Howdy, Stranger!

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





If you experience loading issues with the login/register form, please completely disable ad blocker or use an incognito or in-private window to log in.

Toyota Tacoma vs. Ford Ranger, Part XII

1404143454659

Comments

  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    that Tundras are not full size trucks. Although, I like Toyota trucks, I would have to agree with that faction. I would never buy one.
  • frey44frey44 Posts: 230
    I want to put priemium shocks on my 4x4 Ranger to try to calm the suspension jitters of the torsion bars and that heavy rear axle. I am looking at Edelbrocks and Bilsteins. Any other ideas ? I think I need more DAMPING, in particular i.e. the Ford shocks are crap. (A new aluminum driveshaft sure helped reduce vibration in the seats alot) Have any of you tried either of these with a torsion bar truck ?
  • smgillessmgilles Posts: 252
    You could run RS9000s for the rear, they have a setting from 1(softest) to 5(stiffest). I have heard good praise about them. I run Bils 5100s in the rear and they are great and I have Racerunner Sway-Away Coilovers in the front. There are the best thing since slice bread.


    http://www.swayaway.com

  • frey44frey44 Posts: 230
    Thanks for the ideas on shocks. What truck do you drive ?
    I really like my Ranger now that I got the driveshaft swapped out; it's a different truck ! It is amazing how much vibration wears you down when driving on the freeway.
    Also, I still think I have some tire problems. I got Michelin LTX's and they are very difficult to balance. I suspect they have a runout problem, and will now have to hassle with the tire dealer over that (lateral runout appear to be excessive on 2 of them). What tires do you have on your truck ? do they run smoothe ?
  • smgillessmgilles Posts: 252
    I have a 2001 Toy Tacoma 4x4. I run BFG AT/KO's and they ride very nice. They are even a D rated 8 ply tire. I am glad to hear that you finally got the vibration problem solved, but if it isn't one thing it is another. Hopefully you can get your tires taken care of.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    KOs are D 8-ply? No way....I got KOs on mine, and they are load class C with 3-ply sides....
  • tomh12tomh12 Posts: 240
    You might want to check at...http://www.bfgoodrichtires.com/
    Looks like to me they have "D" and "E" in some sizes. Not sure about the 8-ply. What size are you running?
    Tom
  • smgillessmgilles Posts: 252
    Yes, the sidewalls are 3 ply, but the tread is an eight ply. The general rule is:

    C range~ 6 ply
    D range~ 8 ply
    E range~ 10 ply
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    looks like you should've taken my advice on the BFG's. you simply can't beat that tire on a light truck for all around use. they last forever and ride great. mine were LT rated. maybe all of the KO's are. michelin tires anymore are suited for a car-like ride and grip. i haven't seen a michelin tire that had any kind of aggressive tread. that LTX you have is probably close to a wrangler rt/s in looks and more suited to an suv. oh well, if you never go off-road, im sure they'll work fine.

    anyone have any 2003 truck news yet? ranger, tacoma, frontier?
  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    yeah, I love my KO's on my explorer.
    Tbundy's right, what's up with the 2003 rigs?? I haven't heard much of anything, maybe that means that nothing is really changing...
  • frey44frey44 Posts: 230
    Keep in mind these Michelins were intstalled, byt the Ford dealer, to replace the original Firestones (this dealer handles Michelins. I think the Michelin quality control is pretty dismal). I think the Firestones were better tires (I kid you not). And, as far as "car like ride", I'd LOVE to have a car like ride. I'd even like to have a decent TRUCK ride ! ;-)
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    sorry to hear you evidently settled for the michelins. i do think michelin makes a quality tire, maybe the safest on the road. but mine too were paid for by ford. i just took my receipt for my bfg's and my old firestones to my dealer and a week later i had a check for the whole amount the bfg's cost. you could either replace them on your own and take your old tires in to the ford dealer, or just have the dealer do it all. i chose to have the kind of tires i wanted put on it and then get reimbursed. but some people just don't like to worry that much about stuff like tires. not saying that's you, just that some don't like the inconvenience of shopping around themselves. i wouldn't even put your michelins in the same phrase as a firestone. they are good tires, im just partial to the bfg on any 4x4. kind of like im partial to the ford SOHC 4.0 in any ranger or explorer, or any small truck for that matter. it just plain rocks!
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    but if it had one MORE cam it would rock AND roll!
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    sorry sad, but ill trade my ONE LESS CAM for the horsepower and torque advantage all SOHC 4.0's have over your (im assuming) smallish 3.4- that is both under-powered and under-torqued compared to the SOHC 4.0. i don't know how something that has less power and torque can "rock AND roll" more than something that has both more torque and power. you got me on that one bud.........
  • frey44frey44 Posts: 230
    I agree: the Ford SOHC 4.o is a nice motor for a V6. The mosts amazing engine I have ever experienced is the inline 6 alloy GMC that is in the new Trailblazer. An incredible engine. What amazed me is how smooth and powerful, over a huge range of RPM, that motor was on a test drive. Honest to God it feels like a Tundra V8 or small Ford V8.
    When Chevy releases that mid-size "Colorado" truck in 2003, they will have trouble making enough to meet demand. That motor will sell trucks !! I am not putting down Ford. Rumor is, they might be coming out with a "little diesel" for the F 150. that would also be a hot seller. I also suspect the next Ranger will be closer to the size of a Dakota. I regret buying a Ranger, but that is still not a diss on Ford; I simply got a "lemon". Lemons can be had with any brand, of course. Thanks for ideas on tires. I am listening. I have had great luck with Michelins on my Honda Civics over the years; they will run 70 or 80 thousand miles on those cars, and usually will run without shaking. But, the truck LTX's are literally unable to be balanced...(CORRECTION...they are not ROUND or laterally true).
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    but I have heard that the 260 hp rating that the trailblazer gets is a crock. I don't know though. What I do know is that they don't last six months. Once again, GM has really screwed up on quality issues, and they want to expand this motor to more vehicles. LOOK OUT! When will some people see that initial quality isn't what really matters?

    Tbunder--> I would really like to drive a Ranger with that engine. I could never complain about more power, but I don't know if I could make a switch from such a silky smooth power plant/tranny combo. Do you feel differently on that point after having driven a Taco. I drive my dads brand new silverado, and then step into my truck - its like driving a benz, honestly. Is the 4.0 known as a pretty smooth engine, I just have never heard it labeled as such.
    And while things are slow here I'd like to say for the record that I actually like Rangers a good bit, and would consider buying one should I need a truck. My main reason for being here is to defend Tacomas against the uninformed ones who see them as nothing more than weak rice burners. They are so much more. So no hard feelings no matter what has taken place.
  • frey44frey44 Posts: 230
    You'd buy a Ranger instead of a Taco ? Wow. I'd be careful before doing that. Rangers cost 3 or 4 grand less so the new owner can spend 2 years trouble shooting the truck himself. ;-)
    Then, you'll get whacked again on depreciation: with a capital D. Check the Blue Book prices on Rangers that are, say, 3 or 4 years old (relative to their new prices). Do the same for the Taco: case closed. Also, cruise you truck dealers and check the prices on used Rangers vs. used Tacos (with similar age and miles). Case closed again. I still think that the new Chevy inline is a great engine; the new Colorado will sell out. (I also like the old 4.0 pushrod engine in my Ranger that sounds like it has marbles rolling around in the oil pan !) Wait and see if I am not right about the Chevy [I wouldn't buy one...I am done with American made trucks..but a lot of other guys will !]. If I am wrong, you are welcome to ridicule me on this comment.
    :-) Later, dude.
    ;-)
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    I have always loved chevy trucks. Even after I constantly talk about longevity and quality being so important, I still like Chevies a whole lot. Its just in my blood maybe. In fact, my dad keeps saying that I will have to trade trucks with him when I get out of college, and I kinda have mixed feelings. He has an '02 z71. If I could have any truck out there, it would be a new Chevy HD with the Duramax, as unreliable as they are reported to be. But that would mean that money wasn't too much of an object and I could replace it in 4 years when it was worn out. You are probably right about the new Colorados, I just think its kinda of stupid the way the majority of car buyers seem to act sometimes.
  • frey44frey44 Posts: 230
    My next truck will be a Tundra. Can't wait ! I have learned lessons about quality control. I think the Yankees know how to design nice vehicles; they just seem to fall short on assembling them. i don't know if that is the workers fault, the prduction protocols used, the robotics, or all of the above. I just know after reading the posts about engine knock and shakes with Chevy trucks, trannies with the Dodges, and varies body sheetmetal cracks and head gasket problems with F 150's, and my own travils with my Ranger, I am done with Yankee trucks. However, one could argue that the Tundra is essentially an "American" truck now anyways, as are Nissans and Hondas. I enjoy reading your posts; you seem a little less emotional, and a little more objective, than some of the other cats on here.
    Peace, bro.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    I have said here b4 that I don't like Tundras, but I was thinking just a couple of days ago that it would probably the perfect truck for me right now. I mean, it has the sportiest "full size" truck engine on the planet, which I love. It is almost full size but not too big, which I also love. Its alot roomier than the compacts. I just don't know - I mean I don't need a really heavy duty truck right now, but I have seen them squat very badly under barely marginal loads. And that would really bug me. I would almost certainly replace the rear leaves. Still a very, very nice truck - and if Yota would run the rebates like Chevy and Ford do, you could find one very cheap. My dad got his $32k Z71 for about $22k with just over $2k worth of trade in on his old truck. Not bad. Good luck to you man. Im sure you'll love it. Any time frame on when you might be making a purchase?
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    Where've ya been man? You never gave a report on how the takeover went. Im sure it was pretty sorry since and I quote scape "Tacomas can't rock crawl, LOL." Gimme a break. I heard of one Texas guy who had some damage - that wasn't you was it? Wish I could have ridden up with someone, I gotta feeling that the MS chapter wasn't represented very well, hehe. You need to jump in here and liven things up a bit bud!
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    all trucks can be lemons. probably the reason ford or domestics have more is because of the production margin they have over toyota. it is HUGE! the more stuff you make, the more problems you'll have. that's the reason lexus kicks [non-permissible content removed] on the luxury side. they don't make near the number that lincoln of cadillac do. i do love those lexus' though. an IS300 would be perfect. but i may settle for a new liberty sport.

    as far as full-size trucks go right now, it's hard to beat the new ford FX4 F150. it is downright cool and can be had pretty cheap with rebates and such. along with a still available manual t/c and the torquey 5.4 engine along with the super-crew option, it wins in my book. tundra's just look wimpy, and that's my god's honest truth. small tires and wheels, i love the front end look though. the engine ive heard is good too.

    SOHC 4.0- sad, yes, this engine is smooth. mash it at about 60 mph, and it honestly feels like a turbo just kicked in. it runs hard and revs eaglerly. the older ones are iffy with the camshaft stuff, but ford is still warrantying them up to 75K, so they'll fix them if they're problematic. and you will know when they are, they make a nice little rattle after warmed up and re-started. later

    ps. keep your pre-runner right now, its a nice truck. the trd pkg. is awesome looking.
  • scape2scape2 Posts: 4,124
    if anything new.. Nope the Toyota crowd is still preaching the reliability garbage that I kept hearing back in 1998 when I bought my Ranger. I never stopped hearing... "your Ranger will fall apart" "The Ranger is garbage" "The Ranger cannot offroad"... Yada, Yada, Yada.... Well, my Ranger that was supposed to fall apart and breakdown hasn't.. it now has almost 72,000 miles on it. Miles spent on MT Hood, in the Tillamook National Forest, in Three Sisters/Bend area, MT St Helens. Your arguemnent of Toyota is just plain better because it has the Toyota name on it doesn't fly with me.. I spent at least 3K less for a like optioned Ranger in 1998.... And am sure glad I did..
    I would sure love to see a Tacoma rock climb.. In all my years I have yet to see a truck with its long wheelbase rock climb.. You Toyota boys take it way too far..
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    I'll try and get some pics up for ya. Just b/c you don't have a locker in your long wheelbase truck doesn't mean all long wheelbase vehicles can't crawl. I might even dig up the pic of the SAS'ed Ranger - an awesome truck.

    How about this -- we'll make a little bet. I bet you I can come up with more tacoma rock crawling pics in the next 24 hours than you can find of Rangers crawling. If I win you owe me a set of BF goodies. Ready - GO! L8r man.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/view?p=999&gid=962771&uid=484006&members=1

    You better hurry scape - Im steppin up to 32"s this time and they ain't gonna be cheap. LOL
  • Hey everyone I was wondering if someone could answer this question for me... I own a 2000 Ranger Trailhead edition, it came from the factory with a 3 inch lift and bigger tires, made to look like a 4x4 without actually being one. Well the lifted look has grown old to me and I want to take the lift off so I can lower the truck using an airbag suspension system. What my question is is what type of lift is on the truck? Will I have to replace a bunch of suspension parts to return the truck to stock height, or is it only a matter of removing a few blocks? Thanks for you help!
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    but are you sure that there is actually a "lift" on it or does it just have longer suspension components that make it sit higher. It may just have a body lift that is simple to take out, but if it just has longer/taller suspension components, you are probably looking at more $$$. Some of the Ford guys will chime in here sometime, although it has been fairly slow lately.
  • tbundertbunder Posts: 580
    please, please don't lower a cool truck like the trailhead. the trailhead is a very very rare truck. and no, it doesn't have any type of lift on it at all. it's just ranger 4x4 suspension- with torsion bars, so it will be very hard to bring down anyways. spare the truck from your bad judgment and trade it in on a regular 4x2 ranger. that's almost as bad as yanking the 4.6 out of a mustang gt and putting in the optional V6. yuk!
  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    but I have to agree with tbunder here. lowering a truck is just plain wrong. :)
This discussion has been closed.