Howdy, Stranger!

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

Toyota Tacoma vs. Ford Ranger, Part XII



  • Did the Tacomas compete with other trucks there, like Rangers?
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Well, the run was originally organized by LoneStar ZR2 club. So there was a bunch of ZR2s, 4-5 of them, one Ranger of a funky gold-orange color, 2 Cherokees and 2-3 Wranglers.
    We met up with these guys later in the day when we went to play on the rocks. Lets put it this way....couple of Tacos made it up the most difficult rock slide, I think 1 ZR2 made it also. The Ranger took another way up.
    From there we just continued down the riverbed with 1 Jeep and 1 pre-Tacoma (old Toy pickup) with us.
    So, it turned out to be a big Toyota run, we kept mostly to ourselves.
    No carnage that I've heard of, except 1 punctured tire on a Jeep, 1 blown tire on the pre-Taco, and a small dent with scratched paint that I got on drivers side, right by the taillight. I scratched it coming through a pass, which was surprising, I thought I was going to dent in the whole drivers side, the angle was pretty extreme.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    Oh, I gotcha, its the weekend and i wasn't thinkin. L8r man.
  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    "Oh - and Im talking about v6's (dont say a thing about the comma, anyone)."

    -don't you mean apostrophe?? :)
  • On Friday I saw a news report on CNN regarding Ford and the recent news that they would be closing several plants in the U.S. According to CNN, Ford has the lowest vehicle "quality" of all the Detroit auto manufacturers. Boy, did hearing that really make me feel vindicated. I've always argued that Ford's quality is not very good. Now CNN has backed me up! Perhaps the saying, "you get what you pay for" is true. I'm glad I chose a Taco over a Ranger. Take care and I'll see you in those remote, hard to reach places where the faint of heart don't dare to tread.......Steelman.
  • "Look ma! I watch it on the boob tube, reckon it must be true!"

    It's funny how JD Powers used car vehicle choices, which looks at 1996 model vehicles, choose Tacoma AND Ranger as 2 of the 3 for compact Pickup. Also a 4Runner and an Explorer for SUV. Everyone (who doesn't own a Ford) thinks they are quality-less junk. But how come the Truck and SUV fleet is #1?

    But just like some people's beloved off-road magazine reviews and editorials, it only becomes true gospel if you felt that way before being exposed to it. We are all awash with opinions, and they all must be valid and true, right? I mean Right! :)

    Maybe it all depends on how you define quality. Like a 9 year old vehicle with over 135,000 miles, still getting sticker gas milage, with only a scant pittance of maintenance cost? I "got what I paid for" and more! I'm glad I bought a Ranger instead of a Taco. Have fun, and let us see how your truck holds up in the future...
  • Another anectodal tale of "I bought a Ranger, and it was great; therefore, any source saying otherwise is wrong!"

    Honestly, for every satisfied Ford customer like yourself, there seems to be a disgruntled one regretting his purchase due to quality issues. Recently, Ford has been recognized as Detroit's poorest quality/problem laiden manufacturer. I guess things like recalling 1.8 million Ford trucks and SUVs due to faulty lug nuts causing catastrophic wheel separation don't do much to bolster Ford's "Quality is job #1" slogan, now does it? Or how about the whole Explorer roll-over, Firestone tire fiasco?

    You know, stang, it's all a big conspiracy against Ford - all these quality/satisfaction/resale value/4x4 reviews that consistently rank Toyota higher than Ford. How does one enlighten a conspiracy theorist like yourself with the truth? In your world, all the facts in Toyota's favor are just part of the conspiracy...
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    ford trucks are #1 for 2001, and again we'll see who is #1 for 2002. anyone want to bet their tacoma that ford wont be #1 for '02? im taking names. maybe if i get enough of them, i can cash them in for a nickel a piece. hehe. joke guys. jk. :o)

    really guys, do you actually believe everything you see on tv? right now, ford is an easy target for the media. do you really rank their vehicles behind the other two american companies? that had to be the bonehead post of the week, and its only monday.

    cnn says it must be true!!!wee hee
  • Everyone that's not a Ford guy doesn't think that Fords are junk!! Ford has had some problems with certain models but the Ranger is not on that list and has a good reputation. Unfortunately for Ford, items like the tire situation went against them when it wasn't totally their fault. At least the company stood behind the product. I still personally prefer the Tacoma to the Ranger for my needs, however, the Ranger is certainly a good quality truck overall.
  • "I bought a Tacoma, and it was great; therefore, any source saying otherwise is wrong!" You might as well insinuate the contrary, that all Rangers are crap. This is not so.

    Except, not only do I own one, driven one of a fleet of at least 15 Rangers at a previous occupation, and have known peers with early to late 90's Rangers, my base to judge such vehicles grows far beyond the scope of one vehicle.

    I am simply laughing at others attempts to deny or misrepresent the quality and dependability of a Ranger.

    I will concede that if you purchase a Tacoma, you are likely to have more trouble free miles with their long-lasting drive train.
    I will also concede that I still believe a Ranger is a more cost effective purchase, given it's proven longevity, long list of standard options, and overall value (AKA bang for buck).

    Heck, I'd probably buy a Tacoma if the seats were more comfortable, the cabin a bit larger, my head didn't barely touch the ceiling, or my legs feel so cramped against the no frills interior. I also want a V6 in a regular cab.

    Call me Picky, or a conspiracy nut, which ever you prefer, but I prefer 40 extra bucks a month and a Ranger in my driveway. Sorry if that offends ya'll...

    I guess the grass is always greener on your own side of the fence... :)

    Allknowing--->I'm glad you think and said so! It goes without saying that it's easy to misunderstand each other based on ASCII text, but thank you for saying that.

    And Dear Pluto--->It's 1.7 million recalled vehicles, of which not 100% were affected. Only 98 of these vehicles had any wheel separation accidents(0.0057%), of which who knows how many were attributed to the lug nuts. ZERO fatalities. It is still an error and should have been avoided, but not all were affected and Ford did the right thing by having it fixed at their expense.

    Take 6 million Explorers, half with Firestones, half with Goodyear. (Figures are not approximations, they are extremely close estimates). 1183 Tire tread separations claims on Explorers with Firestones. 2 Tire tread separations claims on Explorers with Goodyears.
    So it's all the Explorer's Fault, and thus Ford?
    It is worthwhile to note Ford paid 3 BILLION DOLLARS to clean up the Firestone mess. Once again, Ford paid out big time for it's customers. The Firestone plant that was under investigation is no longer operating. Hmmm. Do the math.


    Stang, in all honesty, you think Ford is great because they spent $3 billion cleaning up their Firestone tire fiasco? Did they really have a choice? Had they not fixed the problem, it would have been like committing business/sales suicide!

  • Visit the following link to see that Toyota has MUCH better quality than Ford......

    Once again, you cannot dispute hard facts! I'm glad I bought a Taco..........Steelman.

  • I especially enjoyed this part, and I quote:

    "In J.D. Power's study of new vehicle initial quality, Toyota finished first once again among multi-brand automakers, followed by Honda and Nissan. GM came in a close fourth while Chrysler and Ford finished fifth and seventh, respectively."

    You know, this is just adding fuel to stang's conspiracy theory...

    Stang, just come Ford's awesome quality control didn't catch those Explorers' slashed tires immediately? Why did so many vehicles make it through the assembly line before - TA DAA!!! QUALITY CONTROL DISCOVERED THE SLASHED TIRES - that it cost $3 billion to fix the tires?

    Does Ford even HAVE quality control?
  • ensure your customers have safe tires on their SUV's.

    It was a bad situation, but the suppliers fault(Firestone). Would you think better of Ford, if Ford entered a legal blame game with Bridgstone/firestone to see who would pick up the tab, while the customers kept on driving?

    Pluto--->Since you asked that exact same question before, I'll reply to that after I look up my old response in the previous forum(with the hyphen. ) That way I can just cut and paste it again, so you can bring it up again, in say, 2 or 3 months? Why don't you bring up the exploding Pinto's and the early mustangs that would spill fuel if rear ended, again? This is very repetitious, sort of like a broken record.

    Steelman--->Yep, overall Toyota's definately do have less problems than Fords. However I do think the report is a bit broad, going off the makes alone . But I think we all know that the truck segment is a little closer than that report represents.

    (Pluto Translation: Toyota Great, Ford not as great. Report very general. Ford truck better than Ford car. Toyota truck and Ford truck great competition. Many battle, Totanka!)
  • time thinking about such situations, as I bought a Toyota, not a Ford. It seems with Ford lately, it's one catastrophe after another. Toyota doesn't have catastrophes.

    Also, what the heck does this mean?

    "Steelman--->That's a true overall idea of quality. However I think we all know that the truck segment is a little closer than that report represents. Besides that is going off nameplate alone... "

    Translation, please?
  • Are you trying to ridicule me? I guarantee you my English is better than yours (and my Spanish certainly is as well!). Really, this quote of yours makes no sense:

    "Steelman--->That's a true overall idea of quality. However I think we all know that the truck segment is a little closer than that report represents. Besides that is going off nameplate alone... "

    Yup, that's the kind of English I've heard in Texas...

    Going back to that little slashed tire/quality control question. I know HOW it happened: newer Explorers being wider than the older ones but assembled on the same line which caused protruding equipment to slash the tires.

    My question to you is WHY weren't the slashed tired noticed IMMEDIATELY? If something as obvious as slashed tires eludes Ford's quality control, doesn't that make you wonder what OTHER problems are buried in their products?
  • Ever wonder how vehicles made almost a decade ago have fared for themselves? Find out:

    That's just the truck page, but go ahead and research all you want on this site.

  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    I love the warning on the bottom of the page:
    "Warning: New Toyota pickups sold in the U.S. are manufactured in North America with parts many of which are sourced in North America and consequently may be unsuitable for a consumer with made in Japan Toyota experiences."
    Wait, I thought tbunder said it was made in Japan!

    Bottom line is this.....Ranger fans will discredit every media source that the opposition will provide.
    Specialized magazines will be discredited for running Toyota ads.
    General-purpose magazines will be discredited on the basis of "What do they know about trucks, and why should I listen to them?".
    Other sources will be discredited based on "Who are these guys?". (and I do agree with this somewhat)
    I've said it before..the only way a comparison like this can be done is to have a long-term test, like 10 years, of both trucks, work them the same way, and see who dies first or goes to a mechanic more.
  • So why don't the Ranger boys quit discrediting our media sources and simply provide their own showing the Ranger is better?

    I'm waiting...
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    this whole little convo happened like three months ago. why rehash it again? every vehicle has its problems. some dont. just cuz it says ford on it, does not mean it won't last as long as a toyota. just cuz it says toyota on it does not mean it will last longer than a ford. its all in how it is cared for. id be happy to put up my ranger to a long term test, problem is i think i have it sold to a guy who wants to come all the way to iowa from virgina to buy it. wonder why he doesn't want a toyota? i know, BECAUSE EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN PREFERENCE. and just browsing thru the nissan frontier boards a little while before i drove one and decided against it (no room in crew cab for my needs), i find that they hold the same general opinions as us ranger guys- toyotas are really expensive and are nice trucks. but really, a frontier has very good build quality(if not better than other trucks) and more options, plus its way cheaper than any comparable tacoma (just down on engine output). same with the ranger imo, they're all nice. ranger is one of ford's best vehicles. again, ill say it. ford doesn't sell the numbers of rangers they do cuz they are junk.
  • is one of Ford's better vehicles. Perhaps that's because it has enough Mazda in it to make up the difference for the Ford in it.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    Did you decide to go ahead and sell your truck over ebay or what? I know it was there for awhile, but last I saw, reserve had not been met. Take it EZ, man
  • kg11kg11 Posts: 530
    Toyota doesn't have catastrophies??
    My '89 4X4 3.0 V6,recalled-head gasket problems.
    My '95 3.4 V6,recalled-head gasket problems.
    Did Toyota get it right yet?
  • Is the best you can do is come up with a bad head gasket problem on a truck made 13 years ago? I rest my case...

    "Did Toyota get it right yet?" Yeah, I would say they got the head gasket thing and a lot of other things right, the way they keep stealing marketshare from the big 3.
  • Toyota Lug nut problem/

    Tacoma and Tundra
    Even camry's got problems
    Gulf Toyota at it again

    So you see, not all vehicles or nameplates are perfect.

    Scorpio says "I've said it before..the only way a comparison like this can be done is to have a long-term test, like 10 years, of both trucks, work them the same way, and see who dies first or goes to a mechanic more."

    Well since mine is 9 years old, let's hear from someone on the Taco side?

    How about the fact that one of the vehicles that tow my race car is a 1967 Ford F-100? With a Ranger badge to boot! Still pulls strong, engine just rebuilt after 220 or so thousand miles... A little rust in the floorboard and bed, and it isn't the prettiest ride, but I think rust isn't an issue older Toyota's need to bring up!
  • kg11kg11 Posts: 530
    TWO Toyota trucks ,6 years apart,same problem.Most recent recall for V6 head gasket-1997.The problem spanned 8 years in MY experiance.I havent researched to see if it's a continueing problem.
  • No, you're missing the point, and the big picture.

    This shows how different trucks made about a decade ago have fared over the years...

  • In all honestly, can't you see the humor in focusing on Toyota recalls for things like towing wiring harnesses and possibly faulty cotter pins in accelerators when there are Explorers rolling over and killing people?
  • Didn't like the fact that Toyota's Tacoma have bad lug nuts too? Better check yours! Isn't it a 98-99? And since you are in Texas, more than likely it had to be supplied from Gulf Toyota. (?)

    I see you ignored that one.

    Trailer lights? How about trailer brakes too? How about the line "Tacoma vehicles, due to deficient waterproofing and improper installation location " I thought Fords were only capable of such negligence. Ever hear of trailers that brake automatically if the power gets disconnected? (I.E. In the event the hitch fails, and you have a runaway trailer?) Why would a hitch fail? Because the sticker said the wrong Tow capacity.

    And forget the Explorer, you obviously are just gleaning the media hype, and ignoring the fact that accident per accident, Explorers have a lower fatality rate vs. competing SUVs. And Explorers have a lower percentage of rollovers than competing SUVs. Just ask for the facts to back it up!

    I also see no humor in Explorers rolling over and killing people.

This discussion has been closed.