I don't understand how Tacoma is a better offroader than Ranger because the Land Cruiser is better than the Expedition. Those vehicles aren't even built on the same platform-none of them. I agree with Vince; the Ranger does very well off road. I might add that, at least according to Edmunds, Consumer Reports, and host of others, the Ranger handles and rides a WHOLE lot better on road, where even hard core offroaders do more than 50% of their driving.
Vince, Have you ever seen the word limited slip mention on any of the Toyota Trucks? Have you seen the word limited slip anywhere in their brochures. Think about it . . . Personally I think Toyota, Nissan, Ford but not the Sonoma are equals all around.
I was just surprised that Toyota did not have a limited slip rear end? I ocmes down wo what you are willing to pay for image and a perceived quality advantage. I already have given multiple sites to show anyone that the Ranger is very reliable. The Tacoma is expensive for what you get. The Nissan V6 is even thousands less with comparable equipment.
You are a fool if you think the Yotas ground clearance is superior only because of tire size. Look under your "truck" and under a tacoma.
The Tacoma v6 is the fastest stock compact truck you can purchase today. And, like I said, add the optional trd supercharger and it will beat Mustangs off the line.
Sure, limited slip is good for STREET driving in wet conditions for soccer moms and old ladies. Limited slip is a pointless offroad feature. A locking rear diff should not be used on pavement at all. It is strictly for serious offroading.
I never said I didn't believe Edmunds and carpoints reliability ratings, I just questioned where the hell they got them from since they LIST NO SOURCE.
Consumer reports or consumer digest(whichever one uses the "dots") has long been the standard for rating crash test results and vehicle reliability. Even insurance companies use their findings to coorelate with theirs.
Bottom line that many people fail to understand:
FORD VEHICLES ARE NOT OFFROADERS. RIGHT ON DOWN THE LINE FROM THE EXPEDITION TO THE FORD RANGER. THEY OFFE RLTHE LOWEST GROUND CLEARANCE IN THEIR CLASSES , THE SMALLEST BRAKES< AND THE WEAKEST SUSPENIONS. THEY ARE FINE FOR TOWING AND GRAVEL ROAD DRIVING.
Ask any knowledgable offroader about Fords and he will chuckle. Better yet , go to rec.autos.4x4 on the usenet, and ask those experts there. The steering, handling and braking on Fords are not sp;ort-vehicle orientated. The whole setup is for road drivers and shoppers.
Now if you were to start talking Jeeps and land rovers, thats where the yotas get some good competition in the sports-offroad-handling class.
Outside of these three makers, the rest are pretenders. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
A vehicle that handles like a sedan on road, is not going to be a good offroader.(except for Landcruiser and RangeRover....for 60 grand).
Its really quite simple. OFFROAD SUSPENSIONS DO NOT HANDLE WELL ON PAVEMENT.
ONROAD SUSPENSIONS DO NOT FAREWELL OFFROAD.
There is a reason why the Tacomas ride is bad on the highway and city roads. Take it to where the pavement meets the sand, and it will turn into a differemnt truck before your very eyes.
My yota actually handles BETTER on dirt, mud and rocks than it does when driven on pavement. It's the damnedest thing. It actually seems like it LIKES the mud and crap.
Ford Rangers are nice trucks to haul things, pick up groceries, and pickup supplies from home depot, BUT THEY ARE NOT SERIOUS OFFROADERS! Get it through your heads! It is a simple matter of engineering and performance.
It is not an objective argument, it is a factual one. Read the departure andgles, suspension travel numbers ect........
Well, I was curious and check both the Ranger and the Tacoma models from 1998 to 1999. I found that the Ford Ranger has had 5 recalls, while the Tacoma has had one recall. Incidently, the one recall for the Tacoma was an error in the appendix of the manual and not like Ford with the engine or exterior defects. True the Tacoma is more expensive, but then again you get that back in the retail or trade in. Then again I don't have to deal with recalls or worry about reliability.
PS. Checked the new Consumer Reports for Cars just printed this month. Tacoma sure has a lot of red solid dots in the columns, while the Ranger hardly any.
Thanks to all the knowledgeable 4X4 guys! I just bought a '98 Tacoma V-6 with only 8K on the odo. and it's my first truck, so I really don't know much about trucks. My forte was sports cars. Well, I have been trying to debate these 4X4 pretenders on limited knowledge, but I knew the Toyota was the better 4X4 truck.
So I'm glad to see some guys that know 4X4 trucks and not trucks riding on car chassis. I've had my truck almost a month and I love it!
Tacoma is the better 4X4 truck, even a person who knew nothing about 4X4's(Me!) knew this! I read alot of periodicals and yes, the Ranger does ride better on the highway and that made me leery enough. True, 4X4 trucks can't have great road suspensions(unless you pay big $$$$), that's common sense!
Ranger 4 recalls 1 for fuel line that MAY be too close to the engine block. 2. Glazing Material?? 3. A label problem for tire rim specifications 4. A duplicate of the Glazing Material?
Toyota 1996 1. Front suspension may crack or bend under offroad conditions. :0 2. Cruise may fial, or accelerate.
Also, how about those 800,000 plus Toyota on recall just the other day???
Check again for clearance. In 1998 The ranger went away from the live front axle to a fully independent suspension, giving better clearance.
Are 4x4's race cars? With the 5K difference in a TRD to a loaded Ranger I can go out an put all kinds of options on the Ranger also to make it fast from 0-60.
You are not a true offroader it shows. The debate between limited slip and lockers is ongoing fool. Lockers are only good for straight away acceleration and straight away traction. Do Toyota's even come with limited slip at all??
You are the fool who paid 2 - 5K more for an overpriced/overrated vehicle. Resale, How can it be an advantage when you paid more upfront to begin with? Why does Ranger outsell Tacoma? I have already proven to one Toyota hardcore owner that the Ranger is no joke. Like I said, we went head to head in the mountains of Oregon. No winner. You bought an image, you paid a whole bunch of money for it, don't get pissed at me! I have about 15K on my Ranger. The miles have not been easy ones either, I fish, hike, camp, I am an outdoors person. I also talked with an offroader of 15 years. He owns a Jeep that has been in Offroader mag many times, and he is also in a Jeep club. Goes to offroad outings all the time. He said the Tacoma and Ranger are pretty much a toss up. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. I am not a hardcore offroading person. I have however had my Ranger out in the middle of no mans land in some pretty tight spots. Have you read the Edmunds review on the Tacoma? and the one on the Ranger? "5K difference, we'll take the Ranger and get a jet ski" quote from Edmunds. See you in the hills
If you noted I went back and check for the recalls in Edmunds back to 1998 specifically for the Ranger and Tacoma. That was the year the Ranger was revamped. Why would anyone make a comparison prior to that to a vehicle that is no longe existing? You have seemed to left out a few things in the recall for the Ford Ranger. 1. FUEL INJECTION SYSTEM 2. GLAZING MATERIAL STICKER 3. THROTTLE LINKAGES AND CONTROL 4. FUEL LINE HOSES NON METALLIC 5. EQUIPMENT CERTICATION LABEL
Now that is clear Toyota Tacoma has had only one recall since 1998 for a misprint in the appendix of the manual. If I had went back equally for both of the vehicles I would probably had found more recalls for both vehicles. Now you say Toyota in the recalls, but you don't really tell which model it is. Other than that both trucks are about equal less the recalls.
Taco guys don't even try to debate Vince8. He is sold on his car, oops, I mean truck, he gets a little testy too. The main thing he harps on is how much we paid for our Tacomas, well, sounds like envy to me. He simply couldn't afford the better truck so he bought a truck that Ford practically begs people to take(rebates galore!!) The bottom line is people buy the Ranger because Ford makes it easy to purchase, they just want anything that is cheap and is touted as a 4X4! The real midsize 4X4, Tacoma, costs about 2-3K more, but if you want the best and you can afford it...BUY IT! Everyone knows you pay for what you get. Ford Rangers simply will not go the distance and NO ONE CAN CONVINCE ME OTHERWISE! Heck, how many Rangers do you see that have over 150K on the odometer.
The Ranger is just out classed! I wouldn't take one if they were FREE! I hate having to always repair vehicles, that's why I bought a Toyota!
Well seem like you like to leave out some pertinent information intentionally about the 800,000 cars recalled by Toyota. This is a quote, "Toyota will recall 797,707 cars in Japan and 16,500 sold overseas in 84 nations." So divide 16,500 by 84 nations gives you 196 cars per nation. Also, the recall is only for cars made from 1995 to 1998. Ford recalled 945,000 trucks and SUV's in May of this year.
Limited slip is for street driving. It is designed to help the wheels make contact on hard surfaces in snow or rain.
Does the Range Rover or Land Cruiser offer "limited slip"? No. They offer front and rear lockers. These are two of the greatest 4x4 vehicles ever made.
As far as the Rangers clearance, I dont think it really equals the Tacomas. Heck, even toyotas new full size Tundra ALREADY leads the full size class with 11.2 inches of MINIMUM ground clearance. Like I TOLD YOU before, the traits in the Land Cruiser and other yota 4x4 models get inherited down the line, just like Ford traits get inherited down the line.
4runner: highest ground clearance in class Landcruioser: highest ground clearance in class Tacoma: highest ground clearance in class
Ford explorer: same ground clearance as subaru outback Ford Expedition: same gound clearance as subaru outback Ford Ranger: same ground clearance as subaru outback
now anyone with any common sense can see a pattern here. FORD HAS YET TO MAKE A GOOD OFFROADER! FORD MAKES TOW-ERS AND HAULERS, NOT TRAIL OR OFFROAD VEHICLES
I was even reading a few reviews of late about the 4runner and tacoma, and all of them say these vehicles are built with 4x4 use in mind FIRST, and everything else second. Due to their class leading ground clearance and factory optional lockers, and other features.
The Tacoma is a far superior 4x4 to Ranger. Durability, longevity, and performance wise. There are many more aftermarket accesories for tacoma also.
Next time you see the news in africa, europe, or china, look at the UN vehicles.
Next time you see a wildlife documentary in africa, look at the vehicles.
THEY ARE TOYOTAS.
PEOPLE WONT TAKE FORD RANGERS 250 MILES INTO THE BUSH FOR a REASON.
Your truck is a nice truck, dont get me wrong. It is nice for smooth gravel roads and hauling.
But in no way is it HALF the offroader the tacoma is.
Vince, First of all you don't have any idea of how much I paid for my truck & the options. For you to make an comparision is ludicrous. I was discussing reliabilty, but you always seem to go back to PRICE. Sure the Tacoma is more expensive, but does that make it lesser truck in reliability. Or are you eqeating price with reliabiltiy. Price is affordability.....notice that the word has Ford in it....LOL....
Where do I start? First of all where did I call names? Second of all I paid cash for my truck no payments here folks, and yes, could have afforded up to 23K, with the money saved from buying the more expensive Tacoma, I added better tires to the Ranger, nurfbars, linex spray in liner, K&N air filter assembly, rock guard, skidplate, Debating on a Superchip and an exhaust system. Hindsite I don't know where your getting your information about recalls, please link me. I only recognize 3 out of the 5 you mention. You failed to check 1997, and 1996 for the Tacoma, there are other recalls. In the West we have the Cascade range. Go to your map and check to see how high these "hills" are and get back to me. Now, go to North Carolina and see what kind of pansy hills you have in the east. Don't even bother comparing terrain with me, I know I live in some of the roughest in the lower 48. I'm not getting testy, all of you are because you paid too much. I have already given you links to check out Ranger reliability ratings and reviews and I'm not going to waste my time typing them again. I have never questioned Toyota reliability. I have never said the Tacoma is inferior to the Ranger. I am simply stating they are more equal than you think, or with to think that is. Don't even bring full size into this. No way does the Tundra compare to the full size trucks offered by Ford/Dodge/GM. The big three offer more packages, engines, suspensions, layouts, shall I go on, than Toyota ever will. The Tundra is more for image and will only be bought by people like you who own Tacoma's.
First of all if you did scroll back to your previous comments you will see the name calling. Besides that I also paid cash like yourself for my truck and unlike yours my came with as standard or extras in my 4WD extended cab SR5 V6: 1. ABS brakes 2. TRD Package 3. Skid Plates 4. 265 tires 4. Bedliner 5. Full length running boards (wheel base length)
For $23,200 before taxes. So now that you have dragged the price issue out repeatly lets get to the real issue and that is COMPARISON.
The Ranger since 1998 has had 5 recalls to the Tacomas's 1 recall and that was taken from Edmunds. Why did you spread mis-information about the 800,000 cars recalled by Toyota. First of all 99% of the recalls were in Japan. Now you seemed to have left out Ford's recall of 945,000 trucks and SUV's this past May. I guess Ford Country is also called Recall Country.
In your last reply you state, " See you in the hills." Well, the White Mountains of NH is no hill.
You made the comparison that the Ranger has the reliability equal to that of the Tacoma. Well, I showed you that in the 1999 Consumer Guide the Ranger was rated average for reliability and the Tacoma was rated better than average. Take a look at the ratings in the Autos for Consumers Report just publish says the same thing. I never said the Ranger is a bad truck . . . it is just an average truck.
Fact is that you advoid replying to the comments I have made in the discussion and when you do reply you go off in a tangent. You don't want to discuss and that is apparent by your replies and distortions of facts. You just don't like to hear the facts and that is plain and simple. End of discussion . . . with you.
What? I replied to your saying the Ranger was unreliable. www.carpoint.msn.com for one, and also to to Popular mechanics homepage and to the auto section for two... I can keep going if you would like. You paid 23K for yours? I paid under 19K for mine! Once again a 4K difference! The white mountains?? no way do they compare to MT Hood pal, or MT Rainer, or MT Baker, MT Jefferson, Three Sisters, please don't make me laugh. Talked with an owner a 4x4 shop today about the Ranger/Tacoma debate. He did say the locker on the Toyota is very good for a factory truck. Also said the tires that Toyota put on are also far Superior to Ford Ranger. I asked about frame, suspension and so on.. His reply was.... Suspensions, pretty much a toss up there. He even brought up the price difference and said for the price difference, he could fix up the Ranger to stomp any Toyota TRD package with after market addons and I would still come out about even in price or maybe even ahead. Once again you take the facts only you want to see and won't read any of mine. Hope you enjoy your humps in N.H.
How does Hindsite win? I have given sites and data to rebute any claims he has. All he has come up with is a 23K+ price tag, a skidplate and a locker rearend. I am still waiting for the link to the site for his recalls. The recalls I see are at the NHSTA. He also fails to mention the recalls of all 96/97 Tacoma's. Granted there are none on the the 98's. I am not claiming the Ranger as "better" just, just as good. I have given site upon site, reviews, what else is there? The perceived quality/reliability advantage that Toyota did once have is over. All of you have the same access to the Internet as I do, read, search, research.
The pervios post should have been written this way. Sorry.....
"Searched and Read"
NHTSA shows the Tacoma having two (Suspension + Crusie Control) recalls in 96, but shows no Tacoma recalls in 97, 98, or 99 with the exception of the typo in the 98 manual.
The Ranger shows none in 97, 4 in 98 (Equip label+Cruise+Glazing+Fuel lines), and 3 in 99 (Cruise+Glazing+Fuel lines again)
There is a mountain in the Whites of Newhampshire that is considered one of the most treacherous in the world(forget the name).
Something like 200+ mph winds in winter and wind chills of -80. I know that people training for Everest climb this mountain in winter.
As for the west being so much tougher than the east, you have to take in all the elements.
First, the west is much drier than the east. Second, the west lacks standing fresh water when compared with the east.
So, Washington, Colorado and others may have more rockier rugged terrain, but I guarantee you that Michigans Upper Peninsula and the Carolinas have much more BOGGY, SWAMPY land than the west. It tends to equal out. All areas have their specific "tough" spots.
To spout off Washington as being the roughest place to offroad only shows your lack of travel experience and your ignorance.
By the way, you can fix up your Ranger all you want, but it still wont be a Jeep or Toyota offroad. The undercarriage of a Ranger is just not up to par. Take a look and compare.
As far as the full size comments go, did you even bother to look at the latest test results? lol!
Sure the Tundra isnt available in all the options, but it beats ford f150, chevy 1500 and dodge 1500 in 0-60 times, it beats them in braking(handily) it beats them in towing 6500lbs from 5-60, it beats themtowing 4000lbs 5-60, it beat all of them in 65 mph cabin decibel levels, it beat the in frame integrity tests, and it BEAT ALL THE NEXT UP OPTIONAL ENGINES IN 0-60 EXCEPT FOR FORD 5.4 liter v8. YES< YOU ARE reading that correct. + highest minimum ground clearence at 11.2 inches. Look, Im not going to say that the Tundra is the best truck out there for hauling and major work, but I will say it WHOOPS the entry level Full sizes in most performance categories. Obviously if someone was looking for a full size, between the ford f150, chevy 1500, dodge 1500, and toyota tundra, if they were to pick their truck based on performance, they would pick the tundra. By FAR.
Vince just to let you know I own a 99 XLT Supercab with 4WD. It is a good truck so far. Only time I use the 4WD is when I drive on the beach to surf fish. Well, my fishing buddy has a Tacoma with that locking rear end and when I did drive it I like every minute of it. Hey got to admit I would trade my truck any day for a Tacoma just for the V6 engine and that locking rear end whatever.
Spoog, why do you continue to name call? Are you just mad that you paid so much for your perceived quality/reliability advantage? Also, you better read the tests of the Tundra again. It competes more with the Dodge Dakota. Visit the Tundra sites here at Edmunds also. They are going for a very steep price for what you get. Ranger comes out with a 200HP V6 in 2000 sometime. I have already admitted the locker on the Toyota is very good. But at a 4-5K price? A locker can be installed on the RAnger for much less than that. Price is the factor here. For the 4-5K difference in price, do you have any idea what you can do to a Ranger with aftermarket parts/accessories? Reliablity - already listed sites/reviews to rebute the claim the Ranger is unreliable. This weekend I'm going up to the Cascade mountains with a Frontier V6, Toyota Tacoma, another Ranger V6 (besides mine), and possibly a Chevy S-10 4x4 V6. It is going to look like a regualry Motor Trend shootout. Already went up with the Tacoma guy. He was like Spoog, diehard Tacoma fan. Nothing could touch his Tacoma. As I have said before, he found new respect for the Ranger after driving it, and seeing what it could do. He still would stick with his Tacoma though, just because of past experience. I am not claiming Ford Ranger dominance here, which some just don't seem to understand.
I agree with Vince. Nobody thinks that Toyota's are bad, or even worse than Rangers. But Rangers do fine too. Ultimately, I don't think any Toyota fan is going to be swayed into buying a Ford or vice versa. I guess it's just fun to argue. Like them or not, Tacoma is overpriced. Seems like Tundra is priced pretty in line with the Big Three. Hopefully that will lead to the Tacoma's price being a lowered by a few K, more in line with Ranger, Frontier, and S10. I read that at least for this year, Toyota is marketting the Tundra towards previous Toyota owners. Well, people trading in their Tacomas for Tundras doesn't increase sales, so they're gonna have to lower prices somewhere to attract buyers from the Big Three and Nissan.
In Petersen's 4wheel & Off Road the 4wD extended cab Tacoma V6 TRD came in on top. It beat out Cheverlet S-10 4.3 V6, Dodge Dakota V8, Ford Ranger 4.0 V6, Mazda B4000 4.0 V6, and the Nissan Frontier V6. Actually the Ranger came in second to the Tacoma. The Tacoma does carry a hefty price tag, but then again I got money to burn. Have a good long safe and good long weekend everyone.
hindsite, pass some this way? hallow, I'm just tired of the myth that because its spelled T O Y O T A it walks on water. I have learned alot with these debates about the pro's and con's to both the Ranger/Tacoma. These trucks are closer to being equal than you think. And its true, I would never Buy a Tacoma as long as there is a 4-5K price difference for a comparably equipped truck. The Frontier is even less if you want to buy Japanese, these can be had for about 5-6K less. Ran into my daughters soccer coach, he drives a 1994 Ranger 4x4 XLT with 72K miles and not one problem! loves the truck, tows his boat with it and would buy another in a heart beat. See you in the hills@!
Can you read Vince....didn't you see that the Ranger came in second. What relevancy does a 1994 Ranger have to do with the current Ranger and the discussion. I could site other trucks besides the Tacoma that have high mileage and reliable. Fact is my Ford 93 F150 has been a good truck....so what? I really don't see anyone in this topic arguing about the Tacoma price. You can't bear the fact that in a comparsion test the Tacoma came out on top.
Well we all know where most of us sit on the Ranger/Tacoma issue, but let's look at it from a different angle. If we were to assume that all compact 4X4's were priced equally when loaded. Which would you choose and why? I think this question will open the debate about a trucks ability, not just its cost.
Everything is the same except for the price. What do you guy's think? and Why?
I can lurk no longer. What's all this talk about a "perceived quality/reliability advantage" ? The reputation of Toyota mini-trucks has nothing to do with mythology, gentlemen. Toyota defines the genre on a world scale. Ford is in the business of selling vehicles. Toyota is in the business of building them.
I'll standup for America too. I'll choose the Tacoma, because it was built in Freemont CA...!
On another note i drove an Explorer Sport this weekend and it was nice, but that 200+ hp V6 you Ranger guys were talking about was powerful, but very LOUD, in an annoying, turn up the radio, sort of way. If they put it in the Ranger, they may want to add some insulation to dampen the interior noise it creates.......
Built an Assembled mean the same thing! The truck is put together in CA. That process is done by Californians that have a job as a result of Toyota building that vehicle in the US. Tell me where do all the Ford parts come from? I bet there is 1 or 2 metric bolts in a Ranger! This just verify's my previous reply to your post about why the Ranger outsells the Tacoma. One of those reasons being people perceive one as buying American and on as buying Foreign. Ford and Mazda have been in Kahootz with each other for awhile. What's your position on that? The fact is that cars are an international product now. The profits are put back into the company regardless of location. Ford uses its money to buy Volvo and Toyota uses it's profits to Build a truck plant in Indiana. Which also creates jobs in America. My reason for my previous post was that saying you'll choose a vehicle based solely on where it is built is ridiculous. My original ? was which truck and why, based on price not being an issue. I thought it would be a good way to generate post based, which helps readers decide what to buy.....
Could someone please post Toyota's position on Unions and their average wage compared to Ford's. Also, Ford is deeply involved in environmental affairs, which I admit is somewhat like RJ Reynolds being involved in cancer research, but what is Toyota doing? What do they offer that's similar to Rangers FVV? The 3.0L engine may not be much of a help but is Toyota doing?
Assembled in America is vastly different from made in America. Assembling something doesn't require the same skill levels in engineering or manufacturing. One of the issues I've been most concerned with in relation to the Kosovo crisis is our ability to manufacture the things we need to survive as a country. Granted we can live without Tocomas, but how prepared would we be to meet a wartime economy? I remember the morning I woke up to find we had bombed the Chinese embassy. What if the Chinese had declared war? Wars have been started for less. How long would it take us to "gear up" our manufacturing capabilities?
Of course a few points have to be mentioned.
- I doubt I'm the only one who's thought of this, I'm not that bright. Chances are it's been addressed.
- China is not likely to bite the hand that's feeding it, and for the moment that's us, as in U.S.. But not everyone sees life as a logic puzzle , or a math equation. My point is that there are people in the world, like myself, who calculate things other than financial loss or gain. Also, as we all know the threat of nuclear war does not preclude conventional war.
Just a comment about China. We are feeding a giant that we will someday have to tame or somehow live with. I fear a war is on the horizon with China, there defense spending has skyrocketed along with nuclear research. I make it a point NOT to buy anything made in China. I will buy from any country but China. I will pay the extra couple of dollars. Now, back to the difference between assembled and built. assembled is taking already made parts and putting them together. Built is actually making the parts, and building the product.
Is this a Tacoma VS Ranger room? Are you guys trying to equate owning a Tacoma as being disloyal to America? Get real Ford makes cars in Canada and Mexico. Where does China fit into this discussion. Does China produce Tacomas or Rangers? Bottom line the factories that Toyota or any other foreign manufacturer builds here is an investment over here, and not over there. Against competition? Lets face it Ford redesign the Ranger in 98 after they took a beating from stylish Dakota in market share. Foreign car manufacturers have raised the quality.
SUV's and pickups are the most anti-environmental products out there. They use more of our resources, pollute, and tear up the environment. Ford environmental friendly? Is that why they came up with the Excursion and the Triton V10 that gets 12 mpg. Remember the Tundra 4.7 I Force engine is the first Low Emission Vehicle.
Helped a Ranger out of a gully by winching him out of a jam in the Southern Tier. Seemed he did not have enough clearance to make it through. After winching him out drove through the gully with no problem. Got to love it!
This is the Ford VS Ranger message board where the discussion focuses on healthy competition. Much like the Ford Ranger board focuses on Ranger owners and their common concerns. This isn't the place to discuss foreign policy. The Ranger board isn't the place to belittle Ranger owners for not having the intellegince to buy a Tocoma. I can call my brother a butt head but I'll fight anyone who agrees with me.
China fits into this discussion as an example of my concern for our eroding manufacturing capabilities. I didn't mean to infer that Toyota owners were any less American than Ford owners. I simply wanted to give some background as to why I do what I do.
I wasn't impressed with what I found by following the link. I'm driving something Ford is producing now. Not something it might produce in the future at a price I can't afford.
Ford's Ranger is 80% American made. I wish it was 100% American made but there's not much I can do about that.
Comments
I don't understand how Tacoma is a better offroader than Ranger because the Land Cruiser is better than the Expedition. Those vehicles aren't even built on the same platform-none of them. I agree with Vince; the Ranger does very well off road. I might add that, at least according to Edmunds, Consumer Reports, and host of others, the Ranger handles and rides a WHOLE lot better on road, where even hard core offroaders do more than 50% of their driving.
Have you ever seen the word limited slip mention on any of the Toyota Trucks? Have you seen the word limited slip anywhere in their brochures. Think about it . . . Personally I think Toyota, Nissan, Ford but not the Sonoma are equals all around.
Look under your "truck" and under a tacoma.
The Tacoma v6 is the fastest stock compact truck you can purchase today. And, like I said, add the optional trd supercharger and it will beat Mustangs off the line.
Sure, limited slip is good for STREET driving
in wet conditions for soccer moms and old ladies.
Limited slip is a pointless offroad feature.
A locking rear diff should not be used on pavement at all. It is strictly for serious offroading.
I never said I didn't believe Edmunds and carpoints reliability ratings, I just questioned where the hell they got them from since they LIST NO SOURCE.
Consumer reports or consumer digest(whichever one uses the "dots") has long been the standard for rating crash test results and vehicle reliability.
Even insurance companies use their findings to coorelate with theirs.
Bottom line that many people fail to understand:
FORD VEHICLES ARE NOT OFFROADERS. RIGHT ON DOWN THE LINE FROM THE EXPEDITION TO THE FORD RANGER.
THEY OFFE RLTHE LOWEST GROUND CLEARANCE IN THEIR CLASSES , THE SMALLEST BRAKES< AND THE WEAKEST SUSPENIONS. THEY ARE FINE FOR TOWING AND GRAVEL ROAD DRIVING.
Ask any knowledgable offroader about Fords and he will chuckle. Better yet , go to rec.autos.4x4
on the usenet, and ask those experts there.
The steering, handling and braking on Fords are not sp;ort-vehicle orientated. The whole setup is for road drivers and shoppers.
Now if you were to start talking Jeeps and land rovers, thats where the yotas get some good competition in the sports-offroad-handling class.
Outside of these three makers, the rest are pretenders. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
A vehicle that handles like a sedan on road,
is not going to be a good offroader.(except for Landcruiser and RangeRover....for 60 grand).
Its really quite simple. OFFROAD SUSPENSIONS DO NOT HANDLE WELL ON PAVEMENT.
ONROAD SUSPENSIONS DO NOT FAREWELL OFFROAD.
There is a reason why the Tacomas ride is bad on the highway and city roads. Take it to where the
pavement meets the sand, and it will turn into a differemnt truck before your very eyes.
My yota actually handles BETTER on dirt, mud and rocks than it does when driven on pavement.
It's the damnedest thing. It actually seems like it LIKES the mud and crap.
Ford Rangers are nice trucks to haul things, pick up groceries, and pickup supplies from home depot,
BUT THEY ARE NOT SERIOUS OFFROADERS! Get it through your heads! It is a simple matter of engineering and performance.
It is not an objective argument, it is a factual one. Read the departure andgles, suspension travel numbers ect........
PS. Checked the new Consumer Reports for Cars just printed this month. Tacoma sure has a lot of red solid dots in the columns, while the Ranger hardly any.
So I'm glad to see some guys that know 4X4 trucks and not trucks riding on car chassis. I've had my truck almost a month and I love it!
Tacoma is the better 4X4 truck, even a person who knew nothing about 4X4's(Me!) knew this! I read alot of periodicals and yes, the Ranger does ride better on the highway and that made me leery enough. True, 4X4 trucks can't have great road suspensions(unless you pay big $$$$), that's common sense!
My 98 V6 just hit 12,000 problem free miles this weekend.
Enjoy
-wsn
Ranger
4 recalls
1 for fuel line that MAY be too close to the engine block.
2. Glazing Material??
3. A label problem for tire rim specifications
4. A duplicate of the Glazing Material?
Toyota
1996
1. Front suspension may crack or bend under offroad conditions. :0
2. Cruise may fial, or accelerate.
Also, how about those 800,000 plus Toyota on recall just the other day???
Check again for clearance. In 1998 The ranger went away from the live front axle to a fully independent suspension, giving better clearance.
Are 4x4's race cars? With the 5K difference in a TRD to a loaded Ranger I can go out an put all kinds of options on the Ranger also to make it fast from 0-60.
You are not a true offroader it shows. The debate between limited slip and lockers is ongoing fool. Lockers are only good for straight away acceleration and straight away traction. Do Toyota's even come with limited slip at all??
You are the fool who paid 2 - 5K more for an overpriced/overrated vehicle. Resale, How can it be an advantage when you paid more upfront to begin with? Why does Ranger outsell Tacoma?
I have already proven to one Toyota hardcore owner that the Ranger is no joke. Like I said, we went head to head in the mountains of Oregon. No winner. You bought an image, you paid a whole bunch of money for it, don't get pissed at me! I have about 15K on my Ranger. The miles have not been easy ones either, I fish, hike, camp, I am an outdoors person.
I also talked with an offroader of 15 years. He owns a Jeep that has been in Offroader mag many times, and he is also in a Jeep club. Goes to offroad outings all the time. He said the Tacoma and Ranger are pretty much a toss up. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. I am not a hardcore offroading person. I have however had my Ranger out in the middle of no mans land in some pretty tight spots.
Have you read the Edmunds review on the Tacoma? and the one on the Ranger? "5K difference, we'll take the Ranger and get a jet ski" quote from Edmunds.
See you in the hills
1. FUEL INJECTION SYSTEM
2. GLAZING MATERIAL STICKER
3. THROTTLE LINKAGES AND CONTROL
4. FUEL LINE HOSES NON METALLIC
5. EQUIPMENT CERTICATION LABEL
Now that is clear Toyota Tacoma has had only one recall since 1998 for a misprint in the appendix of the manual. If I had went back equally for both of the vehicles I would probably had found more recalls for both vehicles. Now you say Toyota in the recalls, but you don't really tell which model it is.
Other than that both trucks are about equal less the recalls.
The Ranger is just out classed! I wouldn't take one if they were FREE! I hate having to always repair vehicles, that's why I bought a Toyota!
Limited slip is for street driving.
It is designed to help the wheels make contact on hard surfaces in snow or rain.
Does the Range Rover or Land Cruiser offer
"limited slip"? No. They offer
front and rear lockers. These are two
of the greatest 4x4 vehicles ever made.
As far as the Rangers clearance, I dont think it really equals the Tacomas. Heck, even toyotas
new full size Tundra ALREADY leads the full size class with 11.2 inches of MINIMUM ground clearance. Like I TOLD YOU before, the traits in the Land Cruiser and other yota 4x4 models
get inherited down the line, just like Ford traits
get inherited down the line.
4runner: highest ground clearance in class
Landcruioser: highest ground clearance in class
Tacoma: highest ground clearance in class
Ford explorer: same ground clearance as subaru outback
Ford Expedition: same gound clearance as subaru outback
Ford Ranger: same ground clearance as subaru outback
now anyone with any common sense can see a pattern here. FORD HAS YET TO MAKE A GOOD OFFROADER! FORD MAKES TOW-ERS AND HAULERS,
NOT TRAIL OR OFFROAD VEHICLES
I was even reading a few reviews of late about the 4runner and tacoma, and all of them say these vehicles are built with 4x4 use in mind FIRST,
and everything else second. Due to their
class leading ground clearance and factory optional lockers, and other features.
The Tacoma is a far superior 4x4 to Ranger.
Durability, longevity, and performance wise.
There are many more aftermarket accesories for tacoma also.
Next time you see the news in africa, europe,
or china, look at the UN vehicles.
Next time you see a wildlife documentary in africa, look at the vehicles.
THEY ARE TOYOTAS.
PEOPLE WONT TAKE FORD RANGERS 250 MILES INTO THE BUSH FOR a REASON.
Your truck is a nice truck, dont get me wrong.
It is nice for smooth gravel roads and hauling.
But in no way is it HALF the offroader the tacoma is.
First of all you don't have any idea of how much I paid for my truck & the options. For you to make an comparision is ludicrous. I was discussing reliabilty, but you always seem to go back to PRICE. Sure the Tacoma is more expensive, but does that make it lesser truck in reliability. Or are you eqeating price with reliabiltiy. Price is affordability.....notice that the word has Ford in it....LOL....
First of all where did I call names?
Second of all I paid cash for my truck no payments here folks, and yes, could have afforded up to 23K, with the money saved from buying the more expensive Tacoma, I added better tires to the Ranger, nurfbars, linex spray in liner, K&N air filter assembly, rock guard, skidplate, Debating on a Superchip and an exhaust system.
Hindsite I don't know where your getting your information about recalls, please link me. I only recognize 3 out of the 5 you mention. You failed to check 1997, and 1996 for the Tacoma, there are other recalls.
In the West we have the Cascade range. Go to your map and check to see how high these "hills" are and get back to me. Now, go to North Carolina and see what kind of pansy hills you have in the east. Don't even bother comparing terrain with me, I know I live in some of the roughest in the lower 48.
I'm not getting testy, all of you are because you paid too much. I have already given you links to check out Ranger reliability ratings and reviews and I'm not going to waste my time typing them again.
I have never questioned Toyota reliability. I have never said the Tacoma is inferior to the Ranger. I am simply stating they are more equal than you think, or with to think that is.
Don't even bring full size into this. No way does the Tundra compare to the full size trucks offered by Ford/Dodge/GM. The big three offer more packages, engines, suspensions, layouts, shall I go on, than Toyota ever will. The Tundra is more for image and will only be bought by people like you who own Tacoma's.
1. ABS brakes
2. TRD Package
3. Skid Plates
4. 265 tires
4. Bedliner
5. Full length running boards (wheel base length)
For $23,200 before taxes. So now that you have dragged the price issue out repeatly lets get to the real issue and that is COMPARISON.
The Ranger since 1998 has had 5 recalls to the Tacomas's 1 recall and that was taken from Edmunds. Why did you spread mis-information about the 800,000 cars recalled by Toyota. First of all 99% of the recalls were in Japan. Now you seemed to have left out Ford's recall of 945,000 trucks and SUV's this past May. I guess Ford Country is also called Recall Country.
In your last reply you state, " See you in the hills." Well, the White Mountains of NH is no hill.
You made the comparison that the Ranger has the reliability equal to that of the Tacoma. Well, I showed you that in the 1999 Consumer Guide the Ranger was rated average for reliability and the Tacoma was rated better than average. Take a look at the ratings in the Autos for Consumers Report just publish says the same thing. I never said the Ranger is a bad truck . . . it is just an average truck.
Fact is that you advoid replying to the comments I have made in the discussion and when you do reply you go off in a tangent. You don't want to discuss and that is apparent by your replies and distortions of facts. You just don't like to hear the facts and that is plain and simple. End of discussion . . . with you.
Talked with an owner a 4x4 shop today about the Ranger/Tacoma debate. He did say the locker on the Toyota is very good for a factory truck. Also said the tires that Toyota put on are also far Superior to Ford Ranger. I asked about frame, suspension and so on.. His reply was....
Suspensions, pretty much a toss up there. He even brought up the price difference and said for the price difference, he could fix up the Ranger to stomp any Toyota TRD package with after market addons and I would still come out about even in price or maybe even ahead. Once again you take the facts only you want to see and won't read any of mine. Hope you enjoy your humps in N.H.
Is this topic about Tacoma's and Ranger's or about whose moutains are bigger.....?
-wsn
"Searched and Read"
NHTSA shows the Tacoma having two (Suspension +
Crusie Control) recalls in 96, but shows no Tacoma recalls in 97, 98, or 99 with the
exception of the typo in the 98 manual.
The Ranger shows none in 97, 4 in 98 (Equip
label+Cruise+Glazing+Fuel lines), and 3 in 99
(Cruise+Glazing+Fuel lines again)
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/problems/recalls/recmmy1.cfm
-wsn
There is a mountain in the Whites of Newhampshire that is considered one of the most treacherous in the world(forget the name).
Something like 200+ mph winds in winter and
wind chills of -80. I know that people
training for Everest climb this mountain
in winter.
As for the west being so much tougher than the east, you have to take in all the elements.
First, the west is much drier than the east. Second, the west lacks standing fresh water when compared with the east.
So, Washington, Colorado and others may have more rockier rugged terrain, but I guarantee you that
Michigans Upper Peninsula and the Carolinas
have much more BOGGY, SWAMPY land than the west.
It tends to equal out. All areas have their specific "tough" spots.
To spout off Washington as being the roughest place to offroad only shows your lack of travel
experience and your ignorance.
By the way, you can fix up your Ranger all you want, but it still wont be a Jeep or Toyota offroad. The undercarriage of a Ranger is just not up to par. Take a look and compare.
As far as the full size comments go, did you even bother to look at the latest test results?
lol!
Sure the Tundra isnt available in all the options,
but it beats ford f150, chevy 1500 and dodge 1500
in 0-60 times, it beats them in braking(handily)
it beats them in towing 6500lbs from 5-60,
it beats themtowing 4000lbs 5-60,
it beat all of them in 65 mph cabin decibel levels, it beat the in frame integrity tests,
and it BEAT ALL THE NEXT UP OPTIONAL ENGINES IN 0-60 EXCEPT FOR FORD 5.4 liter v8. YES< YOU ARE reading that correct.
+ highest minimum ground clearence at 11.2 inches.
Look, Im not going to say that the Tundra is the best truck out there for hauling and major work,
but I will say it WHOOPS the entry level
Full sizes in most performance categories.
Obviously if someone was looking for a full size,
between the ford f150, chevy 1500, dodge 1500, and toyota tundra, if they were to pick their truck based on performance, they would pick the tundra. By FAR.
Your such a fool.
Ranger comes out with a 200HP V6 in 2000 sometime.
I have already admitted the locker on the Toyota is very good. But at a 4-5K price? A locker can be installed on the RAnger for much less than that. Price is the factor here. For the 4-5K difference in price, do you have any idea what you can do to a Ranger with aftermarket parts/accessories?
Reliablity - already listed sites/reviews to rebute the claim the Ranger is unreliable.
This weekend I'm going up to the Cascade mountains with a Frontier V6, Toyota Tacoma, another Ranger V6 (besides mine), and possibly a Chevy S-10 4x4 V6. It is going to look like a regualry Motor Trend shootout.
Already went up with the Tacoma guy. He was like Spoog, diehard Tacoma fan. Nothing could touch his Tacoma. As I have said before, he found new respect for the Ranger after driving it, and seeing what it could do. He still would stick with his Tacoma though, just because of past experience. I am not claiming Ford Ranger dominance here, which some just don't seem to understand.
Lighten up and this is one Ford guy to another Ford guy. Geez man!!!!!!!!
The Tacoma does carry a hefty price tag, but then again I got money to burn. Have a good long safe and good long weekend everyone.
hallow, I'm just tired of the myth that because its spelled T O Y O T A it walks on water. I have learned alot with these debates about the pro's and con's to both the Ranger/Tacoma. These trucks are closer to being equal than you think. And its true, I would never Buy a Tacoma as long as there is a 4-5K price difference for a comparably equipped truck. The Frontier is even less if you want to buy Japanese, these can be had for about 5-6K less.
Ran into my daughters soccer coach, he drives a 1994 Ranger 4x4 XLT with 72K miles and not one problem! loves the truck, tows his boat with it and would buy another in a heart beat.
See you in the hills@!
I really don't see anyone in this topic arguing about the Tacoma price. You can't bear the fact that in a comparsion test the Tacoma came out on top.
Everything is the same except for the price. What do you guy's think? and Why?
-wsn
1. engine 3.4 V6
2. TRD
3. Clearance
Now Hind whatever you got some valid points I reckon, but ease up man. To Vince cut the bull with the price, because you are beating a dead horse.
Cut the crap with this name calling junk everyone.
On another note i drove an Explorer Sport this weekend and it was nice, but that 200+ hp V6 you Ranger guys were talking about was powerful, but very LOUD, in an annoying, turn up the radio, sort of way. If they put it in the Ranger, they may want to add some insulation to dampen the interior noise it creates.......
Happy Holiday Weekend
-wsn
Built an Assembled mean the same thing! The truck is put together in CA. That process is done by Californians that have a job as a result of Toyota building that vehicle in the US. Tell me where do all the Ford parts come from? I bet there is 1 or 2 metric bolts in a Ranger! This just verify's my previous reply to your post about why the Ranger outsells the Tacoma. One of those reasons being people perceive one as buying American and on as buying Foreign. Ford and Mazda have been in Kahootz with each other for awhile. What's your position on that? The fact is that cars are an international product now. The profits are put back into the company regardless of location. Ford uses its money to buy Volvo and Toyota uses it's profits to Build a truck plant in Indiana. Which also creates jobs in America. My reason for my previous post was that saying you'll choose a vehicle based solely on where it is built is ridiculous. My original ? was which truck and why, based on price not being an issue. I thought it would be a good way to generate post based, which helps readers decide what to buy.....
-wsn
PS Toyota is traded on the Nasdaq (TOYOY)http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=TOYOY&d=t
Also, Ford is deeply involved in environmental affairs, which I admit is somewhat like RJ Reynolds being involved in cancer research, but what is Toyota doing? What do they offer that's similar to Rangers FVV? The 3.0L engine may not be much of a help but is Toyota doing?
Of course a few points have to be mentioned.
- I doubt I'm the only one who's thought of this, I'm not that bright. Chances are it's been addressed.
- China is not likely to bite the hand that's feeding it, and for the moment that's us, as in U.S.. But not everyone sees life as a logic puzzle , or a math equation. My point is that there are people in the world, like myself, who calculate things other than financial loss or gain. Also, as we all know the threat of nuclear war does not preclude conventional war.
Now, back to the difference between assembled and built. assembled is taking already made parts and putting them together. Built is actually making the parts, and building the product.
SUV's and pickups are the most anti-environmental products out there. They use more of our resources, pollute, and tear up the environment. Ford environmental friendly? Is that why they came up with the Excursion and the Triton V10 that gets 12 mpg. Remember the Tundra 4.7 I Force engine is the first Low Emission Vehicle.
steering columns from France. I think they are Renault?
As far as Toyota and the enviroment go, have a look at this link
http://www.toyota.com/afv/prius/f_prius.html
and as mention earlier the Tundra meets LEV. I bet the Excursion doesn't
-wsn
China fits into this discussion as an example of my concern for our eroding manufacturing capabilities. I didn't mean to infer that Toyota owners were any less American than Ford owners. I simply wanted to give some background as to why I do what I do.
I wasn't impressed with what I found by following the link. I'm driving something Ford is producing now. Not something it might produce in the future at a price I can't afford.
Ford's Ranger is 80% American made. I wish it was
100% American made but there's not much I can do about that.