im not going to pretend that the ranger is as reliable as the tacoma BUT.. it is NO WHERE near as bad as spoog likes to make it.. he like to go off of raw data.. raw data means NOTHING.. he would like everyone to think that tsb's, defect investigations, and other things have Nothing to do with the number of vehicles made.....
simple statistics say that more on the road ='s more possible problems...
anyways.. spoog would also like to believe that the Tacoam is in a League by itself... its not
everyone in this room has an oppinion and they think thier truck is best (myself included) but the reality is they are both at the top of thier Class and that is why we all fight about it. if either was soo inferior this topic would not exist.. i hope they dont freeze the discussion, but if they do i have said my peace... have fun everyone
"As has been said over and over again, the 4wheeler article Compared a NON off road equiped ranger"
THere is NO SUCH thing as an offroad equipped stock Ranger. SHould we blame Toyota for Fords lack of a real offroad suspension or offroad features? Of course not.
Let me put this so you understand it: THERE IS NO OFFROAD EQUIPPED STOCK RANGER. The RANGERS supsension in all forms is sacrificed for the HIGHWAY.
"2nd... 4wheeler magazine IS Full of TACOMA ads (including the back cover.. most expensive space) and very few ranger ads.. "
lol!
Hey Scotss.....the farmer called, he wants you to stop grasping all his straws.
"Now a Truly UNBIASED evaluation (consumer Reports)"
Its too bad this "evaluation" doesn't even test the vehicles offroad, and this "evaluation" comments on things like how nice the seat folds so pappy can put his ceramic fish carvings behind the seat nicely. Consumer reports is the mag with the red and black dots, right? I suggest you take a look at those little dots from 89-99 in Consumer reports.
4wheeler actualy takes the vehicles apart PIECE by PIECE and puts the parts under heavy freezing and heating, puts them through serious offroad beatings and highway riding, and a rigorous course at the track.
Once again, we are talking about TRUCKS here, real 4x4 trucks, not trips to Wal Mart.
"Picked the ranger as the best and the tacoma the WORST of the small trucks.. that is an UNBIASED OPPINION..."
Umm...So Consumer Reports likes the Rangers cheap price. Thats good, because that is one of the Rangers pro's.
Stepdown off your soap box and listen carefully. I do not disagree with your crashtest site, as i have stated time and time again. Nor do i think that the 4x4 model will be a million times better than the 4x2 in the same test. All i said was it was a strating point for those who are concerned about safety, but i do think if we are going to compare hard facts that we should really compare results from crashing a 4x4 ranger and a 4x4 Tacoma. Deep down inside I do think even you can comprehend this. A simple yes or no will do!
All + Our Host
If our host would like to settle this once and for all, I do think that our host should talk to edmunds about testing a fully loaded Ranger XLT Xcab w off road pack and a fully Loaded Tacoma XCab TRD Limited. If edmunds can put them head to head in a test that is not about opininons , but about testing abilities and shows methods and numbers we could solve this once and for all.
I do think it is safe to say that if you freeze this topic we'll just start a new one or hijack another one. As childish as this Conf can get sometimes, it has to be the most active, and has the most info about it's sunject than any other Conf i have read on this site.
Meredith if your are serious about how much this board bothers you, then do ask edmunds to do the test...
Toyota has consistently over the years have a higher resale value then the big 3 automakers. Reliability and quality are not marketing slogans but a real tangible product.
Toyota TAcoma's sell for more than Rangers do, option for option. This is no secret, even Edmunds posted this in their review of the Tacoma. A TRD Tacoma you all speak so highly of sells for upwards of 23K+. A lot of money for options most people will use maybe 3% of their driving time. Enjoy the sticker! I don't think a Ford Ranger exists that is that expensive. Gee, all this sounds familiar. This topic is old, same things over and over again. FACT:: The Ranger continues to outsell the Tacoma 3 to 1. This means for EVERY Tacoma sold 3 Rangers are sold. Why is this? If the Tacoma is so superior, so much better after 7 years of production don't you think this is enough time to reverse the huge lopsided sales margin? And I am going to here, "sales don't matter" bull.... sales make MONEY. The consumer rules! We have had 3 Ranger vs TAcoma rooms. In the first room I listed several links, reviews, data sites over and over again, so many times I got tired of continually posting them for nothing! Maybe it is time to close this topic for a while Meredith.
Vince i only remember you posting the carpoint link over and over again, not a bunch of links over and over again.
Ranger outsells Tacoma. Big Deal! This proves only that it outsold the Tacoma and that more people weighed out their criteria list and had the Ranger as their final choice. How many items are in our daily lives that are the top sellers in their fields, and are not the best in their field. McDonald's sells more Big Macs then Burger King sells Whoppers. Does this make the Big Mac better? Vince what the #'s show is that the Ranger fit more peoples criteria making it the best overall choice for most, or the best buy in it's class because the more they sell the cheaper it gets. None of these make the ranger the better truck. It is all subjective. There is no point arguing which is better overall. We will never win this argument. What we can do is compare certain elements of the two vehicles in hope that we will futher educate ourselves and others who happen to read this...
Do you think that better gearing, heavy-duty shocks, and bigger wheels/tires have no effect on how a vehicle would perform on-road or off-road?
Why do you keep bringing up this old, biased article and these ridiculous, 10,000pg TSB listings. It's time to look beyond the numbers.
Hey spoog, that farmer of yours called. He said thanks for shoveling all of that BS onto this message board. It really cleared up his barn. Now, we can all get a better grasp on that straw.
Even if every magazine, web-site, or anybody else performed a head-to-head test on the Ranger vs. Tacoma, there will never be a "winner."
It all ends up being subjective. Some people will like one more than the other and vice versa. If there was a "better" truck, we'd all buy that one. Then, there'd be nothing interesting like this board/forum. (
My bad on the 93 mazda reliability test. Do they say whether it was a '93 or '94 model tested. The model year usually starts well before the actual calendar year itself. A buddy of mine purchased a 2001 Explorer Sport Trac a couple of weeks ago. Hmmmm....
Spoog, that was the absolute 1st time that you've ever admitted that you were wrong (about the rpm thing). Wow! Will wonders never cease? Are you growing wiser in your old age?
no malice or harm intended in my posts, only lighthearted ribbing.
By the way, is that supercharger on your truck eaton-roots or centrifugal??? Just wondering... I don't believe it said one way or the other on the TRD website.
"Even if every magazine, web-site, or anybody else performed a head-to-head test on the Ranger vs. Tacoma, there will never be a "winner."
It all ends up being subjective. Some people will like one more than the other and vice versa. If there was a "better" truck, we'd all buy that one. Then, there'd be nothing "
This is where you are wrong Cthompson. There can be a winner. That can be proven by numbers and performance data. 4wheeeler proved the Tacoma is better in every performance category, and offroad.
As for being "subjective", thats exactly the kind of thing you find the in the consumer reviews. 4wheeelr and PEtersons are a PERFORMANCE review, data that is FACTUAL and not subjective. Subjective is looks, and seat comfort. Things like offroad performance, highway performance, 0-60 numbers are hard, factual data, not "subjective" material. THings like what type of suspension and brakes and lockers is factual data. Apllying those devices to tests is factual data.
So far, I would feel it safe to say that:
The ranger seems better than the tacoma in side impact crashes.
The ranger is alittle bit cheaper than the tacoma.
the tacoma beats the ranger in every single performance category.
the tacoma is better than the ranger offroad.
the tacoma has better reliability than the ranger
the tacoma has a higher resale value than the ranger
THIs is what has been proven so far in this debate. Anyone who disagress with it has:
I do want to add something to resale, however. I think resale percentage can be misleading. If something costs $100,000 and loses 10% of its value you're still out $10,000. If something costs $10,000 and you lose 50% of its value you lose only $5000. I realize that these are inflated figures but I think the bottom line after factoring purchase price, rebates, finance charges etc. the actual out of pocket expense is very close between the two. Your offroad comment is correct in stock trucks but I think "every single performance catagory" comment ties in with that. The Ranger seems to be favored for on road comfort. Reliability is such a personal issue, given that there are so many whiners about Ford products....what can you say. Even though I have never had any serious problems with ANY of my Fords and I beat them.
The way I see it is Ranger 3(I added my on-road score) and Tacoma 3(I guess I have to add back in the off-road win if I use the on-road for the Ranger.) Resale I'll still debate. Good clean post though, spoog.
Vince i only remember you posting the carpoint link over and over again, not a bunch of links over and over again.
Ranger outsells Tacoma. Big Deal! This proves only that it outsold the Tacoma and that more people weighed out their criteria list and had the Ranger as their final choice. How many items are in our daily lives that are the top sellers in their fields, and are not the best in their field. McDonald's sells more Big Macs then Burger King sells Whoppers. Does this make the Big Mac better? Vince what the #'s show is that the Ranger fit more peoples criteria making it the best overall choice for most, or the best buy in it's class because the more they sell the cheaper it gets. None of these make the ranger the better truck. It is all subjective. There is no point arguing which is better overall. We will never win this argument. What we can do is compare certain elements of the two vehicles in hope that we will futher educate ourselves and others who happen to read this...
There is a 'Name the best room' room going on. I posted that we were the best room because were always in the top ten on the front page. We all love our trucks, we have been censored, frozen, were on our 4th group going on 5 and have had posts deleted. We are a crazy group, but it's good reading!
-acceleration times -braking times -skidpad figures -slalom times
These are the only things that not subjective and are therefore objective. They can be measured by numbers. Everything else is subjective, such as handling (whether on-road or off-road), comfort, ergonomics, styling, and on and on. People saying which they prefer (as in these tests and comparisons) is only opinion.
Would you say that a F150 Lightning can handle better than a BMW 3-series because it has higher skid-pad numbers? I believe it to be .86g vs. .84g Can't remember exactly, though.
As for prices and resale values, it all depends. If you pay more for a truck, you'll probably get more when you sell it. There's also supply vs. demand. I could sell a 4x4 auto like nothing for a premium price, but a 4x2 stick would be a hard sell for a beating on what you paid new.
Nice posts on the jdpower info especially since it all recent and not based on older vehicles,I think the tacoma is in trouble next year when the new ranger comes out.By the way all you Ford owners I installed my superchip yesterday and I cannot believe the differance in performance especially with the transmission shifting.It definately is a worth while investmant.
i worked on a 4wd ranger today and i had to drive it around the block and i just have to say that the ranger will NEVER compare to a tacoma! oh and the power...........lol, what power????? I'm not saying the ranger is a bad vehicle but it's just not built (and never will be)like a toyota.
And your toyota will never be american.stupid nafta,by the way it seems toyota employees want to go uaw toyota won't allow it. Can you say disgruntled, Going postal , Son of sam , sooner or later there gonna forget to put those johnson rods in for that locker to work properly. Good Luck.
Since there has been no apparent winner in this topic with all the links and arguments that have been posted here in this topic. I am wondering how many owners of Tacomas or Rangers have had problems or negative experience with their trucks? ie. dealers, servicing, etc.
I had one negative experience when I bought the truck, but then I was not planning to see him again after that. The short version of the story is that there was a mix up at my bank regarding the bank check I had deposited. Told the dealer that I would pay the following day with the bank check in full. Recieved a strange call from the dealer that night asking me to pay in full by credit card. Just told him I would see him tomorrow and hung up.
Ford was a 25% partner with Mazda. That would mean that there was Ford involvment in the Mazda line. In fact, Mazda built the Ford Currier.
To assume that the data provided by JD Powers is a direct reflection of Ranger quality is incorrect. Ranger is one of many vehicles produced. There is nothing in that JD Powers data suggesting the Ranger is the result of the placement.
Also, was spoog not the person that discounted all the previously posted data from JD Powers that was FAVORABLE to Ford. I know I posted data from them recognizing Ford assembly plants, ranking them with, as I recall, BMW for quality.
You Tacoma boys cannot have it both ways. Accepting one JD Powers report, you accept them all.
As far as I am concerned, I have a vehicle that is safer, has a larger frame, great on/off-road performance, resonable price and is independently recognized as a "best buy"(more than once singled out and recognized by Four Wheeler magazine).
Ford was a 25% partner with Mazda. That would mean that there was Ford involvment in the Mazda line. In fact, Mazda built the Ford Courier.
To assume that the data provided by JD Powers is a direct reflection of Ranger quality is incorrect. Ranger is one of many vehicles produced. There is nothing in that JD Powers data suggesting the Ranger is the result of the placement.
Also, was spoog not the person that discounted all the previously posted data from JD Powers that was FAVORABLE to Ford. I know I posted data from them recognizing Ford assembly plants, ranking them with, as I recall, BMW for quality.
You Tacoma boys cannot have it both ways. Accepting one JD Powers report, you accept them all.
As far as I am concerned, I have a vehicle that is safer, has a larger frame, great on/off-road performance, resonable price and is independently recognized as a "best buy"(more than once singled out and recognized by Four Wheeler magazine).
From here you can find links to review of both vehicles. That is where I found the sales data I recently posted as well as recall data. Some other good links about Tacoma and Ranger.
"As far as I am concerned, I have a vehicle that is safer, has a larger frame, great on/off-road performance, resonable price and is independently recognized as a "best buy"(more than once singled out and recognized by Four Wheeler magazine)."
The vehilce is safer in side impacr crashes. It is by no means a good offroader. Even 4wheeler said that. When you have 4wheeler quoting " the suspension was sacrificed towards highway", you don't have a good offroader.
OH, speaking of having it both ways Cspounser, how is it you bash the 4wheeler Tacoma vs Ranger comparions, yet accept their independant review of the Ranger? Interesting.........
I observed that the Ranger was not the model that one would buy for off-road. I also stated that 4 wheeler is in the business of accepting money for its reports and suggested that maybe the outcome was determined by Toyota money. Remember the word is "suggested". I never said the Tacoma did not perform as stated and I believe I did state I accepted the article as a factual, but perhaps not fair test.
My Ranger does real fine off road and I have proven it time and time again with photographs. You have provided NONE.
Your cheese has slipped off your cracker spoog. . .
cannot perform off-road. You have made numerious statements to that fact.
I have a picture in reserve of a basically stock Ranger articulating real fine over a rough rocky area. Not mine but so what.
I will be going to Estes Park this spring with a group of about 5 Rangers from the area. Pics to follow. Interested Scottssss? So you just run along spoog and play in your muddy flat cow pasture fields and race things from stoplights. Leave the Rockies to the Rangers.
There hasn't been a slow down at all, if anything it is picking up there's still the big dig which is about halfway done,there is a new convention center going in South Boston along with some new high rise buildings many new hotels coming up because of the convention center,they are just breaking ground on the new patriots stadium along with plans for a new fenway park.A lot of the colleges in the Boston area are expanding and building.There is a good solid 6 to 8 years for our union hall on the books right now,There is also 2 new cogeneration plants going in for Boston Edison.It is a great time to be a tradesman in the Boston area union or nonunion.Plus the good thing about having a union card if it does get slow in our area you have the option of traveling to any hotspot in the country.Some people dislike unions but I've worked with guys who've put in 25 30 years and they've got close to 3/4s million in there annuities and will have a 5000 a month pension.You can definately retire and live a good life and do what you'd like, thats why I'm big on unions they take care of you,occasionally I'll have a burst against not buying american its only to protect other americans jobs the Tacoma and Corolla are UAW made.By the way those were nice photos of your home you posted awhile ago.
I can say here in Portland/Vancouver area that building has not slowed either. Houses are still going up like weeds, commercial is the same way, along with industrial. Even with the higher interest rates, and higher yet to come the economy seems resiliant with very little to no inflation in sight. Spoog doesn't own this truck. He has slipped so many times in past posts he has proved this himself. wsn, hind, ytktrd I believe own their Tacoma's they have given facts along with descriptions of interiors and mechanicals of the TAcoma to a "T". Spoog is riding the coat tails of these folks. We all have posted good sites, good information about both trucks. I am a staunch Ford fan and see no reason to change. wsn, hind, are staunch Toyota fans and see no reason to change either. So, where do we go from here? See you in the Cascades!
But the difference between you and me is I am not blind to the facts. The side impact crash tests results are fact. I accept those. The 4wheeler.com Tacoma Ranger comparison test and performance data and equipment documentation is fact.
ive been fouwhelling up there when i was in college.. there are some really scary trails up there... had a freind role a CJ into a tree.
thanx for the invite but all my time off this year is dedicated to a float trip through the Grand canyon this June.. its going to be scary how much of this thread I will have to read when i get back LOL.
Spoog, you can't accept TSB's from www.aldata.com that Cp posted! nor any other infor I posted! I don't even know why I answer you. You don't offroad, don't own a Toyota, even yet, a Tacoma. you have slipped up so many times, not answered questions, answered questions wrong, your busted. Now get out of this room son. Curious, I believe it was wsn who answered he would pick the 2.7 over the 3.0 when comparing the lower end engines of Toyota and Ford respectivly. My question is why?
Technical Service Bulletins (TSBs) are issued by vehicle manufacturers to help automotive tehnicians diagnose and repair problems reported by consumers and repair shops. It's amazing how many fixes are found in these bulletins that can't be found anywhere else. Over 6,000 bulletins are issued by car manufacturers every year.
Technical Service Bulletins contain up-to-date factory fixes for difficult to diagnose problems such as rough idles, intermittent stalls, hard starts, and all kinds of "shakes", "rattles," and "clunks" that can sometimes drive you nuts. Technical Service Bulletins describe service procedures that may improve performance, reduce future breakdowns, or show a factory authorized modification for your vehicle.
seems to me that having tsb's or even alot of them isnt a bad thing.. Just means that any mechanic can know how to quickly remedy all problems.. Sounds like a damn good way for mechanics to comunicate to me..
I get anywhere from 14-20mpg depending on different commutes and time of year. During the summer I'll just slightly break 20mpg with a majority of highway miles. During winter I'm happy to get 14mpg with all of the terrible commutes I've got going to downtown Chicago for my busy season clients.
By the way, it's a 4.0L V6 Auto 4x4.
Mileage is pretty much what I expected. It wasn't much of a factor in my purchase decision either. To get all of those ft/lbs of torque (for towing and such) in those low revs, you're gonna have to give up some mpg.
My previous ranger had the 3.0L 4x2 auto. It got between 16-24mpg depending on highway/city and winter/summer. It just didn't have the torque or 4wd that I needed for my snowmobile trips up to Wis, and it handled absolutely terrible in the snow because it didn't have the LSD.
Here's a link to the Ranger Powerforce concept truck shown at the Houston Auto Show. Scroll down to take a look at the pics (it's the orange truck). If this is what Ford fans have to look forward to, bring it on! Unfortunately, it doesn't say what's under the hood as far as I can see.
CScottssss you're right about the tsb's. I do warranty work for several mfgs. of equipment (gas Cproducts) and some put out tech service bulletins were as others do not. It helps techs, especially if new to the field, save on trouble shooting time. In my work there is no comparison to tsb's and product quality. You can have a problematic product out there that you never receive a tsb on. It takes an extra effort from a manufacture to compile and distribute this information to it's service departments. This is not some mandate by the government, just good customer service.
When I first got my Ranger with the stock 235X75X15 tires mileage was crappy until it broke in somewhere 16-19mpg. After breakin, I got 19-20 around town, 22-23 on hwy. Made one trip 560 miles, towing 200 gal of water part way(1600+lb) went four wheeling for maybe 40 of those miles over Medano pass and into the sand dunes and then home. MPG was 21 for the trip.
I have had a drop in mileage I attribute to the 31X10.5X15 tires. Now get 18-19 around town and 20-21 hwy.
to compare to my Ranger. Measured in front of the rear wheel.
Ranger 5 1/4 inches top to bottom.
Tacoma 4 and if you streatch 1/4 inches top to bottom.
Also, Ranger Supercab 4X4 has 8 cross members which are attributed with being 300% stronger than the older Rangers which have 5 crossmembers. Fords words not mine.
Tacoma as I read it has 5 cross memebers on its extracab model.
Comments
simple statistics say that more on the road ='s more possible problems...
anyways.. spoog would also like to believe that the Tacoam is in a League by itself... its not
everyone in this room has an oppinion and they think thier truck is best (myself included) but the reality is they are both at the top of thier Class and that is why we all fight about it. if either was soo inferior this topic would not exist.. i hope they dont freeze the discussion, but if they do i have said my peace... have fun everyone
Here is what you write:
"As has been said over and over again, the 4wheeler
article Compared a NON off road equiped ranger"
THere is NO SUCH thing as an offroad equipped stock Ranger. SHould we blame Toyota for Fords lack of a real offroad suspension or offroad features? Of course not.
Let me put this so you understand it: THERE IS NO OFFROAD EQUIPPED STOCK RANGER. The RANGERS supsension in all forms is sacrificed for the HIGHWAY.
"2nd... 4wheeler magazine IS Full of TACOMA ads
(including the back cover.. most expensive space)
and very few ranger ads.. "
lol!
Hey Scotss.....the farmer called, he wants you to stop grasping all his straws.
"Now a Truly UNBIASED evaluation (consumer Reports)"
Its too bad this "evaluation" doesn't even test the vehicles offroad, and this "evaluation" comments on things like how nice the seat folds so pappy can put his ceramic fish carvings behind the seat nicely. Consumer reports is the mag with the red and black dots, right? I suggest you take a look at those little dots from 89-99 in Consumer reports.
4wheeler actualy takes the vehicles apart PIECE by PIECE and puts the parts under heavy freezing and heating, puts them through serious offroad beatings and highway riding, and a rigorous course at the track.
Once again, we are talking about TRUCKS here, real 4x4 trucks, not trips to Wal Mart.
"Picked the ranger as the best and the tacoma the
WORST of the small trucks.. that is an UNBIASED
OPPINION..."
Umm...So Consumer Reports likes the Rangers cheap price. Thats good, because that is one of the Rangers pro's.
Stepdown off your soap box and listen carefully. I do not disagree with your crashtest site, as i have stated time and time again. Nor do i think that the 4x4 model will be a million times better than the 4x2 in the same test. All i said was it was a strating point for those who are concerned about safety, but i do think if we are going to compare hard facts that we should really compare results from crashing a 4x4 ranger and a 4x4 Tacoma. Deep down inside I do think even you can comprehend this. A simple yes or no will do!
All + Our Host
If our host would like to settle this once and for all, I do think that our host should talk to edmunds about testing a fully loaded Ranger XLT Xcab w off road pack and a fully Loaded Tacoma XCab TRD Limited. If edmunds can put them head to head in a test that is not about opininons , but about testing abilities and shows methods and numbers we could solve this once and for all.
I do think it is safe to say that if you freeze this topic we'll just start a new one or hijack another one. As childish as this Conf can get sometimes, it has to be the most active, and has the most info about it's sunject than any other Conf i have read on this site.
Meredith if your are serious about how much this board bothers you, then do ask edmunds to do the test...
TIA
-wsn
http://www.auto.com/autonews/qvalue4.htm
FACT:: The Ranger continues to outsell the Tacoma 3 to 1. This means for EVERY Tacoma sold 3 Rangers are sold. Why is this? If the Tacoma is so superior, so much better after 7 years of production don't you think this is enough time to reverse the huge lopsided sales margin? And I am going to here, "sales don't matter" bull.... sales make MONEY. The consumer rules!
We have had 3 Ranger vs TAcoma rooms. In the first room I listed several links, reviews, data sites over and over again, so many times I got tired of continually posting them for nothing!
Maybe it is time to close this topic for a while
Meredith.
Vince i only remember you posting the carpoint link over and over again, not a bunch of links over and over again.
Ranger outsells Tacoma. Big Deal! This proves only that it outsold the Tacoma and that more people weighed out their criteria list and had the Ranger as their final choice. How many items are in our daily lives that are the top sellers in their fields, and are not the best in their field. McDonald's sells more Big Macs then Burger King sells Whoppers. Does this make the Big Mac better? Vince what the #'s show is that the Ranger fit more peoples criteria making it the best overall choice for most, or the best buy in it's class because the more they sell the cheaper it gets. None of these make the ranger the better truck. It is all subjective. There is no point arguing which is better overall. We will never win this argument. What we can do is compare certain elements of the two vehicles in hope that we will futher educate ourselves and others who happen to read this...
-wsn
Why do you keep bringing up this old, biased article and these ridiculous, 10,000pg TSB listings. It's time to look beyond the numbers.
Hey spoog, that farmer of yours called. He said thanks for shoveling all of that BS onto this message board. It really cleared up his barn. Now, we can all get a better grasp on that straw.
It all ends up being subjective. Some people will like one more than the other and vice versa. If there was a "better" truck, we'd all buy that one. Then, there'd be nothing interesting like this board/forum.
Spoog, that was the absolute 1st time that you've ever admitted that you were wrong (about the rpm thing). Wow! Will wonders never cease? Are you growing wiser in your old age?
By the way, is that supercharger on your truck eaton-roots or centrifugal??? Just wondering... I don't believe it said one way or the other on the TRD website.
Not quite sure why you posted that little blurb about my posts being directed at you...
performed a head-to-head test on the Ranger vs.
Tacoma, there will never be a "winner."
It all ends up being subjective. Some people will
like one more than the other and vice versa. If
there was a "better" truck, we'd all buy that one.
Then, there'd be nothing "
This is where you are wrong Cthompson. There can be a winner. That can be proven by numbers and performance data. 4wheeeler proved the Tacoma is better in every performance category, and offroad.
As for being "subjective", thats exactly the kind of thing you find the in the consumer reviews. 4wheeelr and PEtersons are a PERFORMANCE review, data that is FACTUAL and not subjective. Subjective is looks, and seat comfort. Things like offroad performance, highway performance, 0-60 numbers are hard, factual data, not "subjective" material. THings like what type of suspension and brakes and lockers is factual data. Apllying those devices to tests is factual data.
So far, I would feel it safe to say that:
The ranger seems better than the tacoma in side impact crashes.
The ranger is alittle bit cheaper than the tacoma.
the tacoma beats the ranger in every single performance category.
the tacoma is better than the ranger offroad.
the tacoma has better reliability than the ranger
the tacoma has a higher resale value than the ranger
THIs is what has been proven so far in this debate. Anyone who disagress with it has:
a. not been paying attention AT ALL.
b. Is in total denial
The way I see it is Ranger 3(I added my on-road score) and Tacoma 3(I guess I have to add back in the off-road win if I use the on-road for the Ranger.) Resale I'll still debate. Good clean post though, spoog.
Vince i only remember you posting the carpoint link over and over again, not a bunch of links over and over again.
Ranger outsells Tacoma. Big Deal! This proves only that it outsold the Tacoma and that more people weighed out their criteria list and had the Ranger as their final choice. How many items are in our daily lives that are the top sellers in their fields, and are not the best in their field. McDonald's sells more Big Macs then Burger King sells Whoppers. Does this make the Big Mac better? Vince what the #'s show is that the Ranger fit more peoples criteria making it the best overall choice for most, or the best buy in it's class because the more they sell the cheaper it gets. None of these make the ranger the better truck. It is all subjective. There is no point arguing which is better overall. We will never win this argument. What we can do is compare certain elements of the two vehicles in hope that we will futher educate ourselves and others who happen to read this...
-wsn
-wsn
-wsn
-acceleration times
-braking times
-skidpad figures
-slalom times
These are the only things that not subjective and are therefore objective. They can be measured by numbers. Everything else is subjective, such as handling (whether on-road or off-road), comfort, ergonomics, styling, and on and on. People saying which they prefer (as in these tests and comparisons) is only opinion.
Would you say that a F150 Lightning can handle better than a BMW 3-series because it has higher skid-pad numbers? I believe it to be .86g vs. .84g Can't remember exactly, though.
As for prices and resale values, it all depends. If you pay more for a truck, you'll probably get more when you sell it. There's also supply vs. demand. I could sell a 4x4 auto like nothing for a premium price, but a 4x2 stick would be a hard sell for a beating on what you paid new.
oh and the power...........lol, what power?????
I'm not saying the ranger is a bad vehicle but it's just not built (and never will be)like a toyota.
ie. dealers, servicing, etc.
I had one negative experience when I bought the truck, but then I was not planning to see him again after that. The short version of the story is that there was a mix up at my bank regarding the bank check I had deposited. Told the dealer that I would pay the following day with the bank check in full. Recieved a strange call from the dealer that night asking me to pay in full by credit card. Just told him I would see him tomorrow and hung up.
Goodyear AT/S tires are not the best for off-road. One would expect the BFG AT/ko or Thornbirds on an offroad vehicle.
To assume that the data provided by JD Powers is a direct reflection of Ranger quality is incorrect. Ranger is one of many vehicles produced. There is nothing in that JD Powers data suggesting the Ranger is the result of the placement.
Also, was spoog not the person that discounted all the previously posted data from JD Powers that was FAVORABLE to Ford. I know I posted data from them recognizing Ford assembly plants, ranking them with, as I recall, BMW for quality.
You Tacoma boys cannot have it both ways. Accepting one JD Powers report, you accept them all.
As far as I am concerned, I have a vehicle that is safer, has a larger frame, great on/off-road performance, resonable price and is independently recognized as a "best buy"(more than once singled out and recognized by Four Wheeler magazine).
To assume that the data provided by JD Powers is a direct reflection of Ranger quality is incorrect. Ranger is one of many vehicles produced. There is nothing in that JD Powers data suggesting the Ranger is the result of the placement.
Also, was spoog not the person that discounted all the previously posted data from JD Powers that was FAVORABLE to Ford. I know I posted data from them recognizing Ford assembly plants, ranking them with, as I recall, BMW for quality.
You Tacoma boys cannot have it both ways. Accepting one JD Powers report, you accept them all.
As far as I am concerned, I have a vehicle that is safer, has a larger frame, great on/off-road performance, resonable price and is independently recognized as a "best buy"(more than once singled out and recognized by Four Wheeler magazine).
From here you can find links to review of both vehicles. That is where I found the sales data I recently posted as well as recall data.
Some other good links about Tacoma and Ranger.
Happy hunting.
"As far as I am concerned, I have a vehicle that is
safer, has a larger frame, great on/off-road
performance, resonable price and is independently
recognized as a "best buy"(more than once singled
out and recognized by Four Wheeler magazine)."
The vehilce is safer in side impacr crashes. It is by no means a good offroader. Even 4wheeler said that. When you have 4wheeler quoting " the suspension was sacrificed towards highway", you don't have a good offroader.
OH, speaking of having it both ways Cspounser, how is it you bash the 4wheeler Tacoma vs Ranger comparions, yet accept their independant review of the Ranger? Interesting.........
I never said the Tacoma did not perform as stated and I believe I did state I accepted the article as a factual, but perhaps not fair test.
My Ranger does real fine off road and I have proven it time and time again with photographs. You have provided NONE.
Your cheese has slipped off your cracker spoog. . .
I have a picture in reserve of a basically stock Ranger articulating real fine over a rough rocky area. Not mine but so what.
I will be going to Estes Park this spring with a group of about 5 Rangers from the area. Pics to follow.
Interested Scottssss?
So you just run along spoog and play in your muddy flat cow pasture fields and race things from stoplights. Leave the Rockies to the Rangers.
Nothing objective or personal
Spoog doesn't own this truck. He has slipped so many times in past posts he has proved this himself. wsn, hind, ytktrd I believe own their Tacoma's they have given facts along with descriptions of interiors and mechanicals of the TAcoma to a "T". Spoog is riding the coat tails of these folks.
We all have posted good sites, good information about both trucks. I am a staunch Ford fan and see no reason to change. wsn, hind, are staunch Toyota fans and see no reason to change either. So, where do we go from here?
See you in the Cascades!
But the difference between you and me is I am not blind to the facts. The side impact crash tests results are fact. I accept those. The 4wheeler.com Tacoma Ranger comparison test and performance data and equipment documentation is fact.
The NHSTA TSB, recall and defect data is fact.
The problem here is accpeting the facts.
thanx for the invite but all my time off this year is dedicated to a float trip through the Grand canyon this June.. its going to be scary how much of this thread I will have to read when i get back LOL.
Curious, I believe it was wsn who answered he would pick the 2.7 over the 3.0 when comparing the lower end engines of Toyota and Ford respectivly. My question is why?
Technical Service Bulletins (TSBs) are issued by vehicle manufacturers to help automotive tehnicians diagnose and repair problems reported by consumers and repair shops. It's amazing how many fixes are found in these bulletins that can't be found anywhere else. Over 6,000 bulletins are issued by car manufacturers every year.
Technical Service Bulletins contain up-to-date factory fixes for difficult to diagnose problems such as rough idles, intermittent stalls, hard starts, and all kinds of "shakes", "rattles," and "clunks" that can sometimes drive you nuts. Technical Service Bulletins describe service procedures that may improve performance, reduce future breakdowns, or show a factory authorized modification for your vehicle.
isnt a bad thing.. Just means that any mechanic can know how to quickly remedy all problems.. Sounds like a damn good way for mechanics to comunicate to me..
By the way, it's a 4.0L V6 Auto 4x4.
Mileage is pretty much what I expected. It wasn't much of a factor in my purchase decision either. To get all of those ft/lbs of torque (for towing and such) in those low revs, you're gonna have to give up some mpg.
My previous ranger had the 3.0L 4x2 auto. It got between 16-24mpg depending on highway/city and winter/summer. It just didn't have the torque or 4wd that I needed for my snowmobile trips up to Wis, and it handled absolutely terrible in the snow because it didn't have the LSD.
http://www.fordranger.com/autoshow/
After breakin, I got 19-20 around town, 22-23 on hwy. Made one trip 560 miles, towing 200 gal of water part way(1600+lb) went four wheeling for maybe 40 of those miles over Medano pass and into the sand dunes and then home. MPG was 21 for the trip.
I have had a drop in mileage I attribute to the 31X10.5X15 tires. Now get 18-19 around town and 20-21 hwy.
XLT 4X4 4.0L engine with manual 5 speed.
Ranger 5 1/4 inches top to bottom.
Tacoma 4 and if you streatch 1/4 inches top to bottom.
Also, Ranger Supercab 4X4 has 8 cross members which are attributed with being 300% stronger than the older Rangers which have 5 crossmembers. Fords words not mine.
Tacoma as I read it has 5 cross memebers on its extracab model.
Just some info to chew on. . .
TSB's also are used to fix hidden warrenties. Maybe that is where the Toyota 3.4 engine recall resides.
Turned 25,000 miles over the weekend. The 99XLT is running fine.
this topic is being "frozen." Please continue these discussions in Topic 1639 Toyota TACOMA vs Ford RANGER - V.
Front Porch Philosopher
SUV, Pickups, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host