I just saw the news and they were talking about the gov't investigating 47 deaths that could have resulted from the Firestone tires and that Sears has quit selling them. They said that Ford and Firestone say that the tires are safe. Hmmmm. That's the first time I've heard of them other than here at Edmunds. They said that most of the accidents involved Explorers.
What are the torque numbers again? I didn't catch that?
Hey if your truck is so powerful why did you do all those modifications to it? Not powerful enough? Or maybe it was buyer's remorse(that means it wasn't the powerful truck you thought it was)? Oh another thing, why do you go around bragging that your other ranger went 94K miles without a problem...did you not expect it to and you were suprised? That's the impression that I get, that YOU were suprised it made it so long. Plus, if it was such a great truck with no problems then why did you get rid of it? Afraid problems were coming?
vince,I did not know that the "Nissan crowd" was so popular that we managed to blame Ford for the tires on National news coverage.We do realize that Ford did not manufacture the tires,I just question their wisdom in putting them on their vehicles.YOU have said that the tires were garbage.
So how much torque does YOUR truck have (he doesn't have the SOHC, he's got the regular 4.0l V6)? Lets see...158hp, 223 ft. lb of TORQUE, according to Edmunds. The Frontier with the SC will have, let's see...210hp and 245 ft. lb. of TORQUE.
The SOHC ain't gonna help YOU, Vinny. You're at the bottom of the barrel.
It seems that the reason Ford is getting beat up over the tires is because they are the ones that have had the most problems.Apparently 19 out of the 21 deaths that have occured due to the tires were on Ford Explorers.For some reason those tires are deadly on Ford vehicles and not on the others.
Why would Ford not recall the tires here in the U.S like they have in other countries? Maybe because they'd be forced to recall millions of Explorers and it would cost them a boatload of money. I'd sure be proud to have purchased a vehicle from a company like that.
And thanks Vince for all those torque numbers you posted above. Too bad your truck didn't even make the list. Have fun wheezing up those cascades!
Let's all give Vince a hand for his ongoing efforts to educate all of us on the torque theory. Vince, you are really making the Vince Ranger referenced in post 327 a reality. I will remember your wisdom next time I shop for a vehicle: "Only torque matters" "More Power". Read the Long term Ranger test on Edmunds yet Vince??? Meow, Meow, good kitty!
Just wondering, but aren't those Firestones OEM equipment on Nissan 4x4s too?
I thought I saw somebody mention that somewhere.
BTW, Ford will be the most sought after manufacturer to sue. They've got very deep pockets (when compared to other manufacturers that use those same tires).
What an incredibly sad, litigious world we live in. Not to put a damper on the unfortunate people who've lost their lives, everyone's always looking for someone to blame. From some idiot who burns themselves with hot coffee (duh) to the morons who blame the tobacco industry for giving them cancer to the baffoons who claim that gun manufacturers are responsible for people killing other people.
You're right the 'liability lawsuits' are out of control - My girlfriend in in law school now and you wouldn't believe some of the precedent tort cases in there, unbelievable!
All of the Crew Cabs that I know of(including mine) have General Grabbers AW. But I have an SE with the 16" wheels, it's primarily the way the Crew Cab is rigged here even the XE has the 16" wheels. I don't know about the other models. I think that the 2wd models have the Firestones.
I know you're a Nissan salesman so I thought you might be able to help me. I was planning on buying a new truck pretty soon, either a Ranger or a Frontier, but now I'm thinking a car may work better for me. I'm seriosly considering a base Maxima SE. I would like the Bose stereo but probably can't afford the comfort and convenience package that is required to get it. I would also love the 17" wheels from the package, and the intermitant wippers--which I think should be standard in Nissan's "flagship sedan" anyway. But I don't need the sunroof or the power seat. Is there any way to get a Maxima like that, or am I just going to have to go with a base SE?? Sorry to go off topic. Thanks--
As an auditor, I've had to take a whole bunch of law classes. One case in particular comes to mind;
An older couple had a cabin somewhere as a vacation home. They continually had break-ins. Their stuff would be either vandalized or stolen. After the police weren't able to help them, they set up a booby-trap. They used a 4-10 shotgun set up with some bird shot. Their booby-trap did end up working and shot an intruder. The intruder then turned around and sued the owners of the cabin. Finally, the intruder ended up owning their cabin as it was the couple's only way of paying off the punitive damages.
And, this is true. I was shocked to say the least when we discussed it in law class.
I believe it, I read several cases like that. There's one I want to post to for you to read if you want(when my girlfriend gets back in town she has her tort book with her in Georgia) it goes something like two people were riding a Honda motorcycle when the driver of the motorcycle got to close to a car and ended up bouncing off the front bumper of the car. Well the driver's girlfriend(who was riding on the back)leg got wedged between the bumper of the car and the motorcycle then her foot bounced back and went into the motorcycle's spokes. The motorcycle never went down he just kind of sheared off the car. The girlfriend ended up suing Honda and won saying the design was a liability.
Well guys, it looks like firestone is going to recall those tires, an announcement is expected today around 11am eastern, I myself don't blame the auto manufacturers for the tires, they did not make them, and honestly, like I said before I have been pretty happy with my wilderness tires, but the possibility of something happening with them keeps me thinking, I hope they don't try to give us those, 4 tires for $99 dollar special tires, I want one with the same warranty as what I already have.
Danny, it will be very difficult to find one of those, are you looking for a 5spd also? If so, practically impossible. No way to get the bose without the package. Now if you pick it the way the factory makes it, your dealer can try to locate one for you, you may want to try a couple of delaers as some may tell you there is not one out there so you will buy something they have there. Last resort, you can have the dealer order one for you from the factory, but you are looking at a good 90-120 days before you get it. I do have a topic in the smart shoppers conference called "Nissan questions ask here" If you want to stop by sometime. Good luck!
Here's a good article on the tire situation. i agree you guys, why would anybody blame Ford? Unless they did't act fast enough or weren't willing to take care of the customers. There's alot of families riding in those damn SUV's.
Well, it looks like the frontiers are not having their tires recalled because they are 215's instead of the 235's. At least that is what firestone is telling me, (of course up until yesterday they also said there was no problem with the tires too) I guess if I wait another day or two, they may recall the frontier tires too.
You guys are clueless as to what torque means because you don't drive real trucks. Lets see. Ford 4.0l 160HP/225ft/lbs of torque Ford 4.0 SOHC 205HP/240ft/lbs of torque Nissan 3.3 170HP and 200ft/lbs of torque Nissan 3.3 SC has 210HP/245ft/lbs of torque. Ford doesn't need to bandaid its engines in order to meet the competition. Their normally aspirated engines to the job! LOL!! The normally aspirated 3.3 has a 10HP advantage, wow, 10HP for such a high tech engine!LOL.. For about $200 worth of mods I'm sure my HP now matches yours in my Ranger..
No buyers remorse here whatsoever, I put on a K&N kit and a chip, thats it! Am thinking of doing dual exhaust here in the next month or so... You guys just can't stand it, a Ford owner who loves his truck, has had great reliability, quality and performance from Ford. The Frontier is no threat to Ranger whatsoever. The 2001's arrive in a matter of months. I'm sure someone will do a comparison between these two trucks. Can't wait to see the Frontier get smoked!
I know where you can get some tires cheap for your Ranger...real cheap! Call Firestone they're having a Blowout Sale! RE: your band aid comments...I noticed how you keep saying that about the 3.3L but, you conviently don't acknowedge that Ford used S/C on the T-bird and the F-150. I know, I know makes you look stupid right? That's ok we all already know that you are, trust me YOU can't hide it! Let's see how Ford 'Bandaids' those tires!LOL
Go ahead start back-peddaling or repeating the same 3 posts you've been putting up here for the last 18 months. Have some creativity!
Get a life vince.Nobody really cares.You are showing your ignorance again.How can you presume to know what our experiences are or what other vehicles we have parked in our garages?You have only shown that you can look up what somebody else has written,misquote the facts,and are able to cut and paste pictures and claim they are yours.Good accomplishment.You also obviously have no mechanical aptitude and no clue on how to drive your truck especially off road.This is quite evident from your posts as well as to your avoidance of any answers to questions of substance where YOU have to answer in YOUR own words.You vince are the LOL.
My engine does the job just fine for me. And Vince, did I ever tell you my heap Ranger was so bad that Ford bought it back from me? LOL! I did? Oh, sorry. They actually had no choice but to buy the vehicle back. Their hot shot lawyers couldn't even refute my claim of what a heap it was. LOL! Have fun in that job1 Ranger, heh heh.
Truth hurts huh fellas? LOL!! The 3.3 is a joke and live with your joke. It proves that you have not been reading my posts/links or reviews showing the Ranger superior to the Frontier. I don't own Firestones on my truck. I got rid of them about 3 months after buying my Ranger. I knew they were garbage for offroading. I have stated this over and over. Signed. A Ford Ranger owner who is happy with his second Ranger and knows the facts! Nissan owners hate me because I popped their bubble! LOL..
I've been here, but now that I see my post #390 has been deleted???? I thought that it was rather funny. Vince has still not responded to my repeated requests to have him read the long term Ranger test right here on Edmunds. It goes back to 1998, and there are problems and complaints in every monthly update.
Since Vince just wants to talk about torque, I will sit back and enjoy my Nissan CC. Go ahead Vince keep spewing torque talk and LOL's. I have owned both a Ranger and a Nissan, and I know which is far superior.
But Vin, you forget, even the Nissan has more torque than the heap you drive. LOL! My 88 Corolla has about as much torque as your own personal rattletrap ranger. And lets not forgret that the Frontier delivers it's torque at low rpms (i.e where it's needed) than that hea...er....ranger LOL! I can't believe you drive that truck and want to join the ranks of the rest of us off roaders. Doesn't it stink to have to get up and get in that thing everyday? LOL!
Man, just read edmunds first drive of the new ranger, boy did they mess that up, I don't like the way the F-250's look, and it looks out of place on a compact truck. The grille really looks too big on it, The headlights make it look like it has its eyes half open like it just woke up. The dash still looks like a taurus, now I actually like the way the regular cab looks instead of the supercab, (at least in the photos in the article). I think it just looks more conservative, with an identity copied from the ford big trucks which was borrowed slightly from the dodge ram, they really should have just evolved the current style. Well at least they addresed some of the problems with the suspension etc. Maybe they fixed the "spotty reliability" and poor suspension edmunds was talking about too.
Unfortunately, as we both know, he never will answer you. A long time ago, in the 4Runner vs. Explorer room, he was trying to tell me how superior the Exploders were but would never answer why there are 3 topics here on Edmunds for people to say how shi**y their Explorers are (One of the, Perpetual Ford Explorer Woes, is on its second version). I must have asked him to answer that question about 30 times. He never did. Oh well, that's our Vinny.
I'm just glad I got to see your post before they deleted it. I wish I had saved it.
I actually really like the looks of the '01 Ranger. (I guess that would make sense as I really like the looks of the F-SuperDuty's) Does it look like they finally got around to putting some decent sized tires on the off-road Ranger? As shown by the comparison of a 2wd Tacoma vs. a 4wd or Prerunner Tacoma, tires make a HUGE difference.
This brings up a question. What's going on with the '02 Rangers, as they are a complete redesign? Will they all look like the '01 models with the slight redesign or something else?
When in the HELL is the rumored SVT Ranger gonna come out?!?
cygnu, what the he.. are you talking about? No Nissan pick-up puts out more torque than the 4.0? Goes to show what fantasy land you are in... Keep it coming boys.. Enjoy your weak 3.3's and keep up the patting each other on your backs to beef up your ego's. LOL! The new 2001 Ranger with its new SOHC 4.0 will continue the domination of the RAnger!! mmc? I haven't seen you around for a while. I notice you are still jumping around from room to room trying to get someone to go up against your superior 4-runner? Heck, even Nissan came out with an engine (3.5) that kills your 4-runner in every performance category...
Since my post #390 was deleted (probably because it was so damn funny) I will sanitize the content.
Vince: You continually call the supercharger on the new CC a band-aid??? Why then do you need to put a new chip, K&N filter, and dual exhaust on your P.O.S. ranger??? Is this not a band aid?? My Nissan CC has no mods, and it performs great on and off road.
Have you spent any time reading the long term ranger test yet?? Ya, I know, you will just keep ignoring this question. Go hide kitty. Meow LOL.
vince you just cannot stand that us Nissan owners really like our trucks and enjoy taking them everywhere.I really enjoy taking mine where Rangers cannot go.So,yes vince we will enjoy and have a LOL at your expense.
vince,I forgot to ask.Did your Ranger come with marshmallows or a fire extinguisher?They may supposedly rate higher then the Nissan in the crash tests,but they also rate higher in the fire test.Have you forgotten the HIGH incidence of fires in your Ford vehicles?I now know what one option your Ranger has that nobody else has.When you get lost in the woods it can be used as a signal fire,heat in the winter and a cook stove.LOL. BURN BABY BURN!!!!
Where oh where could our little Vince be, oh where oh where could he be??? Probably steaming at those who routinely shut him down. Once he gets some more torque info. he'll be back.
Since Vince won't comment on the Edmunds long term ranger test (1998 4x4) here are some gems from the recent monthly updates:
"It didn't take long for Wardlaw to regret his decision to drive the Ranger for a month."
"The seats are horrendously uncomfortable, offering zero support for legs and back. The grippy fabric can, at times, hold your body in odd seating positions as it clings tenaciously to your clothing. What this truck needs is a good, six-way power driver's seat with firmer padding."
"Wardlaw reported that the truck's five-speed transmission was shifting harshly, particularly when engaging reverse or when futzing along in rush-hour traffic on hot days, and once, when coasting down a steep freeway descent and selecting the overdrive-off function, the tranny freewheeled, offering no engine braking and dropping revs to idle level. Not good, especially considering the fact that this truck has already had its drive shaft yoke lubed under warranty, and hasn't been used for towing or moving heavy payloads."
"And then there is the noise issue that started to wear on them. This is not a quiet, comfy pickup. It's loud on the inside - tire noise and engine roar and wind buffeting"
"Memmer had difficulty getting used to the rough ride -- bouncy along on the freeway wasn't so fun, especially with an engine that Memmer thought was noisy and "sounded like a diesel," and was "gutless off the line in the lower range." He thought for sure the Ranger had a four-cylinder, until he opened the hood and saw six spark plug wires and "4.0" emblazoned on the engine. "It's obviously geared lower than a passenger car, for towing and load-carrying."
"Complaints abounded for the seatbacks this month, which were called, "the worst seats I've ever sat in." Scott warns that if you didn't have back problems before you rode in the Ranger, you'd have them in a matter of weeks. Memmer attributes this to the bulge in the lower lumbar region, in addition to the foam rubber that is "soft and spongy."
These are all direct quotes from Edmunds. This only covers a few of the monthly updates in 2000. Sorry Vince, I don't have enough time to go back and copy the numerous complaints they've had since the long term test started in 1998.
But then again, who cares. The Ranger has more torque than my Frontier, and thats all that matters. LOL, Meow, meow.
Don't you know that the little kitty cat is curled up and sleeping at the Service Department's couch at his local Ford dealer. He can't respond because they don't have computers there! To stay on topic...the Ranger is a Ford, Ford builds Rangers...Rangers are sold at Ford dealers, Ford dealers sell Rangers. I own a 2000 Nissan Frontier Crew Cab 4x4. Sleep tight Kitty Kat!
LOL! All you Nissan guys are just pissed off that you got jerked into buying the most inferior compact truck on the market today. I notice Croy2 brings up all the bad points in the longterm Ranger but fails to mention any of the good points in the full longterm review. Also notice he fails to mention the review Edmunds gives the Frontier!@ LOL! Also fails to mention that Edmunds rates the Ranger as the better performer, and rates the Frontier ONE, just ONE point better in reliability! If your going to use Edmunds as a source better dig a bit deeper next time! You Nissan gays can't stand it that a Ford owner lovers his RAnger, knows all about his Ranger, uses his Ranger as a true 4x4, has owned 2 Rangers, has had great reliability/quality out of his Ford products.. With the 2001 just around the corner the Frontiers days are numbered. On the net people are already ordering the Ranger with its NORMALLY aspirated SOHC 4.0, unlike the bandaided 3.3 with its supercharger!@ LOL. About my mods, I put on the K&N and the chip because I wanted to. I actually remove the chip and put it in when I feel I want it in. You have to run supreme when the chip is installed. Heck, with just the K&N air charger kit installed I match your horsepower of 170 easily. So enjoy your weak 3.3's! LOL. See you in the Cascade RAnge! Oh I forgot, the Nissan doesn't have the Torque to make it!! LOL!....
Vince8, Show us the Dyno test results done on your engine since you put the K&N filter in...Oh by the way I just installed my K&N fitercharger tonight myself(got it from 4 wheel parts in calif.) So even if you do get 10hp you only equal the stock 3.3L(what does that say about YOUR engine if you have to spend extra $$$ to equal the "weakest" 6cyl engine?)but not mine. BUT, I'm sure we don't get an extra 10hp maybe 2 or 3 horsepower...don't believe the hype. I bought mine for the durability and better filteration. BUt I can see your still looking for the 'sandman'. nite nite kitty!
The most inferior truck I've ever purchased was the one Ford had to write me a check for and buy back from me. Inferior is too good a word for the wheezing Ranger that I had to suffer with. And as far as Ford reliability goes, I only need one opinion and that's my own (from my own experiences with several makes and models). My motto from here on out is "Anything But A Ford".
Thats funny, my motto is "Anything but a Nissan".. OK, yeah right, its awfully funny how all of the sudden you went and bought a K&N air charger kit.. Hmmm..... Keep on trying to convince yourselfs the 3.3 is what it really isn't.. Face it, its the weakest V6 on the market today.. Wrong, I did Dyno my truck with both the chip and the K&N air charger kit installed. It Dyno'd at 181HP. I took it to a racing place and the guy did look at me kind of funny wanting to know why I wanted to Dyno a Ranger 4x4. He used an intertia type system. One thing I will admit, Rangers with A/C get crappy MPG. Mine drops a good 2-3mpg with the A/C running.. So, I only turn on the A/C if the weather gets hotter than about 85 or so..
O.K. Vince, you win. I am selling my 2000 Frontier CC, and I will buy a Ranger. Actually, I think that I will buy two. That way I will a back-up when one is in the shop, or a parts truck if something breaks. If one of my rangers catches fire, I can flee the scene in the other one. Sure, the ranger will be poor handling and uncomfortable, but it will have more TORQUE than my former frontier. LOL Kitty!
Sorry that you did not like my direct quotes from the Edmunds Ranger test. Yah, all of the quotes are negative, but take a look at the review and you will find that edmunds had very little positive to say about it.
Sorry to hear that your ranger gets crappy MPG with the A/C on. My weak little CC has the A/C almost constanly here is So. Cal, and it has very little impact on MPG or power. 10,000 miles on her now with absolutely no problems, rattles or anything.
Since I formerly owned a Ranger, I have some objective experience to compare these trucks. You, Vince, on the otherhand, have maybe only test driven a frontier. Your subjective judgement is based strictly on all the B.S. stats that you pull out of your [non-permissible content removed]. I know what a piece of crap my 1997 Ranger was. By 10,000 miles it had numerous rattles and had been back for warranty repairs five times. Enjoy your torque while I enjoy my ride.
Well,I see you got inaccurate data from the dyno.LOL.I also find it funny that the a/c on your Ranger drags your engine down.So much for your power.Another LOL.Maybe it is from carrying fire ext or marshmallows for you flaming Ford. LOL.Ha Ha.
Yeah reall, tallk a bout a bandaid. Adding a chip is the ultimate bandaid for not having any power. But if I paid extra money for a 4.0 engine and only produced 160 hp I'd probably be running to the auto parts store too begging for a chip. Oh yeah, Croy2, good call on the rattles. Before Ford was forced to buy 1998 Ranger back from me, it rattled and banged over every speed bump I hit. We dubbed it "the rattletrap" everytime I drove the other guys fishing. One of the things I love about the Frontier is that it is sooooo quiet inside and shifts incredibly smoothly. It's like riding on a cloud.
There are thousands of avid Rangers owners who read this forum daily. Since they all agree with Vince, they have no need to post any messages. LOL Kitty!!!
Actually, we are lucky that Vince is a one man show. No one agrees with his amusing rhetoric, not even the Ford dealer who fixes his truck!!
Vince, what color Rangers (2) should I buy to replace my Frontier CC?? I was thinking of Charcoal gray. This color would hide any burn marks in case my new Rangers self ignite. Or maybe turd brown would be a better color? It would then match the quality of a Ford Ranger. Dig deep little kitty. Meow, meow.
I've conceeded silence and have no wish to participate in the recent melee of stupidity (constant flaming, bashing, and namecalling from both sides) on this board. It's really quite pathetic. This used to be a great place for a discussion or debate.
Comments
Hey if your truck is so powerful why did you do all those modifications to it? Not powerful enough? Or maybe it was buyer's remorse(that means it wasn't the powerful truck you thought it was)? Oh another thing, why do you go around bragging that your other ranger went 94K miles without a problem...did you not expect it to and you were suprised? That's the impression that I get, that YOU were suprised it made it so long. Plus, if it was such a great truck with no problems then why did you get rid of it? Afraid problems were coming?
The SOHC ain't gonna help YOU, Vinny. You're at the bottom of the barrel.
And thanks Vince for all those torque numbers you posted above. Too bad your truck didn't even make the list. Have fun wheezing up those cascades!
I thought I saw somebody mention that somewhere.
BTW, Ford will be the most sought after manufacturer to sue. They've got very deep pockets (when compared to other manufacturers that use those same tires).
What an incredibly sad, litigious world we live in. Not to put a damper on the unfortunate people who've lost their lives, everyone's always looking for someone to blame. From some idiot who burns themselves with hot coffee (duh) to the morons who blame the tobacco industry for giving them cancer to the baffoons who claim that gun manufacturers are responsible for people killing other people.
All of the Crew Cabs that I know of(including mine) have General Grabbers AW. But I have an SE with the 16" wheels, it's primarily the way the Crew Cab is rigged here even the XE has the 16" wheels. I don't know about the other models. I think that the 2wd models have the Firestones.
An older couple had a cabin somewhere as a vacation home. They continually had break-ins. Their stuff would be either vandalized or stolen. After the police weren't able to help them, they set up a booby-trap. They used a 4-10 shotgun set up with some bird shot. Their booby-trap did end up working and shot an intruder. The intruder then turned around and sued the owners of the cabin. Finally, the intruder ended up owning their cabin as it was the couple's only way of paying off the punitive damages.
And, this is true. I was shocked to say the least when we discussed it in law class.
http://www.sptimes.com/News/080900/Worldandnation/Recall_of_tires_due_t.shtml
Lets see.
Ford 4.0l 160HP/225ft/lbs of torque
Ford 4.0 SOHC 205HP/240ft/lbs of torque
Nissan 3.3 170HP and 200ft/lbs of torque
Nissan 3.3 SC has 210HP/245ft/lbs of torque.
Ford doesn't need to bandaid its engines in order to meet the competition. Their normally aspirated engines to the job! LOL!!
The normally aspirated 3.3 has a 10HP advantage, wow, 10HP for such a high tech engine!LOL.. For about $200 worth of mods I'm sure my HP now matches yours in my Ranger..
No buyers remorse here whatsoever, I put on a K&N kit and a chip, thats it!
Am thinking of doing dual exhaust here in the next month or so...
You guys just can't stand it, a Ford owner who loves his truck, has had great reliability, quality and performance from Ford. The Frontier is no threat to Ranger whatsoever. The 2001's arrive in a matter of months. I'm sure someone will do a comparison between these two trucks. Can't wait to see the Frontier get smoked!
RE: your band aid comments...I noticed how you keep saying that about the 3.3L but, you conviently don't acknowedge that Ford used S/C on the T-bird and the F-150. I know, I know makes you look stupid right? That's ok we all already know that you are, trust me YOU can't hide it! Let's see how Ford 'Bandaids' those tires!LOL
Go ahead start back-peddaling or repeating the same 3 posts you've been putting up here for the last 18 months. Have some creativity!
Signed.
A Ford Ranger owner who is happy with his second Ranger and knows the facts! Nissan owners hate me because I popped their bubble! LOL..
Since Vince just wants to talk about torque, I will sit back and enjoy my Nissan CC. Go ahead Vince keep spewing torque talk and LOL's. I have owned both a Ranger and a Nissan, and I know which is far superior.
I think it just looks more conservative, with an identity copied from the ford big trucks which was borrowed slightly from the dodge ram, they really should have just evolved the current style. Well at least they addresed some of the problems with the suspension etc. Maybe they fixed the "spotty reliability" and poor suspension edmunds was talking about too.
I'm just glad I got to see your post before they deleted it. I wish I had saved it.
This brings up a question. What's going on with the '02 Rangers, as they are a complete redesign? Will they all look like the '01 models with the slight redesign or something else?
When in the HELL is the rumored SVT Ranger gonna come out?!?
Keep it coming boys.. Enjoy your weak 3.3's and keep up the patting each other on your backs to beef up your ego's. LOL!
The new 2001 Ranger with its new SOHC 4.0 will continue the domination of the RAnger!!
mmc? I haven't seen you around for a while. I notice you are still jumping around from room to room trying to get someone to go up against your superior 4-runner? Heck, even Nissan came out with an engine (3.5) that kills your 4-runner in every performance category...
Vince: You continually call the supercharger on the new CC a band-aid??? Why then do you need to put a new chip, K&N filter, and dual exhaust on your P.O.S. ranger??? Is this not a band aid?? My Nissan CC has no mods, and it performs great on and off road.
Have you spent any time reading the long term ranger test yet?? Ya, I know, you will just keep ignoring this question. Go hide kitty. Meow LOL.
Since Vince won't comment on the Edmunds long term ranger test (1998 4x4) here are some gems from the recent monthly updates:
"It didn't take long for Wardlaw to regret his decision to drive the Ranger for a month."
"The seats are horrendously uncomfortable, offering zero support for legs and back. The grippy fabric can, at times, hold your body in odd seating positions as it clings tenaciously to your clothing. What this truck needs is a good, six-way power driver's seat with firmer padding."
"Wardlaw reported that the truck's five-speed transmission was shifting harshly, particularly when engaging reverse or when futzing along in rush-hour traffic on hot days, and once, when coasting down a steep freeway descent and selecting the overdrive-off function, the tranny freewheeled, offering no engine braking and dropping revs to idle level. Not good, especially considering the fact that this truck has already had its drive shaft yoke lubed under warranty, and hasn't been used for towing or moving heavy payloads."
"And then there is the noise issue that started to wear on them. This is not a quiet, comfy pickup. It's loud on the inside - tire noise and engine roar and wind buffeting"
"Memmer had difficulty getting used to the rough ride -- bouncy along on the freeway wasn't so fun, especially with an engine that Memmer thought was noisy and "sounded like a diesel," and was "gutless off the line in the lower range." He thought for sure the Ranger had a four-cylinder, until he opened the hood and saw six spark plug wires and "4.0" emblazoned on the engine. "It's obviously geared lower than a passenger car, for towing and load-carrying."
"Complaints abounded for the seatbacks this month, which were called, "the worst seats I've ever sat in." Scott warns that if you didn't have back problems before you rode in the Ranger, you'd have them in a matter of weeks. Memmer attributes this to the bulge in the lower lumbar region, in addition to the foam rubber that is "soft and spongy."
These are all direct quotes from Edmunds. This only covers a few of the monthly updates in 2000. Sorry Vince, I don't have enough time to go back and copy the numerous complaints they've had since the long term test started in 1998.
But then again, who cares. The Ranger has more torque than my Frontier, and thats all that matters. LOL, Meow, meow.
Show us the Dyno test results done on your engine since you put the K&N filter in...Oh by the way I just installed my K&N fitercharger tonight myself(got it from 4 wheel parts in calif.) So even if you do get 10hp you only equal the stock 3.3L(what does that say about YOUR engine if you have to spend extra $$$ to equal the "weakest" 6cyl engine?)but not mine. BUT, I'm sure we don't get an extra 10hp maybe 2 or 3 horsepower...don't believe the hype. I bought mine for the durability and better filteration. BUt I can see your still looking for the 'sandman'. nite nite kitty!
OK, yeah right, its awfully funny how all of the sudden you went and bought a K&N air charger kit.. Hmmm.....
Keep on trying to convince yourselfs the 3.3 is what it really isn't.. Face it, its the weakest V6 on the market today..
Wrong, I did Dyno my truck with both the chip and the K&N air charger kit installed. It Dyno'd at 181HP. I took it to a racing place and the guy did look at me kind of funny wanting to know why I wanted to Dyno a Ranger 4x4. He used an intertia type system.
One thing I will admit, Rangers with A/C get crappy MPG. Mine drops a good 2-3mpg with the A/C running.. So, I only turn on the A/C if the weather gets hotter than about 85 or so..
Sorry that you did not like my direct quotes from the Edmunds Ranger test. Yah, all of the quotes are negative, but take a look at the review and you will find that edmunds had very little positive to say about it.
Sorry to hear that your ranger gets crappy MPG with the A/C on. My weak little CC has the A/C almost constanly here is So. Cal, and it has very little impact on MPG or power. 10,000 miles on her now with absolutely no problems, rattles or anything.
Since I formerly owned a Ranger, I have some objective experience to compare these trucks. You, Vince, on the otherhand, have maybe only test driven a frontier. Your subjective judgement is based strictly on all the B.S. stats that you pull out of your [non-permissible content removed]. I know what a piece of crap my 1997 Ranger was. By 10,000 miles it had numerous rattles and had been back for warranty repairs five times. Enjoy your torque while I enjoy my ride.
Frontier SC: SC is a bandaid because normally aspirated the 3.3 is weaker than the SOHC 4.0
SOHC 4.0 Ranger: Putting a chip or high flow filter, etc is not a bandaid, because it's already more powerful than the normally aspirated 3.3.
This principle is the same for any two engine comparisons. Thats why putting a SC on a Ford is not a bandaid to Vince.
This is the word of Vince, Amen.
Actually, we are lucky that Vince is a one man show. No one agrees with his amusing rhetoric, not even the Ford dealer who fixes his truck!!
Vince, what color Rangers (2) should I buy to replace my Frontier CC?? I was thinking of Charcoal gray. This color would hide any burn marks in case my new Rangers self ignite. Or maybe turd brown would be a better color? It would then match the quality of a Ford Ranger. Dig deep little kitty. Meow, meow.
He has to bandaid his truck to make it equal to the 3.3L.