As far as I am concerned,the Land Cruiser Expedition comparison mirrors that of the 4wheel Tacoma/Ranger comparison. It is highly relevant in determining the design philosophies of toyota and Ford. And Edmunds hit it right on the head. Ford appeals to a broad audience, for larger sales, but they never focusing on doing one thing really well.
As for theCruiser's price, it is around 50 k loaded, while a loaded Expedition lists around 42k. Don't forget theCruiser is still made in Japan, and it has a v8, which equals a very hefty trade tarrif.
But even Edmunds said the Cruiser was WELL worth the extra money.
As for the new cruisers offroad ability , it is still very good.
If I had the money to throw around on a Cruiser, there would be one sitting in my driveway.
Well you are certainly entitled to your opinion but I think that is a stretch "...mirrors that of the 4wheel Tacoma/Ranger comparison..." So which article by Edmunds was incorrect, the multiple supurlitives I cited or the ones you cited?
Also, you never responded to my question regarding gas MPG. Is it because you are closer to the EPA estimate of 16mpg for the Tacoma and nowhere near my 21mpg? Remember I got 23-25 before changing tire size. And MY vehicle has not been recalled for anything as serious as failed head gaskets, broken frames(95-96 model Tacoma) and before you cite the fuel rails issue on the Ranger, that was for a 3.0 and was for 300 or so vehicles ONLY. All you can cite for the Ranger spoog are NITS. And MY SPECIFIC Ranger has NOT been recalled and in 24,000 miles has had only 2 minor problems, the wipers and the door sensors, both of which are intermittent, not hard failures. So just let me make that perfectly clear, ok?
But DO talk to the board about the 900,000 Tacomas in 1995-96 that were recalled for the broken frames. And the hundreds of thousands of Tacomas and pre Tacoma 3.0 engines that were recalled for failing head gaskets. Is this the superior "high density steel" that you say is on the Tacoma?
And the hundreds of thousands of Tacoma 3.4 V6 engines and pre Tacoma 3.0 engines that were recalled for failing head gaskets.
Is this the quality you feel is in the Toyota Pickup? I will grant Toyota that they did a great effort to fix the problems, however, the problems did exist and they were serious. Please, enlighten us as to the SERIOUS, really serious problems with the Ranger. Cite those recalls and service bullitins all you want, the majority were nits and non problems.
Plus, no matter how great the Tacoma does on and off-road, and I will say it is a very good performing vehicle, serious injury results in side impact crashes as compared to a Ranger.
Before you jump back on me, I would have NEITHER the Expedition or the Landcruiser in my driveway. Too big, poor gas mileage, kids are gone, my van days are over, cannot handle nearly as well as my Ranger or your Tacoma, and the list can go on.
I can understand you getting defensive about your Rangers quality. It's ok. You only have a few thousand miles on it. Look C, alot of reviews (especially Edmunds) like to accuse FORD of poor quality. Thats basically what they have done in the Ranger long term test and the Comparison test I posted above.
The NHSTA defect, recall, and technical repair bulletin numbers speak for themselves.
It's called QUALITY CONTROL. Little things, medium things and big things all are quality issues. Broken winshield motors are a quality issue. A broken armrest after a few thousand miles is a quality issue. The NHSTA stats ( which by the way, is the EXACT research company who did THE SIDE IMPACT CRASHES you always gush about) mirror ALL of this.
My comments have been backed up, and backed up again. All the pieces fall into place in my argument. The reviewers, the vehicles, the obvious design philosophies, the NHSTA backing all that as well..... You and Vince's argument is in tatters. YOu never had one to begin with. Well, you DID have an argument, had you stuck with the safety and value plan, but you DIDN't. You and Vince got all greedy and thought you could tackle offroad, reliability, resale value, performance ect.
That was your downfall, and that is why this argument is sadly coming to an end.
You guys made a good run at it. But it is all too clear to anyone reading that the Judge has issued the Tacoma to be the better truck.
All the evidence is in.
Oh, and Cspounser....you list 2 problems the Toyota v6's had. 2. That still doesn't add up to 600 defect investigations in 6 years, like the Ranger.
I could go on and on posting the NHSTA stats again. But why? It will only be like the wide receiver spiking the ball in your face after he jukes you for an 80 yard TD run. Theres no point in rubbing anyones face in it.
I cited 2 of the major problems of Tacoma. But again you do not answer my questions. I certainly do not condem totally the Tacoma for the two issues, however, the did happen. In regard to the Ranger and you comments on the Edmunds Nov. 99 report, you ignore the many months of positive comments on their longterm road test. But that is ok, it is your style.
So just for the record. . .
spoog has no comment on the subject of broken frames and defective heads and or head gaskets, transfer cases that lock up resulting in injury, gas mileage that may be sub par and does not mention Edmunds MANY references to Ranger in some areas being better than BMW's, correct?
Oh NOOOO spoog I would NEVER accuse you of rubbing anyones face in ANYTHING. . .
The results were not out on the side impact when I bough mine.
I just consider it an added PLUS. Not to mention standard ABS, standard theft device, standard complete towing hookups and the Consumer Reports "Best Buy" award for many many years. . .
I could go on, but I do not want to rub spoogs nose in it. . .
So, you think the trucks were actually TESTED on class I and II trails? Somebody PLEASE tell me what is so tough about class I or II trails. If I understand it correctly someone in a Saturn could have easily traversed these trails. Yes, I DO think the Landcruiser is a better vehicle than the Expedition, BUT it had better be. And I am sorry, but I really don't think there are a whole lot of people who will take a 50K+ vehicle off to the bushes. I lived in LA for five years, and I saw plenty of Landcruisers around. Not because they are competent offroad vehicles, but because all the rich girls had to have the most expensive thing out there. They may be great 4wd vehicles, but the worst environment those trucks will see is a pothole on the interstate. For those who cannot afford the overpriced wagon but still want a good offroader, good daily driver, good grocery getter, good box-hauler and good people mover, any of the Ford offerings are good choices. Its not like someone has to SETTLE for a Ford just because they can't afford/don't feel like wasting their money on something they don't need/don't like the Toyota. Ford is a Great Business company. I believe they made the top ten in a "Businesses of the Century." I forget who authored it but I will try to find it. They offer good quality, affordable vehicles to suit most anyones needs. I don't know what your business philosophy is, but a company that is able to please most of the people, most of the time will succeed. Toyota is in the same business, but they do not try to please most of the people with the Tacoma or Landcruiser. Just those that have the money or who want a little extra ability in a category or two. Not a bad philosophy, just different (no better or worse) than Ford's.
Spoojum, listen carefully, this is my point... If you HAVE THE MONEY and HAVE A REASON to buy the LC, then, and ONLY THEN, is the LC worth the extra money. If someone does not have any need for the LCs offroad prowess and does not have the money, then the LC is a VERY BAD CHOICE!!!! List one good reason that someone who will never venture offroad, is not buying a SUV for social status reasons, and cannot afford the extra 20K should buy a LC. I'd LOVE to hear your "intelligent" reasoning why a $50,000 (base) Landcruiser is better for someone who would have ALL of their needs met by a $30,000 (base) 2wd Expedition. I know a lot of people buy more vehicle than they need. You did. I did. But I spent within a few thousand of what I needed. I don't think $20K of (for most people) worthless additional cost is necessary. For most people, the benefits the LC has over the Expedition may be worth $5K, not even close to the $20K price tag.
We've all heard your arguments about TSBs, blah, blah... Give it up. Those numbers don't mean anything without details you will never know. Details about the how and why, not just the what. Unless you have this sort of information, your numbers are irrelevant. If the same problem happened to both the Taco and the Ranger, one company might deem it necessary to act upon it and the other may not think it is important. Proportionality would say Ford should always have more problems than Toyota, Toyota doesn't have the same number of vehicles on the road. There are too many unknown variables involved for you to derive some cute little conclusion as to the meaning of the numbers. The only conclusion you can possibly make with the data you present is that the law of proportionality holds true.
Crash test data is similar, there are too many variables involved in an accident to say whether one vehicle is safer than the other in ALL circumstances. The difference between crash tests and defect reports is that the crash test data is presented in the format ...in this PARTICULAR situation, the Ford is this safe and the Tacoma is that safe... The defect reports, however, just give numbers, no situations or background information.
Regarding the TSBs or whatever they are called. Not defending or bashing any particular vehicle, if you think about these numbers logically you should conclude that more vehicles should only tend towards more repitions of the same problem. Conversely, fewer vehicles = fewer repitition of the same problem. Therefore more vehicles on the road should not be an excuse/reason for a larger number of unique problems. It is not like there is a seperate recall or Technical Repair bulletin issued for each individual vehicle that exhibits the problem.
Not necessarily true. In saying that you imply that all vehicles will break in a certain way every time. Take ten identical engines and line up, and run 'em till they fail. Then take a hundred engines and repeat. Which group will have a higher instance of unique problems? Of course it will be the larger group. There will be comparable percentages of similar problems between the two sets, but there will be more unique problems in the larger group. When do you decide if there are enough failures to write a TSB? Say 10% of the engines throw a rod. Thats one of the ten or ten of the hundred. What the owner of the ten says is no problem can be a large problem for the owner of the hundred.
And, this is a rather static experiment. Throw in different driving habits, different conditions, etc, all the way down to the conditions in which the individual components were formed, and you can see vehicle life is a very, very dynamic problem with way too many unknown variables to be able to say whether an individual vehicle is likely to fail. THEN, throw in how the different companies deal with the problems and you have my point that TSBs CANNOT be used to definitively say that the Toyota is better or worse than the Ranger.
Listen, I am not saying that either vehicle is better than the other. I'm just saying that TSBs are not a good way to say one vehicle is better than the other.
what is the ford ranger splash anyways...seriously, it looks like a sedan. And what's with those little side steps to the 3 1/2ft. bed it has. What can you do with a truck like that...if you can even call it a truck.
"Regarding the TSBs or whatever they are called. Not defending or bashing any particular vehicle, if you think about these numbers logically you should conclude that more vehicles should only tend towards more repitions of the same problem."
Thank You. Seems sum' folk just don't get it. All these vehicles come from the same plants, same installation machinery. REPEATED problems are not counted, individual ones are.
And a DEFECT is investigated as a DEFECT, having nothing whatsoever to do with different driving habits. Again, the same machines processs ALL these vehicles over and over. It would be different if you were talking about each vehicle being independantly hand crafted.
"Conversely, fewer vehicles = fewer repitition of the same problem. "
THANK YOU.
"Therefore more vehicles on the road should not be an excuse/reason for a larger number of unique problems."
Logic!!! Did someone bring LOGIC in here ! WOW!
You can try and sugar coat it all you want, or use "break-in" excuses. Thats just more backpeddling.
Well, first, the TSB on the wipers on the Ranger are for a GEM module produced by a sub of Ford, not Ford itself. Granted, a trend in this area SHOULD motovate Ford to get a different supplier. In fact it did just that. It is NOT a serious problem.
Door chimes issue? It is the newly designed door interlock switches sticking again from a sub and again, NOT a serious problem.
As I stated, an I will check my facts, the fuel rail issue was for 300 or so vehicles, yes it was stated it COULD cause a fire, however, a small number of vehicles involved.
The cruise control issue was a large number of vehicles, however, was promptly handled by Ford and was for a CHECK, not a complete replacement on ALL vehicles.
Now we come to Tacoma. What year is yours spoog and was it effected by the head/head gasket recall that was (cause you cannot find it anywhere) an non-published recall.
Was your vehicle recalled? Simple question.
It regard to EPA, my QUESTION was what was spoogs mpg and please consider that you stated many times you RACE it which will factor in the mileage number.
I get, now a solid 21 on the hwy and 19 in the city, well ABOVE the EPA mgg for a 4.0L manual.
I will not rub your nose in the broken frame issue as I do not think you were effected, however, that was a LARGE Tacoma recall of at least 2 years, 95-96 where the frame was breaking and causing "...loss of vehicle control...".
That, my friends is a SERIOUS DESIGN FLAW in an otherwise good pickup. It effected ALL Tacomas, 2X, 4X, under 6 inch ground clearance bottom of the line up to the supposed "bullet proof" TRD.
Toyota DID fix that problem as did Ford FIX their problems. So give it a rest when you try to lecture me about Quality. I am certified in the field of Quality, you are not.
When are you going to realize that a review is somebody's OPINION? You seem to believe it is FACT. About all they're good for is producing a glaring defect, like the Expedition's laughable inability to tackle anything worse than a gravel road or the Landcruiser's astronomical price tag that will keep it off any gravel road. Take them for what they're worth. It is only single opinion for the hundreds of thousands of vehicles sold each year.
There just simply isn't a winner, as it is based on opinion. When someone purchases the vehicle, they're simply issuing their opinion on which is the best for them.
Bingo! Which is why the Expedition sells 8 to 1 for every Land Cruiser sold. The Land Cruiser is a nice vehicle, but for over 50K it sure and hell better be!@. NHSTA site again huh. And once again spoog wants everyone to see the TOTAL numbers not the individual incidents affecting only a certain build group of Rangers, or the ones for stickers, or decals, or even the duplicates. Spoog, how many times do I have to ask for pictures? You could at least go down to the Toyota dealer and take a picture of a TRD on the lot. LOL. I am getting about 20HWY, 17 city in my 4.0. I do however have larger tires. Before with the 235's I was getting about 22HWY, 18 city. Doesn't seem like the Toyota has too much of an advantage there for such a high tech engine that puts out 5ft/lbs less of torque. I will ask the guy how he got a hold of Sport Trac next time I see him. The Sequoia will get rave reviews, and a bunch of hoopla just like the Tundra did. Sales will be brisk at first but then after everyone sees it only comes with ONE V8 engine, and the high price, sales will flatten out.
"A fully loaded Expedition is around 44 grand, and a fully loaded cruiser is around 51 grand."
That $51,000 is also the base price on the landcruiser. It comes fully optioned. On the other hand, an Expedition starts with a base price of $29,600. Not everyone needs leather and enough options to make Inspector Gadget jelous.
Enough of this, though. I'd never consider purchasing either. I'll leave that to the status-seeking soccer moms (and dads).
No, not back peddling, mearly placing things in perspective.
1998 Ranger 4X 4.0L engine: SB 99-8-16 Motor Oil-SAE 5W-30 Viscosity Grade Recommendation. That is a real show stopper is it not?!? 99-8-15 Interior Door Trim Panel Replacement tip 99-7-8 Temp Gage Fluctuates 99-6-3 Wire Splicing and wire harness repair kit 99-5-3 A/T Checking Transmission Fluid level cold 98-24-6 Excessive effort when lifting door handle 98-17-4 No Start-Dead Battery/corrosion at tray 98-12-20 Mud flaps shipped with vehicle incorrect 98-6-6 Mud flaps difficult to install tip 98-5-2 Tire company phone numbers 98-8-13 Axle clunking noise during 4WD shifting
Hmmm finally found one that could be somewhat serious but it is not for EVERY Ranger.
Do you get my point that when you rave on regarding the NUMBER of Service Bulletins rather than their content, you REALLY LOSE what credibility you have.
Now, lets look at the 59 Technical Service Bulletins against the 96 Tacoma 3.4L 4X: TC003-99 A/T fluids AX004-99 Toyota Dinghy Towing Guide AC002-99 Snow Entry into heater unit. Hmmm a Quality issue here, cannot keep snow out of cab? ST002-98 Steering Gear Removal/replacement Hmmm problems with the steering gear? AC006-97 A/C Suction hose improvement AC007-97 A/C liquid tube improvement Hmmm, not designed well in the first place so it needs improvement? TC002-97 Transmission shift delay. Hmm bad trans? AC00297 A/C evaporator odor (a real TuRD in the cab?) DL00196 Driveline engagement noise. Hmm sounds like that Ranger TSB ATRATB345 Checkball wear. Hmm things wear out? EL95004 Wiper motor circuit breaker inspection. Hmmm like the Ranger wiper motors? SS95-003 Engine support bar improvement. THIS is the breaking frames issue.
But my POINT is that the TSB's will be issued against ANY vehicle and we should be thankful that Ford and Toyota DO issue them.
to not answer questions and to ridicule people who question him.
Go ahead ask him a question. All he can answer with is a 2yr article.
I am glad Edmunds gave you fresh material on their Landcruiser test because the comments on the TSB's, without any deep review by yourself and the Four Wheeler article were getting real old. But go read the title of this board and start answering questions you are asked regerding a Tacoma, ok?
to not answer questions and to ridicule people who question him.
Go ahead ask him a question. All he can answer with is a 2yr article.
I am glad Edmunds gave you fresh material on their Landcruiser test because the comments on the TSB's, without any deep review by yourself and the Four Wheeler article were getting real old. But go read the title of this board and start answering questions you are asked regerding a Tacoma, ok?
is they actually care about each and every problem with their trucks and they immeadiately post them without delay. With Ford, you have to have a few states attorney generals threathen them with class action suits, congressman pass resolutions, and senators start constitutional amendments before you see Ford relent and post: "Temp Gage Fluctuates" or "Excessive effort when lifting door handle". They would not dare post anything else because it would result in something of the level of a presidental order just to get them to issue a recall to actually fix the problems. Toyota actually cares about its customers and takes care of them instead of waiting for them to start a class action suit or ask for governmental action.
Technical Service Bulletins are internally generated, which the government has nothing to do with. They are issued to help a mechanic in a service department fix a problem.
Recalls, which are mandated by the government, are issued do to a possible unsafe situation with the vehicle.
Do you really think a lawyer would start a class action suit based on "Temp Gage Fluctuates" or "Excessive effort when lifting door handle"? No, it has to be an actual serious problem.
I'll give you another little tidbit of info. Toyota, Ford, GM, VW, etc... only care for their customers in that they've got enough green in their pocket to purchase their product. Turning a profit is what keeps them employed and the shareholders happy.
I know i asked you this before, but tell us all you can about your BFG AT KO's. I got the FireBones on my Taco and i think the time has come to move on. Talk to me about snow traction/cost/and the size you put on your ranger. Also if anybody else has them please speak up...
I saw a thing on the The learning Channel the other night were these people were crossing antartica in LandCruisers. Thsoe "soccer mom's" must have a lot of free time to be taking there LC's across Antartica! Also the LC will be around for 10+ years, i think it's safe to say the Expedition will not...
Vince
I disagree about the Sequoia. I think it will do better than you think. The ful size SUV competion is not as tough as the full size truck competion. Also i think as the Tundra gets older it will take more and more away from the big 3. It is my opinion, but i'm basing this on past examples (ie; the Camry)....
"I own a '98 Ford Ranger XLT 4X4. Up until now it has been a great little truck, peppy and fun. A week and a half ago the rear end locked up on it and it would not budge. (second occurrence) Last time this happened I nudged it and it broke loose, the repair techs said it must have been a hung brake, so I took their word for it. When it happened last week I had it towed to the ford dealership. When my truck arrived I got the same response "you got a brake hung". Aside from the fact that he is supposed to be a certified technician , I wondered how much he was really concerned about fixing the problems with my truck. I found out 4 days later when I got the truck back. They replaced a module,I don't know which one. I had the truck for one day, and noticed some differences, it seems a little more peppy, yet something was wrong.
The second day I had it back the windshield wipers refused to come on, and once I got them on, they were stuck on high. I shut the truck off, and then it would not start again. Once again after a short rest the truck started, and ran fine. When I took the truck into the dealer, with the wipers flapping away, the seemed rather unconcerned. They began naming off things that I must have done, or was not doing right. Talk about getting ticked off. That was Monday, this is Wednesday, and still no word. When I call them all I get is, "Sir, we will call you." I don't know if all of this was a deep enbedded problem in the ford that came out with the replacement of other parts(I work on computers, that kind of stuff happens) or if they did something with their pull and plug method of fixing the problem. I can only guess that they pulled and plugged because all of my fuses were loose, a few were in the wrong places, and the modules were all loose too. Anyone else had this problem with their truck, or some words of advice?"
I was just telling my friend about the LCs in Antatartica last night. I've seen that and also read about it in some magazine. I remember one of the sources saying that the LC was the only vehicle suited for the task even though they were heavily modified. Those frames that they added to reduce chances of slipping into crevases(sp?) were interesting. If I ever get rich and move somewhere that justifies it I would love to get my hands on an older one and do some modifications, starting with taking off the running boards. This guy who lived in the town I went to school in had an LC without the running boards with 33" BFG MTs. It was always covered in mud.
96 was the first year of the Tacoma. Most first year vehicles have a few bugs that need to be ironed out. But if we look at the Technical Service Bulletins, DEFECT investigations, and safety recalls over the past ten years, things start getting mighty interesting......even LOPSIDED I would say.........lol....BEYOND lopsided.
oh the horror stories i could tell you about fricken dealerships!..........they all suck! i am sure gald i am in the business and do my own work.you just can't trust anyone these days to do the job right.
reddog, sounds more like your dealership rather than the truck. All dealerships are different, some like night and day. Try another dealership. Day 14 spoog and still no pictures. Just admit it you don't own the TRD with a supercharger. Gees, you could have at least scanned one out of a magazine, LOL.
I know i asked you this before, but tell us all you can about your BFG AT KO's. I got the FireBones on my Taco and i think the time has come to move on. Talk to me about snow traction/cost/and the size you put on your ranger. Also if anybody else has them please speak up...
Not too much experience in snow. There was about 5-6 inches on the property and it cut thru that very well. Snow on the roads is no problem. They cost $100 each plus the goodies for a total of $525 considering a 3.8% tax rate here. I put on 31X10.5X15" as the price was not that much different for the 30s. The 265X16s are about $10 more. I got them at Discount Tire and went to a plcace with the lower tax rate. Why pay 6.8% in Greenwood Village when I can pay 3.8 in Englewood? They are wearing very well. 10,000 miles and some of the stuff that leaks out between the lugs are still on the tires! I run 27-28 lb front and 29-20 rear. A bit of a bouncy ride and lower mpg but the tread pattern is flatter to the road. Taco is lighter so you MAY get away with a lb or so less. I like em so far. They are great off-road as compared to the Wilderness AT. Do look at the new Goodyear (an ATS, I think) that has 2 fairly wide grooves around the tire and the Scorpions. Big O makes one like it but is more expensive. But I am not sure that there is a better general purpose agressive off-road tire built. I like the side lugs that grip the rocks. I THINK the Aug or Sep Four Wheeler mag did a piece on them and said they were the best they had ever put on a truck. I will look for it as I have the mag somewhere.
I expect 45K+ on the BFG tires the way they are wearing. Get the KO's not the regular if you so choose. You get the side lugs on the KO's.
I still think I could out do the new Landcruiser with my old 71. Not as fast with the old 6 cyl but tighter turns, lighter, better articulation and the list could go on.
"I own a '98 Ford Ranger XLT 4X4. Up until now it has been a great little truck, peppy and fun. A week and a half ago the rear end locked up on it and it would not budge. (second occurrence) Last time this happened I nudged it and it broke loose, the repair techs said it must have been a hung brake, so I took their word for it. When it happened last week I had it towed to the ford dealership. When my truck arrived I got the same response "you got a brake hung". Aside from the fact that he is supposed to be a certified technician , I wondered how much he was really concerned about fixing the problems with my truck. I found out 4 days later when I got the truck back. They replaced a module,I don't know which one. I had the truck for one day, and noticed some differences, it seems a little more peppy, yet something was wrong.
The second day I had it back the windshield wipers refused to come on, and once I got them on, they were stuck on high. I shut the truck off, and then it would not start again. Once again after a short rest the truck started, and ran fine. When I took the truck into the dealer, with the wipers flapping away, the seemed rather unconcerned. They began naming off things that I must have done, or was not doing right. Talk about getting ticked off. That was Monday, this is Wednesday, and still no word. When I call them all I get is, "Sir, we will call you." I don't know if all of this was a deep enbedded problem in the ford that came out with the replacement of other parts(I work on computers, that kind of stuff happens) or if they did something with their pull and plug method of fixing the problem. I can only guess that they pulled and plugged because all of my fuses were loose, a few were in the wrong places, and the modules were all loose too. Anyone else had this problem with their truck, or some words of advice?"
I got the quote from a frustrated Ford customer who posted it in the wrong place..Now it reads correctly, little confusing the other way...
Just so you know, in regard to recalls, the 1995 Ranger only lists one recall from that database and that was: 95V138000 Interior systems instrument panel speedometer where the speedometer registered speed in mph but the odometer indicated distance in kilometers. Ford recieved a waiver as it was determined that the noncompliance to the govt standard did not create an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.
So can we establish that in 1995 the Ranger had ONE recall which turned out to not be a recall and Tacoma had THREE recalls?
Using your logic does that mean that the 1995 Tacoma was a worse vehicle because it was recalled three times to Ranges 0ne time? I do not think so but just using your logic of just counting numbers and not looking into the specifics. However on this case, the data shows 115,000 Tacomas and 0 Rangers were recalled in the year 1995.
You kill me. The cruise control issue is real. I can't believe you're quoting problems on electric vehicles and an o ring that affected 330 vehicles. Gee, 330 vehicles, seems like Ford did a good job catching that one. We're not stretching now to make a point; are we?
Ya know, spooj, I don't know sales figures off the top of my head but I think that Ford sells more than 35,000 Rangers a year. Two of your three recalls affected less than 350 vehicles. So, do a bit of math and you see that these two recalls affect LESS THAN ONE PERCENT OF THE TOTAL NUMBERS OF RANGERS SOLD!!!! LESS THAN ONE PERCENT! That means that there is over 99% chance that YOU WILL NOT HAVE THIS PROBLEM!!!! I guess Ford recalls vehicles for insignificant problems as well. I admit the other recall affected a greater percentage of vehicles, but then again, is that 895,000 vehicles the number of Rangers recalled, or the number of Explorers, Mountaineers, Rangers, Mustangs, F-250s, F-350s, F-450s, F-550s, F-53s built randomly between 1997 and 1999?
Back to my post about the law of proportionality, again I forget sales figure but I believe the ratio of Rangers sold to Tacomas sold is five to one. Take one of the two insignificant recalls you listed above. Proportionality would say that if the two vehicles are of the same quality, Tacomas would have problems of similar degree occur in about 50 of their trucks. This makes me wonder if there is a "threshold" value for the number of vehicles to have a repeated defect before a Recall or TSB is issued. Say, if a problem affects one hundred vehicles the company has to issue a recall. The law of proportionality says that Ford will have more recalls than Toyota, because they sell more. If a problem affects only fifty vehicles, the company may just swap the engine, or whatever it is that failed.
Have been looking at Tundras (SR5 - 2whl.Dr.)and think it is a quality product. Finally found a dealer who would deal and gave me a price that I could live with. They are all to expensive ! Did a little more research and found a couple things that concern me. 1. Can't get keyless entry 2. Engine is designed for premium fuel if you want book performance. In the past, no big deal,but the difference ' regular vs supreme' is becoming significant and I fear will become even more-so given the current trend in fuel prices.Was looking at the V/8 with Auto. and EPA estimates on mileage compound the problem. Keep hoping fuel prices will come down (not likely)or designers will develop more efficient engines while maintaining performance. Maybe you just can't have it both ways ! Does this concern anyone besides me ?
If you look at that list, you will see that the Toyota SR5 pickups placed TWICE. NOt only that, but I don't see the Ranger ONCE on that list.
So CSpounser, I will ask you this.....where is the Ranger pickup on that list? lol !!!!!!!
Good one!!! Please also note, those vehicles are all brand new models, or redesigns that were selected. 93 was the grand cherokees first year ect.
If the 98 4wheeelr was included, that makes THREE times the Toyota comapct pickup was selected..............and the Ranger hasn't been picked once. lol.
Why would you post something that hurts your argument? NOt a very snappy post Cspounser.
lol!!!!!!!
Toyota compact THREE times, Ranger - O times!!!
in fact, the Toyota pickup and Jeep cherokee seem to appear on that list the most.......
BTW, you still do not answer questions because I THINK the answer is your vehicle has been subjected to more recalls than my Ranger.
BTW, speaking of runaway vehicles, found this on the 1996 Tacoma:
Component: FUEL:THROTTLE LINKAGES AND CONTROL Manufacturer: ROSTRA PRECISION CONTROLS Year: 1996 Make: TOYOTA TRUCK Model: TACOMA Potential Number of Units Affected: 5145 Manufactured From: NOV 1995 To: DEC 1995 Year of Recall: '96 Type of Report: Equipment Summary: THESE CRUISE CONTROL SYSTEMS FAIL TO HOLD THE SPEED SET BY THE DRIVER AND CAN ACCELERATE ABOVE THE INTENDED SET SPEED.
UNINTENDED ACCELERATION CAN INCREASE THE POTENTIAL FOR A VEHICLE ACCIDENT.
DEALERS WILL REPLACE THESE CRUISE CONTROL ASSEMBLIES.
Hmm, they replaced more than just the cables. . .
and:
Component: SUSPENSION:INDEPENDENT FRONT Manufacturer: TOYOTA MOTOR CO., LTD. Year: 1996 Make: TOYOTA TRUCK Model: TACOMA Potential Number of Units Affected: 90000 Manufactured From: To: Year of Recall: '96 Type of Report: Vehicle Summary: UNDER CERTAIN DRIVING CONDITIONS, THE FRONT SUSPENSION SUPPORT CAN CRACK LEADING TO FAILURE OF THE SUPPORT.
THIS CONDITION CAN RESULT IN LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL.
So using your logic, this vehicle is subject to accelerating out of control and breaking suspensions to boot?
So you see that Toyota shows up on the list, but not the Explorer, a Ford product, twice?
BTW, Ranger showed up on another list for Pickups and the Mazda, it's clone showed up also.
In all cases simply means that someone liked the vehicle that year compared to others.
spoog says: "Good one!!! Please also note, those vehicles are all brand new models, or redesigns that were selected. 93 was the grand cherokees first year ect."
Well, that is true. However, when YOU were bragging about the 1998 Tacoma, which, as MANY people have established, was paired up against, basically a bottom of the line Ranger in tests, you felt that the test proved the Tacoma was the best of that year.
Best of the selected new vehicles, however, some other vehicles may very well have waxed the 1998 Tacoma in many areas.
The Tacoma was introduced as a 1995.5 so there are 1995 "pickups" and 1995 Tacomas.
PS I hated the Tacoma when it first came out, at he time I was driving a 1988 "pickup", but look at me now, oh well, I guess opinions change. I have been spending alot of time at the Tacoma Territory forum and it seems alot of Tacoma owners, while very satisfied, are saying they dont measure up to older models in build quality and "fit and finish". This is coming from diehard Toyota fans who laugh at the mentioning of wheeling in a Ranger, Frontier, or S10. I have to say that I will take the Tacoma anyday over my rusted 88. My dad has it know and I drive it whenever I visit. I wish I had the money to beef up the 88 with a flat bed to replace the rusting one, a lift, and locking diffs all around. That would be fun. I still wince when wheeling in my Tacoma considering it is only months old. I think it is absurd when people say that no one takes a 22K Taco off road, like it is so much easier to deal with damaging a 20K Ranger
Comments
Tacoma/Ranger comparison. It is highly relevant in determining the design philosophies of toyota and Ford. And Edmunds hit it right on the head. Ford appeals to a broad audience, for larger sales, but they never focusing on doing one thing really well.
As for theCruiser's price, it is around 50 k loaded, while a loaded Expedition lists around 42k. Don't forget theCruiser is still made in Japan, and it has a v8, which equals a very hefty trade tarrif.
But even Edmunds said the Cruiser was WELL worth the extra money.
As for the new cruisers offroad ability , it is still very good.
If I had the money to throw around on a Cruiser, there would be one sitting in my driveway.
So which article by Edmunds was incorrect, the multiple supurlitives I cited or the ones you cited?
Also, you never responded to my question regarding gas MPG. Is it because you are closer to the EPA estimate of 16mpg for the Tacoma and nowhere near my 21mpg? Remember I got 23-25 before changing tire size. And MY vehicle has not been recalled for anything as serious as failed head gaskets, broken frames(95-96 model Tacoma) and before you cite the fuel rails issue on the Ranger, that was for a 3.0 and was for 300 or so vehicles ONLY. All you can cite for the Ranger spoog are NITS. And MY SPECIFIC Ranger has NOT been recalled and in 24,000 miles has had only 2 minor problems, the wipers and the door sensors, both of which are intermittent, not hard failures. So just let me make that perfectly clear, ok?
But DO talk to the board about the 900,000 Tacomas in 1995-96 that were recalled for the broken frames. And the hundreds of thousands of Tacomas and pre Tacoma 3.0 engines that were recalled for failing head gaskets. Is this the superior "high density steel" that you say is on the Tacoma?
And the hundreds of thousands of Tacoma 3.4 V6 engines and pre Tacoma 3.0 engines that were recalled for failing head gaskets.
Is this the quality you feel is in the Toyota Pickup? I will grant Toyota that they did a great effort to fix the problems, however, the problems did exist and they were serious. Please, enlighten us as to the SERIOUS, really serious problems with the Ranger. Cite those recalls and service bullitins all you want, the majority were nits and non problems.
Plus, no matter how great the Tacoma does on and off-road, and I will say it is a very good performing vehicle, serious injury results in side impact crashes as compared to a Ranger.
Before you jump back on me, I would have NEITHER the Expedition or the Landcruiser in my driveway. Too big, poor gas mileage, kids are gone, my van days are over, cannot handle nearly as well as my Ranger or your Tacoma, and the list can go on.
If that mistake had been a side impact, well, I would have walked away unscathed.
The NHSTA defect, recall, and technical repair bulletin numbers speak for themselves.
It's called QUALITY CONTROL. Little things, medium things and big things all are quality issues. Broken winshield motors are a quality issue. A broken armrest after a few thousand miles is a quality issue. The NHSTA stats ( which by the way, is the EXACT research company who did THE SIDE IMPACT CRASHES you always gush about) mirror ALL of this.
My comments have been backed up, and backed up again. All the pieces fall into place in my argument. The reviewers, the vehicles, the obvious design philosophies, the NHSTA backing all that as well..... You and Vince's argument is in tatters. YOu never had one to begin with. Well, you DID have an argument, had you stuck with the safety and value plan, but you DIDN't. You and Vince got all greedy and thought you could tackle offroad, reliability, resale value, performance ect.
That was your downfall, and that is why this argument is sadly coming to an end.
You guys made a good run at it. But it is all too clear to anyone reading that the Judge has issued the Tacoma to be the better truck.
All the evidence is in.
Oh, and Cspounser....you list 2 problems the Toyota v6's had. 2. That still doesn't add up to 600 defect investigations in 6 years, like the Ranger.
I could go on and on posting the NHSTA stats again. But why? It will only be like the wide receiver spiking the ball in your face after he jukes you for an 80 yard TD run. Theres no point in rubbing anyones face in it.
I cited 2 of the major problems of Tacoma. But again you do not answer my questions. I certainly do not condem totally the Tacoma for the two issues, however, the did happen. In regard to the Ranger and you comments on the Edmunds Nov. 99 report, you ignore the many months of positive comments on their longterm road test. But that is ok, it is your style.
So just for the record. . .
spoog has no comment on the subject of broken frames and defective heads and or head gaskets, transfer cases that lock up resulting in injury, gas mileage that may be sub par and does not mention Edmunds MANY references to Ranger in some areas being better than BMW's, correct?
Oh NOOOO spoog I would NEVER accuse you of rubbing anyones face in ANYTHING. . .
I just consider it an added PLUS. Not to mention standard ABS, standard theft device, standard complete towing hookups and the Consumer Reports "Best Buy" award for many many years. . .
I could go on, but I do not want to rub spoogs nose in it. . .
Ranger w/4.0 Auto = 15/19
Man. = 16/20
Tacoma w/3.4 Auto = 17/20
Man. = 17/20
They look to be about the roughly the same with the Tacoma having a marginal edge.
Also:
Again if we are gonna trash the $$ diff on the LC vs. The Expedition, what about the Sequoia?
-wsn
Crash test data is similar, there are too many variables involved in an accident to say whether one vehicle is safer than the other in ALL circumstances. The difference between crash tests and defect reports is that the crash test data is presented in the format ...in this PARTICULAR situation, the Ford is this safe and the Tacoma is that safe... The defect reports, however, just give numbers, no situations or background information.
And, this is a rather static experiment. Throw in different driving habits, different conditions, etc, all the way down to the conditions in which the individual components were formed, and you can see vehicle life is a very, very dynamic problem with way too many unknown variables to be able to say whether an individual vehicle is likely to fail. THEN, throw in how the different companies deal with the problems and you have my point that TSBs CANNOT be used to definitively say that the Toyota is better or worse than the Ranger.
Listen, I am not saying that either vehicle is better than the other. I'm just saying that TSBs
are not a good way to say one vehicle is better than the other.
"Regarding the TSBs or whatever they are called.
Not defending or bashing any particular vehicle, if
you think about these numbers logically you should
conclude that more vehicles should only tend
towards more repitions of the same problem."
Thank You. Seems sum' folk just don't get it.
All these vehicles come from the same plants, same installation machinery. REPEATED problems are not counted, individual ones are.
And a DEFECT is investigated as a DEFECT, having nothing whatsoever to do with different driving habits. Again, the same machines processs ALL these vehicles over and over. It would be different if you were talking about each vehicle being independantly hand crafted.
"Conversely, fewer vehicles = fewer repitition of
the same problem. "
THANK YOU.
"Therefore more vehicles on the
road should not be an excuse/reason for a larger
number of unique problems."
Logic!!! Did someone bring LOGIC in here ! WOW!
You can try and sugar coat it all you want, or use "break-in" excuses. Thats just more backpeddling.
Defects? Saftey recalls anyone?
Door chimes issue? It is the newly designed door interlock switches sticking again from a sub and again, NOT a serious problem.
As I stated, an I will check my facts, the fuel rail issue was for 300 or so vehicles, yes it was stated it COULD cause a fire, however, a small number of vehicles involved.
The cruise control issue was a large number of vehicles, however, was promptly handled by Ford and was for a CHECK, not a complete replacement on ALL vehicles.
Now we come to Tacoma. What year is yours spoog and was it effected by the head/head gasket recall that was (cause you cannot find it anywhere) an non-published recall.
Was your vehicle recalled? Simple question.
It regard to EPA, my QUESTION was what was spoogs mpg and please consider that you stated many times you RACE it which will factor in the mileage number.
I get, now a solid 21 on the hwy and 19 in the city, well ABOVE the EPA mgg for a 4.0L manual.
I will not rub your nose in the broken frame issue as I do not think you were effected, however, that was a LARGE Tacoma recall of at least 2 years, 95-96 where the frame was breaking and causing "...loss of vehicle control...".
That, my friends is a SERIOUS DESIGN FLAW in an otherwise good pickup. It effected ALL Tacomas, 2X, 4X, under 6 inch ground clearance bottom of the line up to the supposed "bullet proof" TRD.
Toyota DID fix that problem as did Ford FIX their problems. So give it a rest when you try to lecture me about Quality. I am certified in the field of Quality, you are not.
There just simply isn't a winner, as it is based on opinion. When someone purchases the vehicle, they're simply issuing their opinion on which is the best for them.
are for a GEM module produced by a sub of Ford, not
Ford itself. "
Back peddling. A common Cspounser tactic.
Cthompy:
A fully loaded Expedition is around 44 grand, and a fully loaded cruiser is around 51 grand.
NHSTA site again huh. And once again spoog wants everyone to see the TOTAL numbers not the individual incidents affecting only a certain build group of Rangers, or the ones for stickers, or decals, or even the duplicates.
Spoog, how many times do I have to ask for pictures? You could at least go down to the Toyota dealer and take a picture of a TRD on the lot. LOL.
I am getting about 20HWY, 17 city in my 4.0. I do however have larger tires. Before with the 235's I was getting about 22HWY, 18 city. Doesn't seem like the Toyota has too much of an advantage there for such a high tech engine that puts out 5ft/lbs less of torque.
I will ask the guy how he got a hold of Sport Trac next time I see him.
The Sequoia will get rave reviews, and a bunch of hoopla just like the Tundra did. Sales will be brisk at first but then after everyone sees it only comes with ONE V8 engine, and the high price, sales will flatten out.
and a fully loaded cruiser is around 51 grand."
That $51,000 is also the base price on the landcruiser. It comes fully optioned. On the other hand, an Expedition starts with a base price of $29,600. Not everyone needs leather and enough options to make Inspector Gadget jelous.
Enough of this, though. I'd never consider purchasing either. I'll leave that to the status-seeking soccer moms (and dads).
1998 Ranger 4X 4.0L engine:
SB 99-8-16 Motor Oil-SAE 5W-30 Viscosity Grade Recommendation.
That is a real show stopper is it not?!?
99-8-15 Interior Door Trim Panel Replacement tip
99-7-8 Temp Gage Fluctuates
99-6-3 Wire Splicing and wire harness repair kit
99-5-3 A/T Checking Transmission Fluid level cold
98-24-6 Excessive effort when lifting door handle
98-17-4 No Start-Dead Battery/corrosion at tray
98-12-20 Mud flaps shipped with vehicle incorrect
98-6-6 Mud flaps difficult to install tip
98-5-2 Tire company phone numbers
98-8-13 Axle clunking noise during 4WD shifting
Hmmm finally found one that could be somewhat serious but it is not for EVERY Ranger.
Do you get my point that when you rave on regarding the NUMBER of Service Bulletins rather than their content, you REALLY LOSE what credibility you have.
Now, lets look at the 59 Technical Service Bulletins against the 96 Tacoma 3.4L 4X:
TC003-99 A/T fluids
AX004-99 Toyota Dinghy Towing Guide
AC002-99 Snow Entry into heater unit. Hmmm a Quality issue here, cannot keep snow out of cab?
ST002-98 Steering Gear Removal/replacement Hmmm problems with the steering gear?
AC006-97 A/C Suction hose improvement
AC007-97 A/C liquid tube improvement Hmmm, not designed well in the first place so it needs improvement?
TC002-97 Transmission shift delay. Hmm bad trans?
AC00297 A/C evaporator odor (a real TuRD in the cab?)
DL00196 Driveline engagement noise. Hmm sounds like that Ranger TSB
ATRATB345 Checkball wear. Hmm things wear out?
EL95004 Wiper motor circuit breaker inspection. Hmmm like the Ranger wiper motors?
SS95-003 Engine support bar improvement. THIS is the breaking frames issue.
But my POINT is that the TSB's will be issued against ANY vehicle and we should be thankful that Ford and Toyota DO issue them.
Go ahead ask him a question. All he can answer with is a 2yr article.
I am glad Edmunds gave you fresh material on their Landcruiser test because the comments on the TSB's, without any deep review by yourself and the Four Wheeler article were getting real old. But go read the title of this board and start answering questions you are asked regerding a Tacoma, ok?
Go ahead ask him a question. All he can answer with is a 2yr article.
I am glad Edmunds gave you fresh material on their Landcruiser test because the comments on the TSB's, without any deep review by yourself and the Four Wheeler article were getting real old. But go read the title of this board and start answering questions you are asked regerding a Tacoma, ok?
With Ford, you have to have a few states attorney generals threathen them with class action suits, congressman pass resolutions, and senators start constitutional amendments before you see Ford relent and post: "Temp Gage Fluctuates" or "Excessive effort when lifting door handle".
They would not dare post anything else because it would result in something of the level of a presidental order just to get them to issue a recall to actually fix the problems.
Toyota actually cares about its customers and takes care of them instead of waiting for them to start a class action suit or ask for governmental action.
Recalls, which are mandated by the government, are issued do to a possible unsafe situation with the vehicle.
Do you really think a lawyer would start a class action suit based on "Temp Gage Fluctuates" or
"Excessive effort when lifting door handle"? No, it has to be an actual serious problem.
I'll give you another little tidbit of info. Toyota, Ford, GM, VW, etc... only care for their customers in that they've got enough green in their pocket to purchase their product. Turning a profit is what keeps them employed and the shareholders happy.
I know i asked you this before, but tell us all you can about your BFG AT KO's. I got the FireBones on my Taco and i think the time has come to move on. Talk to me about snow traction/cost/and the size you put on your ranger. Also if anybody else has them please speak up...
I saw a thing on the The learning Channel the other night were these people were crossing antartica in LandCruisers. Thsoe "soccer mom's" must have a lot of free time to be taking there LC's across Antartica! Also the LC will be around for 10+ years, i think it's safe to say the Expedition will not...
Vince
I disagree about the Sequoia. I think it will do better than you think. The ful size SUV competion is not as tough as the full size truck competion. Also i think as the Tundra gets older it will take more and more away from the big 3. It is my opinion, but i'm basing this on past examples (ie; the Camry)....
.02
-wsn
has been a great little truck, peppy and fun. A
week and a half ago the rear end locked up on it
and it would not budge. (second occurrence) Last
time this happened I nudged it and it broke loose,
the repair techs said it must have been a hung
brake, so I took their word for it. When it
happened last week I had it towed to the ford
dealership. When my truck arrived I got the same
response "you got a brake hung". Aside from the
fact that he is supposed to be a certified
technician , I wondered
how much he was really concerned about fixing the
problems with my truck. I found out 4 days later
when I got the truck back. They replaced a module,I don't know which one. I had the truck for one day, and noticed some differences, it seems a little more peppy, yet something was wrong.
The second day I had it back the windshield wipers refused to come on, and once I got them on, they were stuck on high. I shut the truck off, and then it would not
start again. Once again after a short rest the
truck started, and ran fine. When I took the truck
into the dealer, with the wipers flapping away,
the seemed rather unconcerned. They began naming
off things that I must have done, or was not doing
right. Talk about getting ticked off. That was
Monday, this is Wednesday, and still no word. When
I call them all I get is, "Sir, we will call you."
I don't know if all of this was a deep enbedded
problem in the ford that came out with the
replacement of other parts(I work on computers,
that kind of stuff happens) or if they did
something with their pull and plug method of fixing
the problem. I can only guess that they pulled
and plugged because all of my fuses were loose, a
few were in the wrong places, and the modules were
all loose too. Anyone else had this problem with
their truck, or some words of advice?"
People wonder why these rigs cost more. lol.
TWO problems:
1. Defective parts on your Ranger
2. Idiots at your repair shop ( most repair shops screw up every now and then, especially DEALER shops).
i am sure gald i am in the business and do my own work.you just can't trust anyone these days to do the job right.
Day 14 spoog and still no pictures. Just admit it you don't own the TRD with a supercharger. Gees, you could have at least scanned one out of a magazine, LOL.
you can about your BFG AT KO's. I got the FireBones
on my Taco and i think the time has come to move
on. Talk to me about snow traction/cost/and the
size you put on your ranger. Also if anybody else
has them please speak up...
Not too much experience in snow. There was about 5-6 inches on the property and it cut thru that very well. Snow on the roads is no problem.
They cost $100 each plus the goodies for a total of $525 considering a 3.8% tax rate here.
I put on 31X10.5X15" as the price was not that much different for the 30s. The 265X16s are about $10 more. I got them at Discount Tire and went to a plcace with the lower tax rate. Why pay 6.8% in Greenwood Village when I can pay 3.8 in Englewood?
They are wearing very well. 10,000 miles and some of the stuff that leaks out between the lugs are still on the tires!
I run 27-28 lb front and 29-20 rear. A bit of a bouncy ride and lower mpg but the tread pattern is flatter to the road. Taco is lighter so you MAY get away with a lb or so less.
I like em so far. They are great off-road as compared to the Wilderness AT.
Do look at the new Goodyear (an ATS, I think) that has 2 fairly wide grooves around the tire and the Scorpions. Big O makes one like it but is more expensive. But I am not sure that there is a better general purpose agressive off-road tire built. I like the side lugs that grip the rocks. I THINK the Aug or Sep Four Wheeler mag did a piece on them and said they were the best they had ever put on a truck. I will look for it as I have the mag somewhere.
Hope that helps.
I still think I could out do the new Landcruiser with my old 71. Not as fast with the old 6 cyl but tighter turns, lighter, better articulation and the list could go on.
"I own a '98 Ford Ranger XLT 4X4. Up until now it
has been a great little truck, peppy and fun. A
week and a half ago the rear end locked up on it
and it would not budge. (second occurrence) Last
time this happened I nudged it and it broke loose,
the repair techs said it must have been a hung
brake, so I took their word for it. When it
happened last week I had it towed to the ford
dealership. When my truck arrived I got the same
response "you got a brake hung". Aside from the
fact that he is supposed to be a certified
technician , I wondered
how much he was really concerned about fixing the
problems with my truck. I found out 4 days later
when I got the truck back. They replaced a
module,I don't know which one. I had the truck for
one day, and noticed some differences, it seems a
little more peppy, yet something was wrong.
The second day I had it back the windshield wipers
refused to come on, and once I got them on, they
were stuck on high. I shut the truck off, and then
it would not
start again. Once again after a short rest the
truck started, and ran fine. When I took the
truck
into the dealer, with the wipers flapping away,
the seemed rather unconcerned. They began naming
off things that I must have done, or was not doing
right. Talk about getting ticked off. That was
Monday, this is Wednesday, and still no word.
When
I call them all I get is, "Sir, we will call you."
I don't know if all of this was a deep enbedded
problem in the ford that came out with the
replacement of other parts(I work on computers,
that kind of stuff happens) or if they did
something with their pull and plug method of
fixing
the problem. I can only guess that they pulled
and plugged because all of my fuses were loose, a
few were in the wrong places, and the modules were
all loose too. Anyone else had this problem with
their truck, or some words of advice?"
I got the quote from a frustrated Ford customer who posted it in the wrong place..Now it reads correctly, little confusing the other way...
95V138000
Interior systems instrument panel speedometer
where the speedometer registered speed in mph but the odometer indicated distance in kilometers. Ford recieved a waiver as it was determined that the noncompliance to the govt standard did not create an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.
So can we establish that in 1995 the Ranger had ONE recall which turned out to not be a recall and Tacoma had THREE recalls?
Using your logic does that mean that the 1995 Tacoma was a worse vehicle because it was recalled three times to Ranges 0ne time? I do not think so but just using your logic of just counting numbers and not looking into the specifics. However on this case, the data shows 115,000 Tacomas and 0 Rangers were recalled in the year 1995.
Care to comment on those statistics spoog?
-wsn
Back to my post about the law of proportionality, again I forget sales figure but I believe the ratio of Rangers sold to Tacomas sold is five to one. Take one of the two insignificant recalls you listed above. Proportionality would say that if the two vehicles are of the same quality, Tacomas would have problems of similar degree occur in about 50 of their trucks. This makes me wonder if there is a "threshold" value for the number of vehicles to have a repeated defect before a Recall or TSB is issued. Say, if a problem affects one hundred vehicles the company has to issue a recall. The law of proportionality says that Ford will have more recalls than Toyota, because they sell more. If a problem affects only fifty vehicles, the company may just swap the engine, or whatever it is that failed.
lol. Including the electrical car was pretty sad.
1. Can't get keyless entry
2. Engine is designed for premium fuel if you want book performance. In the past, no big deal,but the difference ' regular vs supreme' is becoming significant and I fear will become even more-so given the current trend in fuel prices.Was looking at the V/8 with Auto. and EPA estimates on mileage compound the problem. Keep hoping fuel prices will come down (not likely)or designers will develop more efficient engines while maintaining performance. Maybe you just can't have it both ways !
Does this concern anyone besides me ?
So CSpounser, I will ask you this.....where is the Ranger pickup on that list? lol
!!!!!!!
Good one!!! Please also note, those vehicles are all brand new models, or redesigns that were selected. 93 was the grand cherokees first year ect.
If the 98 4wheeelr was included, that makes THREE times the Toyota comapct pickup was selected..............and the Ranger hasn't been picked once. lol.
Why would you post something that hurts your argument? NOt a very snappy post Cspounser.
lol!!!!!!!
Toyota compact THREE times, Ranger - O times!!!
in fact, the Toyota pickup and Jeep cherokee seem to appear on that list the most.......
"Where is the Tacoma."
BTW, you still do not answer questions because I THINK the answer is your vehicle has been subjected to more recalls than my Ranger.
BTW, speaking of runaway vehicles, found this on the 1996 Tacoma:
Component: FUEL:THROTTLE LINKAGES AND CONTROL
Manufacturer: ROSTRA PRECISION CONTROLS
Year: 1996
Make: TOYOTA TRUCK
Model: TACOMA
Potential Number of Units Affected: 5145
Manufactured From: NOV 1995 To: DEC 1995
Year of Recall: '96
Type of Report: Equipment
Summary:
THESE CRUISE CONTROL SYSTEMS FAIL TO HOLD THE SPEED SET BY THE DRIVER AND CAN ACCELERATE ABOVE THE INTENDED SET SPEED.
UNINTENDED ACCELERATION CAN INCREASE THE POTENTIAL FOR A VEHICLE ACCIDENT.
DEALERS WILL REPLACE THESE CRUISE CONTROL ASSEMBLIES.
Hmm, they replaced more than just the cables. . .
and:
Component: SUSPENSION:INDEPENDENT FRONT
Manufacturer: TOYOTA MOTOR CO., LTD.
Year: 1996
Make: TOYOTA TRUCK
Model: TACOMA
Potential Number of Units Affected: 90000
Manufactured From: To:
Year of Recall: '96
Type of Report: Vehicle
Summary:
UNDER CERTAIN DRIVING CONDITIONS, THE FRONT SUSPENSION SUPPORT CAN CRACK LEADING TO FAILURE OF THE SUPPORT.
THIS CONDITION CAN RESULT IN LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL.
So using your logic, this vehicle is subject to accelerating out of control and breaking suspensions to boot?
So you see that Toyota shows up on the list, but not the Explorer, a Ford product, twice?
BTW, Ranger showed up on another list for Pickups and the Mazda, it's clone showed up also.
In all cases simply means that someone liked the vehicle that year compared to others.
"Good one!!! Please also note, those vehicles are
all brand new models, or redesigns that were
selected. 93 was the grand cherokees first year
ect."
Well, that is true. However, when YOU were bragging about the 1998 Tacoma, which, as MANY people have established, was paired up against, basically a bottom of the line Ranger in tests, you felt that the test proved the Tacoma was the best of that year.
Best of the selected new vehicles, however, some other vehicles may very well have waxed the 1998 Tacoma in many areas.
PS I hated the Tacoma when it first came out, at he time I was driving a 1988 "pickup", but look at me now, oh well, I guess opinions change. I have been spending alot of time at the Tacoma Territory forum and it seems alot of Tacoma owners, while very satisfied, are saying they dont measure up to older models in build quality and "fit and finish". This is coming from diehard Toyota fans who laugh at the mentioning of wheeling in a Ranger, Frontier, or S10. I have to say that I will take the Tacoma anyday over my rusted 88. My dad has it know and I drive it whenever I visit. I wish I had the money to beef up the 88 with a flat bed to replace the rusting one, a lift, and locking diffs all around. That would be fun. I still wince when wheeling in my Tacoma considering it is only months old. I think it is absurd when people say that no one takes a 22K Taco off road, like it is so much easier to deal with damaging a 20K Ranger