Howdy, Stranger!

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





Ford Ranger AND Toyota Tacoma AND others

135

Comments

  • oregonboyoregonboy Posts: 1,653
    Don't know if they make them any more, but I believe that the Tacoma S-Runner came with a limited slip.

    -james
  • rlafaverrlafaver Posts: 70
    They still make it, though I don't know if it is still called S-runner. It is a 2wd non-Pre with a V6 and manual 5 speed. It comes with 16" alloy wheels, but the specs don't show it having limited slip.
    It doesn't have the payload of the 4-cyl xtracab non-Pre, but control is probably pretty good with those low profile tires.
  • oregonboyoregonboy Posts: 1,653
    I imagine the reduced payload is due to the special (lowered) suspension. It also comes with F&R swaybars.

    -james
  • rlafaverrlafaver Posts: 70
    A lot of the problem is the tires. they are 235-55-16, which has a lower payload rating than the standard 205-75-15. I don't know why they use the 55 profile because a 235-60-16 is the same rolling circumference as the standard tires and has a higher payload rating. I have looked at getting some Borbet 16" rims, but if I do I will use the 60 profile tires.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Toyota just got 2nd best in vehicle dependability study (after Porsche) for 2003 by JD Powers.
    Ford was......I got tired of reading down the list :)
    They also scored Tacoma the best in compact pickup.

    F-150 got the best in fullsize, though, beating Tundra.
  • But scorp, at least the Ranger didn't receive the lowest rollover rating... :)
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    so they haven't tested it :)
  • rlafaverrlafaver Posts: 70
    They didn't ask me. I think that once you have complained to Boss Hogg Toyota they drop you from the surveys. Makes for a better score, I guess.
  • ebbgreatdaneebbgreatdane Posts: 278
    Anyone installed the RevTek lift for their Taco?

    What shocks did you go with?

    btw - after 2+ years it's nice to be back. Good thing I remembered my password.

    : /

    jp
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    just nice to see someone who knows how to spell "receive"- thats all.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    Is that the spacer lift? If so, you can go with stock struts upfront, and put something like Rancho 5000 (which a lot of people find stiff), ES3000 (same thing as RS5K) or RS9K, which are adjustable. Really depends on your budget.
  • plutoniousplutonious Posts: 799
    The other night I was watching a program on one of the educational channels and the new Ford F-150 was featured. I forgot how many improvements Ford made to the new design, but one of the improvements mentioned was the placement of the rear shock absorbers. They were moved towards the ends of the axle because Ford claims this arrangement is more effective than the old design with the shocks closer to the pumpkin.

    Check it out if you don't believe me. Just curious as to what your thoughts might be...

    Ouch!!!
  • Ford did a great job with the redesign. Looks like an awesome truck to me.

    unless you were trying to stir up old arguments where you were bashing the Ranger for shock mounts that hung below the axle. You called it a serious flaw, and the rest of us didn't care just like the door lock knobs that recessed into the door panel.

    Nice to have you back Pluto, but let's not traverse down the old beaten path. If you play nice with others, we may actually have this topic survive, otherwise you will have us shut down again.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Posts: 257
    actually, the whole truck is like 4 inches wider. it makes better sense to do this now. what's your point? yeah i know tacoma has shocks outward. are you saying ford is engineering trucks now with a tacoma in one eye and a mouse in the other? ford could have built the new f150 with a mono-shock rear-end, and it would still end up being the world's best selling brand.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    it would still be the worlds best selling brand. But don't you find something wrong with that??? I sure do. You just disproved your "Ranger must be better cuz there are more sold theory." Don't get me wrong, the new F-150 might be my next vehicle, I love em. But you can bet your bottom dollar Im gonna hate having it just cuz its one of about 500000000000000000000. Not trying to stir something up, your last sentence just seemed a little questionable as far as bragging of Ford.??? You kinda made them sound alot like McDonalds and Sams Choice soft drinks.
  • As discussed before, how can anything be best because it is the best selling? That is reversing cause and effect. The correct order would be "Ford makes great trucks, thus they are the best selling."

    It'll always sound wrong or be confusing, if stated the other way around.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    is saying that Ford makes great trucks despite the fact that they *use a mono-shock setup*. That is saying NOTHING BUT "Fords are best selling, thus they make great trucks." That was my one and only point.

    Its all pointless now.

    I was just callin his bluff on what I assume to be a joke or mistaken finger motion. You guys have a good evening.
  • nra1871nra1871 Posts: 26
    Did I read correctly that the new F150 has no manual transmisssion option at all?
  • plutoniousplutonious Posts: 799
    midnight_caballo:

    "you were bashing the Ranger for shock mounts that hung below the axle. You called it a serious flaw, and the rest of us didn't care"

    >>Anybody who four-wheels would certainly care. But you readily admit you don't off-road. Just because you don't, you shouldn't assume nobody else offroads either and wouldn't care.

    In other words, don't speak for others.

    Besides, we're not discussing shocks that hang below the axle. We're discussing the placement of the shock itself. Nice little diversion there...

    According to my theory, placing the shock absorbers closer to the axle ends (a la Toyota) was more effective than placing them towards the axle center (a la Ford). You vehemently disagreed. Now your beloved Ford has just made this improvement to their new F-150, saying this arrangement is more effective. How can you explain that?

    I simply brought this up because, being interested in automotive technology like myself, I thought you would find it interesting (especially since it directly relates to something we discussed in depth earlier).

    Plus, I just wanted to see if you could admit you were wrong. Nope....

    *tbundy*:

    "the whole truck is like 4 inches wider. it makes better sense to do this now. "

    >>Oh, so what you're saying is Ford has to add 4 inches to a full-size truck to accomplish what Toyota did with a compact truck?

    That's what I thought, too.
  • Let's get a hand count on those who care about shock placement on the F-150 and if I ever disagreed with Pluto. Who has the official scoreboard?

    Honestly I do not recall anything but you going on and on about the shock absorbers mounting points that hang below the axles. I don't recall my "vehement disagreement" with shocks placed further outwards from the differential. Maybe I did, but I did not come back after a several month haitus from edmunds to bring up old topics. Even so, who cares? I brought back this topic for all the regulars to join in a discussion about their trucks. Not to tally up points on old and pointless debates.

    Do you try to add something beneficial to this conversation, or are you just trying to proove something?
  • You're right. From what I have seen, no manual in the 2004 F-150. They do have 2 different 4 speed automatics, however.
  • sc0rpi0sc0rpi0 Posts: 897
    I just hope Toyota doesn't wuss out and phase out manual transmissions from their trucks. They did it with the DoubleCab Taco, though.

    I always find it ironic when I see a parked hotrod, but when I look inside, I see auto tranny.
  • stevekstevek Posts: 362
    I own a Ranger, however if you add the Chevy and GMC trucks together Ford may not have the claim of best selling trucks. GM reports them as a separate line, although they are not
  • rlafaverrlafaver Posts: 70
    Unless a person worships a particular manufacturer, I don't think it matters. The only one I care about is the one I own, and the only one that shapes my opinion is the one I own.
    Deals on Fords are far, far better than deals on Toyotas. There are a lot more Fords to choose from on the lots. Fords have a far wider range of options and colors available on "in-stock" vehicles. People generally buy from stock, so is there any wonder Ford sells more? (a lot more)
    As for which is better, I don't know. I own a Tacoma, and there are a few things about it I really don't like, but if it lasts as long as everyone claims I will be happy. It now sports Recaro seats because the human back isn't made correctly for a Toyota seat. On the other hand, it's a 4 banger and it runs like a scalded ape. It handles like a dream. On balance, I like it so far, but I don't recommend it to people who ask.
    I think the Ranger is probably a better deal for the money. But no matter which you chose, if you get a bad one you'll cry like a bambino.
  • tadaohtadaoh Posts: 2
    Good evening, I came to this board in search of information on the new Honda Truck that is supposed to be out soon. Anybody know of it? I am interested in picking up a small reliable truck, and I am very happy with my current Accord.

    Also, I've noticed some bickering and silly statements. What is up with this?

    "Anybody who four-wheels would certainly care. But you readily admit you don't off-road. Just because you don't, you shouldn't assume nobody else offroads either and wouldn't care."

    I don't believe any off roading Ranger owners have much problems with their rear shocks. Otherwise you would see them complain.

    "In other words, don't speak for others."

    One could say the same thing to you.

    "According to my theory, placing the shock absorbers closer to the axle ends (a la Toyota) was more effective"

    Your theory? What are you an engineer that came up with the whole idea?

    "I simply brought this up because, being interested in automotive technology like myself, I thought you would find it interesting (especially since it directly relates to something we discussed in depth earlier).

    Plus, I just wanted to see if you could admit you were wrong. Nope...."

    You realized you just contradicted yourself.

    "Oh, so what you're saying is Ford has to add 4 inches to a full-size truck to accomplish what Toyota did with a compact truck?

    That's what I thought, too."

    Please explain what you mean, I don't see your point or correlation between four inches and a Toyota. I think he just stated the new Ford truck is 4 inches wider, and then somehow it is because Ford is copying Toyota? I'm confused. You sound like a politician or goverment employee.

    "Unless a person worships a particular manufacturer, I don't think it matters. The only one I care about is the one I own, and the only one that shapes my opinion is the one I own."

    I find these words probably the truest ones yet spoken in these messages.

    "I always find it ironic when I see a parked hotrod, but when I look inside, I see auto tranny."

    What is wrong with that? Automatic transmission technology, (especially sports shift auto's) are getting better each year. There is less power loss in manual transmissions, but that is a small fraction. What I would like to see is a paddle shifter behind the wheel, F1 style.
  • saddaddysaddaddy Posts: 566
    You are wanting a Honda (emphasis on the manufacturer) pickup and just jump right into this convo about two very capable trucks and start telling people how to act. If you want help, my advice is to not try to be such a mommy figure. You proved in some of your statements that you could use as much truck knowledge as you can get (excuse this blunt truth). No one minds helping you but come on, this stuff is not meant to be a political debate, we are all just having a little fun, lighten up a little. Ok, ok, lighten up ALOT.
  • tadaoh, if only you knew how close you are!

    Also, here are some links that may help you on your quest for information:
    http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/2005/honda/preview.html
    http://www.esquirehonda.com/pdfs/hondatruck.pdf
  • rlafaverrlafaver Posts: 70
    I had very bad luck with Honda cars, two of them, so I can't get exited about a Honda truck. But I'm sure it will be a good one. On the other hand, if you are looking for reliability, I think there are several engines around that can serve you well. The Toyota 4 cylinder engine is supposed to be bulletproof, and the way mine has performed so far I can't argue the point. It feels good. I got 230K miles out of a Chevy V6, and the engine was still running like new, but the rest of it was ready for the bone heap.
    As for a Honda, you might want to wait until you can sit in that bad boy and get a price quote before you get truck fever. Tacomas have been around for a while, so they have to get consideration. But both are Japanese designs, so both qualify you to be a genuine riceneck. The Chevy or Ford gets you in the redneck club, which is pretty much the same thing.
    What you might want to do is decide which way you wish to come down on the internet. I've noticed different styles from the Ford and Toyota guys in this string, so you can see which team you want to be on before you buy. Both teams have enforcers and both have finesse guys, but the attitude is totally different. I can't see how Honda and Toyota guys could have a lively conversation. I mean, what are they going to say?
This discussion has been closed.