Howdy, Stranger!

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

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Ford Ranger vs Toyota Tacoma



  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Tacoma looks like a truck that was designed 8 years wonder. Kind of hard to compare a newly redesigned truck to an old design.

    I wish you would stop mentioning the "trac-loc rear and 13" LLL", because it sounds really sad when I have a locker and 15" try to make it sound special, and it isn't. You can say that the difference is all tires, but it isn't. And if it is, you can't put 31s on anyway without lifting it.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    i picked up some '03 brochures at the dealer the other day. tonight i was just looking at them and noticed a few numbers i really couldn't believe.

    running ground clearance:
    Liberty 4x4- 8.9
    Wrangler- 8.8
    also, remember that these are lowered liberty's. add another 3/4 to an inch on pre-lowered ones. (i got one)

    approach/departure angles:
    Liberty- 36/31.5 degrees
    Wrangler- 41.8/31.3 degrees

    breakover angles:
    Liberty- 21.8 degrees
    Wrangler- 22.3 degrees

    track- front/rear
    Liberty- 60/59.7
    Wrangler- 57.6/57.8

    transfer case:
    Liberty- NV231
    Wrangler (non rubicon)- NV231

    what does all this mean? well, imo, it means that the liberty has a little wrangler blood in it. i didn't know they both shared the same t/c. also, interesting that the liberty has more ground clearance.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    I have been curious but have never heard you speak much of 3/4 ton trucks so I didn't include that in my last post. Its gonna be a 6.0L, right? V8 still or did they go to an I6? I bet it will be hard for some to give up that old 525 ft-lb beast of an engine they use now. But yeah, I like lots of things about every thing on the road. I just could never buy a Mopar vehicle. They seem as cheaply made to me as Tacomas obviously do to you.The mopar vehicles I have dealt with personally not only felt cheap - everything broke. Though, the Tacoma interior may be old. Not one thing inside has broken after over 2 years of rude friends. If my last post "hurt" as you said and you were being serious, I messed up and the true point was not fulfilled.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    525 lb/ft of torque is a drop in the bucket for the new 6.0 V8 diesel in the new '03 super-duty's. the new one spouts out 560 lb/ft of torque at an incredible 2000 rpms, and 325 horsepower at 3300 rpms.

    like i said earlier, go sit in a liberty, drive one, or just look at one close. slam the doors, check out the door mounts. the thing is thick, and the door mounts are huge. especially the one in back. it must be 1/4 inch back there. trust me, i am very anal about my vehicle selection, and the jeep is not a cheaply built vehicle. everything was thought out very cleverly on the liberty. it does what it was supposed to do. provide good on-road driveability, while providing off-road performance that will play with the best of them.

    the cool thing about the new sd diesel, is the new 5-spd auto tranny. it senses when the brakes are applied and immediately downshifts to help slow the vehicle. read the article on it's pretty thorough.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    I went and saw a little about the new diesels and saw that NO ONE will care about giving up the 525 ft-lb beast. Hehe. Oh well. Know of any place I can read about the actual engine and whats new about it that allowed it to be so much smaller yet so much stronger. I am pretty interested in this kind of stuff. Big trucks are the best!
  • This may be of interest to you

    As a sidenote, I would like to add that though I'm not a fan of "American" compact trucks, I think that Ford makes, bar-none, the best full size truck out there but only in diesel trim and manual transmission. Their gassers (and everybody else's) don't impress me much.

    I've been around enough horse trailers and rodeos in my lifetime to know what people who do serious towing and hauling drive, and they drive powerstrokes. I estimate I see 8 powerstrokes towing horsetrailers and backhoes (20,000lbs and up) for every Chevy or Dodge. And that's not coincidental. It's nice to see Ford hasn't compromised its trucks like Chevy has and still uses a solid front axle.

    Because I'm a traditionalist and would rather buy something with an established and proven design, I would be skeptical about buying the new 6.0 powerstroke. Let them work out the bugs first. Besides, with the amount of torque we're talking about with these engines, do you think you'll ever pull anything heavy enough to appreciate the new engine's extra 35 lb/ft?

  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    that new engine probably needs a couple of years to work out the kinks (IMO), just like everything no matter what the make. But I do agree that Ford makes great 3/4 tons, Chevy could give em a run if they had not given up the solid axle - that really made me mad. Oh well.
  • luca1luca1 Posts: 29
    why is this discussion continuing. It seems that this has nothing to do with the Liberty and some of the participants are more interested discussing pick-ups. No flame, just a question.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    but that's just me. i like to try new things.

    i don't believe in the theory of "working out the kinks" in a new anything. if you guys really knew all of the testing and prototyping that goes on before a vehicle is released for sale, i don't think you'd have that theory anymore (the liberty had been prototyped in some form or another since back in '97). sure, when the general public buys thousands, it's different than testing because everyone does different things to their vehicles. but an engine can only run or not. i haven't had one problem with my liberty aside from a part that im sure has been used in dc vehicles for years. and the engine is smooth as butter and runs harder than my ranger's SOHC.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    do you not consider the ford super-duty a pickup? that's what we're talking about at the moment.

    i stop talking about the liberty when everyone else does. i had to defend it to others who don't know jack about it and stereotype it as a ford escap/hyundai santa fe/rav4 type of vehicle. it isn't. not by a long shot. it has the same transfer case as the wrangler comes with, and has better running ground clearance than wrangler, has better departure angles than wrangler, better breakover angles than wrangler (pre-lowered '02 liberty's), and only takes two feet more to turn in a circle. not to mention it shares dana axles in the rear with the wrangler (non rubicon- it has 44's all around) and has a ifs dana 30 up front. how many escapes or rav4's or even tacomas do you know of with dana axles?
  • "i had to defend it (Liberty) to others who don't know jack about it and stereotype it..."

    Believe you me, I know exactly how you feel!
  • luca1luca1 Posts: 29
    I have a Liberty, and believe me, I always hear how it's not a real Jeep. I guess I was just curious as to why pick-ups were being compared to the Liberty. They are totally different vehicles except I guess they are all trucks. I'll just stay with the other Liberty discussions.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    hehe, don't let us scare you off. we all love 4x4's around here. i use to have a ranger 4x4 (3 in all- 2 reg. cabs), and adamently follow the tacoma and ranger and S10 ZR2's (2 of those- one a reg. cab). i love them all. i just like debating these toyota guys over my vehicle choices. i like to point out things that the toyota guys don't know about. the tacoma is an awesome truck, but without some competitive debate, life is a drag. due to a growing family, i had to get a different vehicle. i wanted something relatively cheap, but which still offered 4x4ability. yeah, i could've bought an explorer (not a new irs one), but figured for the price of a used explorer i could have a new liberty sport with more 4x4 hardware than any explorer can ever dream about. the manual t/c being the big thing as the explorer isn't horribly bad off-road (here they come on that comment).

    pluto- hehe.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    My thoughts about first year vehicles are really mimics of the things I have always heard about things. No real experience to speak of except my moms Chrysler car. Still runs good but the interior is long past "still together." Some companies seem to have trouble though. Think about the trailblazer, escape, and maybe some Yotas, I just don't know of em. What's the hurt in waiting a year if you have any doubts?

    And I love this one--> "i stop talking about the liberty when everyone else does." I guess you are right! Hehe.

    Has anyone seen the specs on the new Colorado - the Ranger and Tacoma have nothing to worry about. I was expecting alot more -- and its gonna be stepped up to midsize??? Good luck.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    the colorado is going to have the 275 horse I-6 standard i assume. and it going mid-size is what the competition will be doing too i assume. the new ranger is supposed to be bigger too. people just don't want smaller trucks anymore. this is backed up by the fact that the small truck segment is way down on sales. also, i read that there will be a new ZR2 pkg for the colorado. (what a stupid name for a truck).

    liberty just surpassed escape as #1 seller in its market. just fyi.
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,870
    quote- this is backed up by the fact that the small truck segment is way down on sales.

    Perhaps if they would redesign the small trucks they would sell more. Toyota and Nissan are both selling well. When was the S10 last redesigned? 1994? Ranger? Can't even remember.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    if you really want to look at it, the ranger is still outselling everything. am i not correct? i will make that statement without even looking at any facts or stats.

    and the S10 was refreshed in '98 with a new front end. each year, there have been minor improvements. and i will also blanket that the S10 is second in sales.

    the ranger got re-designed in '98 with SLA suspension and a larger cab. in '01 it was again re-designed a little with an all new front end, new braking system, larger engine, etc. also in '98, it got a larger frame from front to middle of truck. it is fully boxed.

    in comparison, the frontier design got refreshed (plastic all over) in '01, but same as the '98 totally new design.
    the tacoma was new in '95, it hasn't changed at all except for front end treatment.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    But Rangers' advantage is slowly disappearing. Remember, you used to say "Ranger outsells Tacoma by hundreds of thousands"...well, looks like Tacoma outsold Ranger in September. Maybe in good times Ranger was outselling Tacoma, but when economy hit the bottom, look at what happened. Ford makes headlines talking about "restructuring", Toyota makes headlines making money.
    S10 maybe second in sales now, but not by much. Next month Tacoma could be in second place, the way S10 is selling.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    What We Know: This replacement for the aged S-10 compact pickup will have a larger overall size and a new range of engines derived from the 4.2-liter in-line six-cylinder currently sold in the TrailBlazer SUV. The base engine will be a 2.8-liter in-line four-cylinder that is expected to generate 170 hp at 5,600rpm and 175 lb-ft of torque at 3,200 rpm. A larger 3.5-liter in-line five-cylinder is projected to churn out a healthy 215 hp at 5,600 rpm and 225 lb-ft of torque at 2,800 rpm. Both engines are all aluminum and feature advanced technology like dual overhead camshafts and four valves per cylinder for maximum power and effciency. Buyers will be able to choose between either a four-speed automatic or a five-speed manual depending on application. We also expect the Colorado to offer standard, extended, and crew cab bodystyles and an interior that draws heavily from the General Motors corporate parts bin.

    This is from the S-10 future vehicles page here at Edmunds.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    but do you really think gm will come out with an all new larger "midsized" truck with only 215 horses? when it already has the I-6 sitting there? speculation aside, i do not think that 215 horses will be the most powerful colorado engine. i could care, because i know the new ranger will have some sort of V8. unlike the new tacoma, which will still settle for the new 4.0 V6. it may make more power than the new ford V8, but i guarantee that the new V8 ranger (when it gets here) gets will make more torque, which is really the important thing around here.

    scorp- it's still third hat in sales. it will never be #1. or #2. take that to the bank.
  • Good for Tacoma! It is #1 in compact sales this month. Still alot of catching up to do to win #1 for the year...
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    but this year I wouldn't be surprised if Taco hit #2 in compact sales the way S10 is selling. It might actually be #2 already if you use September data and do some math. Of course, it's speculatory, but given the sales volume this year, highly likely.

    The new Ranger may have a V8, but lets was first supposed to come out in 2003? Then 2004? Now it is pushed back to 2005? With all the headlines about "restructuring" in Ford...who knows.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Doesn't matter, it'll make it to #1 eventually. What matters is that before tbunder used to say "Ranger outsells Tacoma by hundreds of thousands", and now it's down to "tens of thousands". Besides, if it makes #2, that's quite an accomplishment for a model that's been on the market for 8 years only.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    but for like the past three years people have been saying that about it getting the I-6. If it was, don't you think Chevy would be bragging about it too. Heck, they were bragging about the I-6 for two years before the Trailblazer came out. I could be wrong, though. Its about time. Hehe.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    is that the avalanche is on the heels of the beloved tundra. not to mention it is up over 200% in sales over last year. now with a new avalanche coming out in '03 with none of that body claddding, it will sell even better. plus, it isn't as bad to look at it. looks like a normal truck. the days of hundreds of thousands over the tacoma are done simply because people aren't buying small trucks like they used to. ford isn't selling as many as they used to, therefore they aren't building as many. the whole market is soft. the ram is very impressive however in sales.

    sad- i dont know nor do i care. i won't buy a new colorado. it will be a new ranger i assume. as i expect the new one to kick [non-permissible content removed] whenever it comes out. there's always something new and better around the bend. no matter when or what you buy.
  • Yes the Tacoma sold more trucks in September 02, according to

    However for the Year of 2002, Ranger is still over 181,000 vs Tacoma's 117,000.

    But Yes, again, the Tacoma did sell 618 more trucks in September...

    See what I see?
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    If people aren't buying small trucks like they used to, why aren't we seeing that behavior with Tacoma?

    Avalanche vs Tundra: who cares?
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Like I said, Tacoma will get to #1 eventually, if they choose to. It's not like Toyota is making 200,000 Tacomas a year and can't sell them. They are going rather well without any rebates and 0% financing.
    Ranger still sells more, but it is no longer the "hundreds of thousands" more units. I'll be laughing when Tacoma tops S10 in sales for this year. Tbunder said to take it to the bank that it would not. We all know how much his "facts" are worth.
  • eagle63eagle63 Posts: 599
    I would like to see some data showing that compact truck sales have significantly dropped off. (adjusted for the fact that all vehicle sales are down due to the economy) I'm skeptical.
This discussion has been closed.