stout tow hooks up front, not one wimpy one under the truck, floor emergency brake, o/d bypass button, 5-spd auto tranny, keyless entry, cd changer in dash, mp3 player, larger engine, more configurations, etc.
so, im curious to see you toyota guys' reactions to all of these statements i just made. hash em out, say they're false, but trust me they're all true. my question is, WHY? why would toyota let all this happen, KNOWING that year in and year out the ranger outsells its truck in unbelievable ratios. usually something that outsells its competition means that more people prefer it and have more faith in it. or am i an idiot on this theory. i mean, do people buy more rangers cuz they like the tacoma better? LOL
I bought my 1998 Tacoma TRD with V6, 5 speed, SR5 package (power windows, locks, bucket seats, CD player, etc.) for $22,500 - drive out price which included TTL. IMHO, that is not getting ripped off, and that's what I expected to pay for a truck with this equipment. Especially for a product respected and noted for its quality and reliability, versus one who advertises it (Ford = Quality is Job #1).
Tbunder, I hate to say it, but you sound like a teenager, praising things like MP3 players and other stereo-like componets. Sorry dude, I grew up, and don't enjoy listening to my music at excessive deaf-cibels. Most of the options you praise I couldn't care less about, like keyless entry, 5 speed auto tranny with OD bypass, foot-operated parking brake, vacuum pulse locking hubs, etc. I don't care how loaded you can get a Ranger for less money than a Tacoma. Ranger looks, feels and drives cheap and crappy, in my opinion. Sorry if that offends you, but that's my honest opinion. Basically, a loaded Ranger is still just a Ranger with more junk on it - junk I don't even care about on a truck I think is already inferior.
I'm into quality, not quantity. There will always be that segment of the population who feels the same way, and will pay a little more for what they feel is a higher-quality product.
Your philosophy is: Why buy a six pack of Guiness when you could have a half-rack of Keystone Light (in cans) for the same price?
My philosophy is: Why would I want all that crappy beer?
I still don't see where more units sold = better truck. Could you please post a link stating the more units sold, the better the truck? The VW Bug and F-150 are best sellers, but I wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole. Especially seeing how the F-150 crumples about as bad as a VW Bug in an accident and being awarded the honors of being by far the most unsafe full size truck. Maybe the F-150 is made from the same tin of Bud Light and Miller Lite (best selling beer) cans?
I want more and I want to pay less. That's why I have a Ranger, and She has always served me faithfully and dutifully.
Extra options may be "yuppie" to some, but to others they are an added bonus. And this is a hard argument to press solely towards the Ranger, since most of the same options are available on the Tacoma, but for more money. Is that 80 dollar clock Toyota quality? (Except 6 disc CD and the MP3 player, what I know off-hand)
If you think the Ranger is so crappy, then why is it such fierce competition for you?
"I would say an outright yes -- the 4runner is a bad offroad vehicle. Unless a lot of mods are involved, I think most would agree. I mean how desperate are you guys? "
-boy, I don't know why you would say that. while I certainly wouldn't spend the 30-40 grand on a new 4-runner to wheel with it, it's more than capable. In fact, I can't think of many SUV's that would be better offroad. (stock)
Cpounsr- what's this "flang" you're talking about? I'll look next time a 4-runner passes me, but from memory the only I can see underneath that vehicle is the spare tire. (and it's certainly not below the axle)
I may be off base with this one, but what can you tow with 5600 lb towing capacity that you can't with a 5000 lb capacity. Aren't the class III hitches only for 3500 lbs anyway. I realize that trucks are meant for this type of application but I have never seen the advantages of an extra 600 lbs. You prolly have an answer for this but I'll ask it anyway -- How many rangers do you see towing 5000 lbs to begin with?
I think it would be safe to say that trying to tow upwards of 4000lbs with either a Tacoma or a Ranger is silly. A good friend has a 25' Parker (a beautiful fishing boat for those that are unsure) that has a dry weight of 4700lbs. Could I get the thing moving with my Tacoma? Probably. Would it be anywhere approaching safe to try and drive around with? No way. He used to pull it uncomfortably with a 1988 F-250 with the 460. He now has to pull it with a 1997 Chevy 3500 series duely with the 454. Remember this boat is "only" 4700lbs without fuel.
Is anyone here really trying to state that either of these trucks is really capable of comfortably towing 5000lbs? Please.
If they are, I will have him tow it on over with the duely and we'll hook it up. Not to mention that you would never be able to see around the thing (it only clears local power lines by 6" on the Cape) and he needs extended mirrors anyways.
So Ranger guys forget the added 600lbs of towing capacity over the 5000lbs it really is a moot point. Then again I wouldn't try to tow the 5000lbs with my Tacoma either. The ride height alone on these trucks makes them poor for this application anyways.
Well, I've come back to see how you folks are doing and its the same old thing. I have a solution. Why don't we just say that both trucks are equal and stop arguing about it. Don't any of you have anything better to do than to rant and rave about which truck is better. Some of us prefer "quality" (at a higher price) and buy a Tacoma. Some of us prefer "value" and buy a Ranger. Sounds like each company simply knows how to market to a specific audience. You know what, Ford and Toyota probably make the same profit on each unit sold, so we all get screwed in the final analysis. Who cares. Just drive your truck, enjoy it, and stop fighting about it. I'll see you in the woods getting real muddy...............Steelman.
I figured that you wouldn't take my advice and I hope you enjoyed lowering yourself to name calling once again. In answer to your challenge, first I don't think that your attempt at using sticker vs. out the door price really applies here. The out the door price is all that really matters anyway but either way you have problems in your past statements. In post #2705 you stated that the FX4 was expensive and priced well over $26,000. In post #2819 you stated that your Ranger stickered at $23,900 but you got it for $20,000. Now in Post # 3066 you say the difference between a fully loaded XLT (like you say you have) and the FX4 is only $500. Even if your statement on the price of the FX4 referred to sticker price, then the difference between the FX4 and the XLT is over $2,100 according to you. Or maybe you're trying to tell us that you can get a FX4 out the door for $20,500 (using your "out the door" figure). If so, please enlighten us where to shop because I don't know of anyone else finding such a deal. In reality, humble yourself and admit that you have a habit of embellishing your posts with non-researched information and you may gain a little respect here. If you go on as you are, posting misinformation over and over again, you'll just enhance your present bad image. Maybe it's time to change your name again vince.
You sound like a soccer mom, or one of those stupid chicks in the Kia commercials. "Oh, look at me, I have a ranger with a 6-cd changer, I don't have to put a key into the lock to unlock the doors, Oh, I can operate my emergency brake with a foot, Oh this, Oh that". You keep saying that noone responds to your questions about these wonderful Ranger options: I have. I asked you why you keep mentioning the foot-operated brake. I got nothing in return from you. Do you just enjoy telling everyone how many options you have on your Ranger? Thats childish. I never got any answer from you about the maximum towing capacity also....what do you have to say for it? I realize that you'll be pushing the "Well, standard capacity is 5K pounds", but we all know thats a load of bull. I've said it before and will say it again, neither Tacoma nor Ranger will be able to tow their maximum load comfortably for an extended period of time. Be honest, bundy. You just love to stick the "Ranger outsells everyone" everywhere you can, yet you try to make up things when I posted the link to JD Powers -->customer satisfaction<--!!! statistics (where in there did it ever say anything about buying a truck over the net???? Making things up again?). Whats the deal?
Yes, I drove a Tacoma out at 22,9K. I bought it for $100 over invoice, at $21.5K, with title, reg and tax. I've been hunting for a vehicle for a year, and I couldnt find anything reasonably cheaper than 21-22K. I've combed through the SUV market, almost bought an Isuzu Rodeo (or a Sport), which cost even more, at least 22K in a V6 manual config. My purchase is justified, at least for myself. Oh.....just thought of this...tow hooks...I guess you guys need them, you all get stuck a lot
The TRD s/c makes power at all rpm,s (i get 5psi under 2k rpm,s)and makes a total of 6 1/2 to 7 psi at anything above that.Let me just say that my truck hauls [non-permissible content removed]!....ive had it for a year now and it's worth every penny!I have played with many low 14 second cars (lots of mustangs)and they just can't believe how good my tacoma goes!The only problem is with first gear...it makes to much power at once and just spins the tires off wich gets you know where if your stop light racing but second and third gear are a gift for me.lets just say from 30 mph to 80 mph it's really quick and when i chirp third gear i'm gone!
Do you ping a lot, and how's your gas milage? I'm thinking of MAYBE getting one in the future (money is tight, with the new truck, and having to save for a big vacation next year), and I generally do not want a gas hog of a truck that gets 15-17mpg city/hway.
you guys' defense..... ours wont tow as much, so we'll bank on the argument that "it doesn't matter anyways". thats intelligent debating. it proves what? something not in your favor, so we'll downplay the facts. the simple facts are that the ranger is a more heavy duty truck, and you CANNOT debate my comments. they're all true. i am into accuracies and concrete facts, not magazine articles and opinions from some compensated joeoffroader to make the new truck the pickup truck of the year. again, i ask the question: if so many people think the tacoma is so great, and its SOOOOOO superior to the ranger, READ*** WHY DOES RANGER OUTSELL IT BY THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS???????? place answer here.
foot operated emer. brake on the floor plus? if you get in an accident, it isn't scooping out your knee when it bangs into the dash.
options not in your favor? we'll downplay the availability of them too. if they're so inferior, why does toyota offer them at an added price?
pluto- who said anything about listening to music at loud decibel levels? its all about the convenience of not having to take your eyes off the road to switch cd's. something you have to do. do you even know what an mp3 player is? they have them down in mehico? "there will always be that segment of the population who will pay more for a higher priced product". who? again, i say look at the sales numbers of rangers vs tacomas. so if you want to tow something, get a full-size? finally admitting that 3500lbs. is too much for your squeaky wimpy clutched 5spd? maybe thats why you want the s/c. whats a toyota man to do if they want to tow then? beings the tundra can only tow a bit over 7000lbs. is this a full-size truck? i mean, when an F150 is rated at 8500lbs. and super duty's being able to tow over 14000lbs.
saddadddy or scorpio (same person, we caught you scorpio)- my ranger stickered at $23900. its an '01. the prices i posted was for 2002's. again, please comprehend when you read and go to www.fordvehicles.com and build your own. then check out the prices i posted. are you that incoherent that you can't do that? the numbers came straight from this site. come on, you can handle this cant you? what about the towing? ranger has more power, so its rated for higher towing weights. if it couldn't tow that much, do you really think ford would tell its buyers that it can? think! you paid 22.9K for a 5spd and no air? S-C-R-E-W-E-D. one more thing, what other truck makes you pull a handle out of the dash for the emergency brake? none.
allknowing- unresearched information? you're the one who posted that there was a $7000-8000 difference between the FX4 and every other 4x4 ranger. is that accurate? uh, NAAAAH! you want reassurance, and it's just not coming is it?
scorpio/saddaddy, whatever you're going by mr. trollman- go back to that site. then click on the link you provide where it states top ten trucks being bought over the net. it doesn't surprise me that toyota buyers have to do this, as the dealers are all too stuck up to offer anyone a deal. we all know toyota's customer service/satisfaction is worst in the industry.
759357- question for ya. why doesn't this friend of yours dock it in the water. wouldn't this be the smart thing to do? it doesn't seem like any vehicle would be great at towing this. maybe this is why docking it in the water is an option, so people don't have to clear power lines by 6". even so, a 5000lb. load can be in almost endless configurations. a solid block of 5600lb. cement would be no problem for the ranger. a huge load of wood, a car, etc. loaded the right way, whats the problem? air up the tires and get a classIII hitch attached to the frame, maybe some trailer brakes.
all in all, your responses were basically what i expected, not responding to any of the accurate statistics i mentioned. but hey, how could you when they're all true. more options? who needs them? more tow capacity? who cares? where was THIS argument on the tundra vs all other full size trucks? i mean, you tundra guys held on to every pound over there. no mention of this not being able to tow max at all, even though a magazine recommended helper springs for the mighty TRD tundra when towing big loads. hilarious. thanks to all for taking place in this very scientific poll. LOL
YOUR IGNORANT POST: allknowing- unresearched information? you're the one who posted that there was a $7000-8000 difference between the FX4 and every other 4x4 ranger. is that accurate? uh, NAAAAH! you want reassurance, and it's just not coming is it?
I was sarcastically using the dollar figures that you and your buddies use. You're right that they are incorrect. That was the whole point. Pretty much everything you post is incorrect. There's no longer doubt in my mind that you're vince8.
By the way, in spite of some of the advantages of the Ranger that you're posting, I guess the Ranger's "more recalls" keeps us in the Tacoma camp. The Ranger is a nice truck for the money, but in spite of your attempts to prove otherwise, many of us continue to see a clear quality advantage from Toyota. Owning both, the cliche' has held true with more quality problems as well as recalls from the Ford. The Ford is a good truck but I would still choose the Toyota based on my experiences. I guess you'll have to find some way to deal with that through therapy or something..
Let me know when you want to meet for an off-road venture, then we can settle all this debates. We will do braking, slalom, 0-60, 0-100, quarter mile. Look for welded boxes to frames! Off-road. Anything you want, then we can report to everyone in hear how our respective trucks did.
smgilles, cool, where do you live? bring it on, either of you. ive got a handycam, and a couple friends with ZR2 and a HR, and one a little bit of everything. we can all participate. smgilles, please tell me how YOUR truck's bed along with S10's beds are held in place, since neither one are bolted. they've got to be "SPOT WELDED" to something. whichever, when i have a load of wood in my truck, or a dirt bike or four-wheeler loaded in my bed, i know its bolted and welded down to the frame. yours? well.....i wouldn't climb too many hills with a load of wood in your bed.
allknowing, you contradict yourself in your last post. did you mean to? also, please tell me (asking again) where i said that FX4 was the amount different like you said compared to a loaded 4.0 off-road? yeah, maybe a 3.0 reg. cab 5spd XL equipped truck, but not like my rig. please, please go to www.fordvehicles.com and build your own, then you won't look like such a fool everytime you post. earlier you were defending your dollar amounts, now they're just "sarcastic statements?" dude......
one last thing, im flattered that you think im this vince dude, but.....im not. never heard of him.
smgiles, please direct me to the off-road spot where we can hit 100 mph, and do slalom. are you crazy? to be honest, i dont think my ranger will do 100. its not why i bought it. id do roll on at 65 mph with you on a four lane or something like that, unless you have the s/c, i guarantee you'd be left behind. even so, id do the off-road articulation thing with you and all that stuff, jumping, rut skipping, hill clibing. id love to see how your "rugged" trails hang it in the iowa timber.
i believe i was challenged into this little shootout with smgilles. cant you read english very well?
still hinging on the "PUBLISHED INFORMATION?" how about hinging on the raw facts i posted? whats the matter, no defense? dude, anyone can publish anything. do you think this makes it rule or law?
and who do you consider the "entire automotive world?" i would call this sector the buyers, since that is the ULTIMATE reason why manufacturers build vehicles, am i not right? and why do they build them? to sell and make money. who sells more? ford. why? because the entire automotive industry thinks the tacoma is the better truck? in your mind, thats probably what you think. still haven't answered my question though, WHY DOES FORD SELL SO MANY MORE RANGERS THAN TOYOTA SELLS TACOMAS? if tacomas are so great, you'd think the public would see this, explain pluto. im waiting. why cant toyota sell anywhere close the numbers of tacomas as ford sells rangers? if your "published articles" are the general thoughts with the automotive world, the sales numbers just don't add up now do they plute? never give up do you?
Bunder, bunder, bunder!!! Every time you use the welded bed statement you lose any credibility. Remember, you don't have to take your bed liner out to check....just crawl under your truck. My Super Duty will carry more than your ranger(ya' think?) and I assure you all that's holding it is 8 bolts.
Yeah ive heard about the dreaded pinging problems with earlier taco's but not a one with my 01.They say that the 01,s have bigger injectors i guess.as far as using more fuel it really doesn't change unless you are using the boost.You can drive it like stock if you keep your foot out of it (real hard..lol)Oh mine is a 5 speed by the way wich makes a huge difference.
Comments
FX4 XLT 4.0-$25415
Off-Road XLT 4.0-$24920
straight from www.fordvehicles.com build your own section. from doing the math, the difference looks to be about $500 more for the FX4. so tell me, how do you come up with $7000-8000? are you high?
2002 Ford Ranger 4dr SuperCab XLT FX4 4WD Styleside SB (4.0L 6cyl 5M) is 25415
2002 Ford Ranger 4dr SuperCab XLT Off-Road 4WD Styleside SB (4.0L 6cyl 5M) is 22765. is this the right Ranger? I can't tell very well, there's too many of different variations.
hope this helps you out.
No supercharger link goofy!
tblunder: You think that your bed is welded to the frame? So, if you got into an accident they would have to torch the bed off to fix it? I would like to see a truck that has the bed welded to the frame. The bed couldn't flex or give when in binding situations. I think you are way off on this one.
Ranger=ironman triathelete? Interesting analogy
So, for the fx4 you are saying they are just charging more for it because of the sticker? Odd marketing don't you think??
Yes, but inquiring minds want to know. I assumed it was a centrifugal, not positive displacement roots type blower. You know what they say about "assume."
tbunder-
"and the SOHC has been employed since fall of '96 in explorers"
-actually it was '97, and I think it was ported over to the ranger in 2000 or 2001.
Sort of like a certain other Three letter sticker option group for another truck? You know TRD?
But seriously, it's a loaded Ranger. Take the XLT 4X4 with Off road package and add:
- "Torsen" Brand Limited Slip Rear Axle (w/ 4.10s)
- 24-inch water fording capability.
- Manual transmission with manual transfer case or automatic transmission with electronic transfer case.
- ALL Power accessories, (tilt, speed, windows, Keyless entry, &all others)
- "Bilstein" Brand Shocks
- Tougher Skid plates
- 31x10.5 BF Goodrich All Terrain T/A KO tires
- Cool front seat buckets unique to the FX4
- And the FX4 sticker...
Scorpio--->I can't speak for Ford, but would have to think that the FX4 isn't Ford's answer to the Tacoma. Ford's engineers listen to Ranger owners and listen to their wants and desires. This new model is designed to appeal to the more off-road focused group.
Even though I'm not interested in buying a 4X4 truck, I would love to see what the FX4 can do!
Tbunder, just curious, why do you care if I want to install a supercharger, even though I've already had my truck for 50K miles? You've had your Ranger for a whopping 7K problem free miles, now you already want a Frontier or F-150, LOL!!!
Just curious, is the FX4 package only a $1650 upgrade, or does it cost more? Somebody said the FX4 retails for over $26K. Either that FX4 package costs A LOT, or you guys have been underestimating the low price on your Rangers we keep hearing about. The FX4 package is Ford's version of the TRD package, but at least with the TRD you get the locker...I guess I'm wondering if you're getting more for your money with the TRD package.
Oh, and that link I posted a while back with the 1998 Tacoma being pickup of the year? The Ranger was part of that shootout.
Somebody here said that only 1% of people really care about serious off-roading capibility when we posted links on the Tacoma's winning performance off-road. If that's the case, why would have Ford developed the FX4? There just wouldn't be any profit in it...
I can't wait until a comparo is done between the TRD and the FX4. My money's on the TRD - it's beaten everything compared to it so far...
smgilles-please repost my post saying that all the fx4 was is an added sticker. id like to see when i said this. and dude, open your eyes. is your bed bolted to the frame? no, i dont think so. is the S10 bed bolted to the frame? no. they're both welded. why do you think ford brags about their beds being bolted AND welded?
eagle63- like i said, the FALL of '96 is when the '97 explorers came out. i had one myself. came to ranger in 01. had to raise the hood to make it fit. hence, the raised hood, it does function, not all for looks.
pluto- also, tell me where i said the trd package was $3000. i said that it is that much more than an off-road xlt ranger option for option. which it is, and i can provide proof if you want. also, please re-post that link so i can see how the ranger did, for some reason i dont remember reading about the ranger. but even so, remember that was then, this is now. ranger is more powerful than tacoma now, and comes with better off-road stuff. as i posted earlier, the differences in price between a loaded to the hilt xlt off-road, and an fx4, is around $500. and one last thing pluto, you say the tacoma has beaten everything compared to it so far. what about the new for 2002 shootout in four-wheeler? pickup truck of the year? the new ram stomped both trd's that you brag so heavily about. thats got to be embarassing. is it? they actually dogged the trd both on the tundra and tacoma. at least the F150 included had the most powerful engine and was noted for how well it articulated, (and it wasn't even a new FX4 F150)as well as the editors saying they couldn't find one negative thing to say about it. gonna comment on this one? i doubt it. how was your day off from your multiple postings? funny how someone talks how you post around here 24 hours a day, and suddenly you stop for a day. hilarious.
There's no link covering the entire article with the Tacoma and Ranger. It was Four Wheeler's Pickup truck of the year, which came out in January of 1998, if you care to go to the library and read it...
Please post your link from Four-Wheeler. Are you making stuff up again? I find it hard to believe comparos were done with two Toyota trucks, one a full-size and one a compact. That must be something new...
-my bad, I thought you were talking model year, not actual year.
http://carpoint.msn.com/Browse/win_2879.asp
Lets play "Find a word Ranger on that page"
You'd think that a bestselling truck would appear on that list.
scorpio- basically all your little link proves is that buyers of toyota trucks can get them cheaper over the 'net. this is not news to me, considering everytime i go to a toyota dealer, they act like they are selling mazerati's. check out www.pickuptruck.com to see who is really happy with their truck purchasess, the trucks that more people buy than any others combined.
"Altogether, the APEAL study examines 15 vehicle categories. Results are based on responses from vehicle owners after three months of ownership. Among the areas probed are why consumers feel the way they do about their vehicles, and what they think about vehicle styling; engine and transmission; comfort and convenience; ride and handling; seats; heating, ventilation and cooling; cockpit and instrument panel; and sound system. "
Seems to be this sort of measured how much people were satisfied with their purchases initially. If Ranger is so great, why didnt it make it in, given it's volume of sales?
Pluto, you happy? I'll call out a Ford guy if the info is wrong.
True statement, the 1998 Ranger they used was a non-offroad optioned (that means a 3.73 open differential vs a 4.10:1 locker in the Tacoma and 225X15 tires vs the 31X10.5X15 tires on the Tacoma), automatic transmissioned (that means that the final reduction ratio of the 4X4 system was about 27:1 vs 40:1 in the 5 speed manual transmissioned Tacoma)vehicle.
Now, the Tacoma won in 1998, but do you feel based on what I told you that the test was fair? The Ranger was out differentialed, out tired, out transmissioned, out shock absorbered, and out final drive ratioed. . .but it was not outpriced to the tune of maybe 5-6,000 bucks.
I was surprised that the Ranger kept up with the Tacoma in that test.
Hmmm 4th place in the Jan Four Wheeler mag Pickup Truck of the year test. Is this the same vehicle that beat the Hummer?
Hmmmmmm. . .
Based on your opinion of the 2 inch drop of the shock mounts on a Ranger, still not as low as the bottom of the differental, is the 4Runner a bad off-road vehicle?
I await with batted breath. . .8^) your answer . .
Seems JD Powers gives the initial quality award to the Ranger here...
you know, there have been alot of arguments made on this forum, and alot of them unanswered. but ill make these comments and lets just see how you toyota guys defend these (erroneous im sure someone will claim) statements im about to make.
ranger outsells the competition by a landslide. tacoma not even close in sales.
ranger has more available power and torque.
ranger comes with larger standard tires. 245/75/16 vs. 225/75/15 on toyota. toyota actually charges $300 for STEEL 16" rims. aluminum 16's are standard on ranger 4x4.
ranger comes with more options standard, while toyota charges you more for the same stuff.
ranger tows more than tacoma. 5600 vs 5000.
ranger comes with larger rear axle, and a higher gvwr.
ranger comes with a LSD rear diff, not just a locker which is limited to manual operation and minimal speed usages. lsd engages automatically and thus is more operational in the real world, on or off-road. how good is a locker driving in the snow? uh-huh.
ranger can be had with little goodies not offered on toyota. fog lights, two stout tow hooks up front, not one wimpy one under the truck, floor emergency brake, o/d bypass button, 5-spd auto tranny, keyless entry, cd changer in dash, mp3 player, larger engine, more configurations, etc.
so, im curious to see you toyota guys' reactions to all of these statements i just made. hash em out, say they're false, but trust me they're all true. my question is, WHY? why would toyota let all this happen, KNOWING that year in and year out the ranger outsells its truck in unbelievable ratios. usually something that outsells its competition means that more people prefer it and have more faith in it. or am i an idiot on this theory. i mean, do people buy more rangers cuz they like the tacoma better? LOL
Tbunder, I hate to say it, but you sound like a teenager, praising things like MP3 players and other stereo-like componets. Sorry dude, I grew up, and don't enjoy listening to my music at excessive deaf-cibels. Most of the options you praise I couldn't care less about, like keyless entry, 5 speed auto tranny with OD bypass, foot-operated parking brake, vacuum pulse locking hubs, etc. I don't care how loaded you can get a Ranger for less money than a Tacoma. Ranger looks, feels and drives cheap and crappy, in my opinion. Sorry if that offends you, but that's my honest opinion. Basically, a loaded Ranger is still just a Ranger with more junk on it - junk I don't even care about on a truck I think is already inferior.
I'm into quality, not quantity. There will always be that segment of the population who feels the same way, and will pay a little more for what they feel is a higher-quality product.
Your philosophy is: Why buy a six pack of Guiness when you could have a half-rack of Keystone Light (in cans) for the same price?
My philosophy is: Why would I want all that crappy beer?
I still don't see where more units sold = better truck. Could you please post a link stating the more units sold, the better the truck? The VW Bug and F-150 are best sellers, but I wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole. Especially seeing how the F-150 crumples about as bad as a VW Bug in an accident and being awarded the honors of being by far the most unsafe full size truck. Maybe the F-150 is made from the same tin of Bud Light and Miller Lite (best selling beer) cans?
Extra options may be "yuppie" to some, but to others they are an added bonus. And this is a hard argument to press solely towards the Ranger, since most of the same options are available on the Tacoma, but for more money. Is that 80 dollar clock Toyota quality? (Except 6 disc CD and the MP3 player, what I know off-hand)
If you think the Ranger is so crappy, then why is it such fierce competition for you?
-boy, I don't know why you would say that. while I certainly wouldn't spend the 30-40 grand on a new 4-runner to wheel with it, it's more than capable. In fact, I can't think of many SUV's that would be better offroad. (stock)
Cpounsr-
what's this "flang" you're talking about? I'll look next time a 4-runner passes me, but from memory the only I can see underneath that vehicle is the spare tire. (and it's certainly not below the axle)
Is anyone here really trying to state that either of these trucks is really capable of comfortably towing 5000lbs? Please.
If they are, I will have him tow it on over with the duely and we'll hook it up. Not to mention that you would never be able to see around the thing (it only clears local power lines by 6" on the Cape) and he needs extended mirrors anyways.
So Ranger guys forget the added 600lbs of towing capacity over the 5000lbs it really is a moot point. Then again I wouldn't try to tow the 5000lbs with my Tacoma either. The ride height alone on these trucks makes them poor for this application anyways.
In reality, humble yourself and admit that you have a habit of embellishing your posts with non-researched information and you may gain a little respect here. If you go on as you are, posting misinformation over and over again, you'll just enhance your present bad image. Maybe it's time to change your name again vince.
You keep saying that noone responds to your questions about these wonderful Ranger options: I have. I asked you why you keep mentioning the foot-operated brake. I got nothing in return from you. Do you just enjoy telling everyone how many options you have on your Ranger? Thats childish.
I never got any answer from you about the maximum towing capacity also....what do you have to say for it? I realize that you'll be pushing the "Well, standard capacity is 5K pounds", but we all know thats a load of bull. I've said it before and will say it again, neither Tacoma nor Ranger will be able to tow their maximum load comfortably for an extended period of time. Be honest, bundy. You just love to stick the "Ranger outsells everyone" everywhere you can, yet you try to make up things when I posted the link to JD Powers -->customer satisfaction<--!!! statistics (where in there did it ever say anything about buying a truck over the net???? Making things up again?). Whats the deal?
Yes, I drove a Tacoma out at 22,9K. I bought it for $100 over invoice, at $21.5K, with title, reg and tax. I've been hunting for a vehicle for a year, and I couldnt find anything reasonably cheaper than 21-22K. I've combed through the SUV market, almost bought an Isuzu Rodeo (or a Sport), which cost even more, at least 22K in a V6 manual config. My purchase is justified, at least for myself.
Oh.....just thought of this...tow hooks...I guess you guys need them, you all get stuck a lot
I'm thinking of MAYBE getting one in the future (money is tight, with the new truck, and having to save for a big vacation next year), and I generally do not want a gas hog of a truck that gets 15-17mpg city/hway.
ours wont tow as much, so we'll bank on the argument that "it doesn't matter anyways". thats intelligent debating. it proves what? something not in your favor, so we'll downplay the facts. the simple facts are that the ranger is a more heavy duty truck, and you CANNOT debate my comments. they're all true. i am into accuracies and concrete facts, not magazine articles and opinions from some compensated joeoffroader to make the new truck the pickup truck of the year. again, i ask the question: if so many people think the tacoma is so great, and its SOOOOOO superior to the ranger, READ*** WHY DOES RANGER OUTSELL IT BY THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS???????? place answer here.
foot operated emer. brake on the floor plus? if you get in an accident, it isn't scooping out your knee when it bangs into the dash.
options not in your favor? we'll downplay the availability of them too. if they're so inferior, why does toyota offer them at an added price?
pluto- who said anything about listening to music at loud decibel levels? its all about the convenience of not having to take your eyes off the road to switch cd's. something you have to do. do you even know what an mp3 player is? they have them down in mehico? "there will always be that segment of the population who will pay more for a higher priced product". who? again, i say look at the sales numbers of rangers vs tacomas. so if you want to tow something, get a full-size? finally admitting that 3500lbs. is too much for your squeaky wimpy clutched 5spd? maybe thats why you want the s/c. whats a toyota man to do if they want to tow then? beings the tundra can only tow a bit over 7000lbs. is this a full-size truck? i mean, when an F150 is rated at 8500lbs. and super duty's being able to tow over 14000lbs.
saddadddy or scorpio (same person, we caught you scorpio)- my ranger stickered at $23900. its an '01. the prices i posted was for 2002's. again, please comprehend when you read and go to www.fordvehicles.com and build your own. then check out the prices i posted. are you that incoherent that you can't do that? the numbers came straight from this site. come on, you can handle this cant you? what about the towing? ranger has more power, so its rated for higher towing weights. if it couldn't tow that much, do you really think ford would tell its buyers that it can? think! you paid 22.9K for a 5spd and no air? S-C-R-E-W-E-D. one more thing, what other truck makes you pull a handle out of the dash for the emergency brake? none.
allknowing- unresearched information? you're the one who posted that there was a $7000-8000 difference between the FX4 and every other 4x4 ranger. is that accurate? uh, NAAAAH! you want reassurance, and it's just not coming is it?
scorpio/saddaddy, whatever you're going by mr. trollman- go back to that site. then click on the link you provide where it states top ten trucks being bought over the net. it doesn't surprise me that toyota buyers have to do this, as the dealers are all too stuck up to offer anyone a deal. we all know toyota's customer service/satisfaction is worst in the industry.
759357- question for ya. why doesn't this friend of yours dock it in the water. wouldn't this be the smart thing to do? it doesn't seem like any vehicle would be great at towing this. maybe this is why docking it in the water is an option, so people don't have to clear power lines by 6". even so, a 5000lb. load can be in almost endless configurations. a solid block of 5600lb. cement would be no problem for the ranger. a huge load of wood, a car, etc. loaded the right way, whats the problem? air up the tires and get a classIII hitch attached to the frame, maybe some trailer brakes.
all in all, your responses were basically what i expected, not responding to any of the accurate statistics i mentioned. but hey, how could you when they're all true. more options? who needs them? more tow capacity? who cares? where was THIS argument on the tundra vs all other full size trucks? i mean, you tundra guys held on to every pound over there. no mention of this not being able to tow max at all, even though a magazine recommended helper springs for the mighty TRD tundra when towing big loads. hilarious. thanks to all for taking place in this very scientific poll. LOL
I was sarcastically using the dollar figures that you and your buddies use. You're right that they are incorrect. That was the whole point. Pretty much everything you post is incorrect.
There's no longer doubt in my mind that you're vince8.
By the way, in spite of some of the advantages of the Ranger that you're posting, I guess the Ranger's "more recalls" keeps us in the Tacoma camp. The Ranger is a nice truck for the money, but in spite of your attempts to prove otherwise, many of us continue to see a clear quality advantage from Toyota. Owning both, the cliche' has held true with more quality problems as well as recalls from the Ford. The Ford is a good truck but I would still choose the Toyota based on my experiences. I guess you'll have to find some way to deal with that through therapy or something..
allknowing, you contradict yourself in your last post. did you mean to? also, please tell me (asking again) where i said that FX4 was the amount different like you said compared to a loaded 4.0 off-road? yeah, maybe a 3.0 reg. cab 5spd XL equipped truck, but not like my rig. please, please go to www.fordvehicles.com and build your own, then you won't look like such a fool everytime you post. earlier you were defending your dollar amounts, now they're just "sarcastic statements?" dude......
one last thing, im flattered that you think im this vince dude, but.....im not. never heard of him.
Why don't you come down to "mehico" and prove ME, and the entire automotive world wrong?
Tbunder vs. the entire automotive world...who's right, and who's dumb?
still hinging on the "PUBLISHED INFORMATION?" how about hinging on the raw facts i posted? whats the matter, no defense? dude, anyone can publish anything. do you think this makes it rule or law?
and who do you consider the "entire automotive world?" i would call this sector the buyers, since that is the ULTIMATE reason why manufacturers build vehicles, am i not right? and why do they build them? to sell and make money. who sells more? ford. why? because the entire automotive industry thinks the tacoma is the better truck? in your mind, thats probably what you think. still haven't answered my question though, WHY DOES FORD SELL SO MANY MORE RANGERS THAN TOYOTA SELLS TACOMAS? if tacomas are so great, you'd think the public would see this, explain pluto. im waiting. why cant toyota sell anywhere close the numbers of tacomas as ford sells rangers? if your "published articles" are the general thoughts with the automotive world, the sales numbers just don't add up now do they plute? never give up do you?