Toyota TACOMA vs Ford RANGER - VII



  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    As far as American car go. I guess I barely write better than that other gut at times.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    I was hoping that answering your question would not have sparked spoog but I was wrong. And also, would agree with you regarding satisfaction of Tacoma owners, but, since your fairly new here, let me briefly remind spoog of some facts he seems to forget.

    Get it straight. There have been more Toyota Tacoma vheicles RECALLED, notice the key words RECALLED and VEHICLES PERIOD. You posted the data that supports that fact.

    In regard to RECALLS for Ranger, mine has NEVER, repeat NEVER had a RECALL as I do not own a 3.0 Liter engine, I do not own an Electric Ranger.

    I also totaled up the number of TSB's, as you will recall and found that, as a percentage of vehicles sold, the Tacoma has a, ready for this again,

    You REALLY need to read DETAILS rather than just numbers. Sometimes the TSB's effected say 90 vehicles. I can assume that you look at a speed limit sign and do not get past the word speed. Quite frankly spoog your ignorance in this and the details of the issue that Meredith called us on is appalling.

    Read it again spoog, your ignorant as you fail to read any details.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    Well I think that you and I both know that the crash NTSA for both the Ranger and the Tacoma were done with a non 4X4. As I have pointed out before, the standard Tacoma, non-4X4 is lower in road clearance than the Ranger which may have contributed to it's poor showing. Aslo, I think the Tacoma was a shortbed regular cab and the Ranger a Supercab. As I understand it Ranger on all Supercabs has the boxed 8 crossmember frame which is reported to be quite a bit stronger than the non boxed frame.

    As for pictures, I was just ribbing you a bit. Yes I did have someone else take pictures, the side view of my truck was taken by someone else. The ones in for development now we swapped cameras but do not know how they will come out. In the sand, where you do not stop in soft sand least you will sink, the only pictures are of the two trucks together.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    reread your post 272, if a vehicle has 15 TSB's that effect 100 cars and another has 5 TSB's that effect 10,000 cars, which is the worst car?

    Also, many of the TSB's are for Ranger are: missing stickers, window glazing, service tips, that kind of stuff.

    Now for Tacoma, some of the TSB's refer to:
    Transfer case locking up and that kind of stuff. I also did a review of the TSB's and found that there was a higher incident of INJURY associated with Tacoma TSB's vs the Ranger.

    Numbers are fine however, you need to read the details to get the true picture.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    In regard to the Toyota vehicles I have owned, please read into my posts that I have had less cumulitive problems with my 86 Caravan, 90 LeBaron and 94 Intrepid than with the Toyotas I have owned.
    I also own an 82 VW Rabbit. Now it has had some electrical problems, blown fuseable links, but other than wearout stuff, brakes, 2 clutches, struts, a rack and pinion, that kind of stuff, it is running fine at 215,500 miles on the odometer.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    the amount of money spent on the Toyotas far exceeds the other cars I have owned. This is because when they break, Toyotas are expensive to fix.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    OK, I guess the Ranger has everything but a reputation for quality and a higher satisfaction per vehicle sold ratio than Tacoma. Even in the last car review in your much quoted Consumer Reports which I read in 1998, it rated Tacoma good to excellent in every category. The Ranger had a lot of areas fair to poor. Lets say that the Ranger has improved that much in two years and the Tacoma has gone the other way. If so are most of the truck and four wheel magazine articles I read that biased? What you seem to be trying to convince us here is that the Ranger is actually better in quality than the Tacoma because it has less TSBs and recalls. The responses from Ranger owners in Edmunds or every truck forum I have found don't support that. Every forum I go to sings praises to Tacoma and gives mixed responses to the ranger.
  • hindsitehindsite Member Posts: 590
    You have cited the crash test in regards to the side impact done by NHTSA and have compared it with the Taco 4x4. Are you changing your tune again or just straddling the fence?
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    ODI ID: 721787
    Model: TACOMA
    Year: 1999
    Date of Failure: Friday, April 07, 2000
    Incident: No
    Fire: No
    Number of Injuries:
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    Well, if your refering to the April Consumer Reports, yes the Tacoma was rated high in all areas. Fair to poor for the Ranger? Do not exactly recall it that way. Thought the Ranger rated a half red circle or above in all areas.

    But which truck did CR rate the best buy and recommended check mark in that issue?

    It was not the Tacoma.

    My point and others here has been that the Ranger is a very capable vehicle, and the price is reasonable. Its rankings in CR have been high enough to warrent the "best buy" award for most of the last 10 years.

    No not saying Ranger is better in Quality vs the Tacoma. In general Toyota puts out a very high quality product. Just suggesting when you look at the DETAIL of the recalls and TSB's you see, per unit, there are more Tacoma's recalled, and there is a higher injury rate associated with the Tacoma TSB's.

    Draw whatever conclusions you want from that data but just look beyond a number and see the details.

    You notice how spoog just cited data from 1999 to 2000? That is because when you bring in the data from 1996-2000 like I did, which showas a HISTORY the picutre changes a bit and is not as favorable to the Tacoma.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    No, just saying that I would think for both vehicles that the crash test data should compare reasonably with the 2 wheel drive and 4 wheel drives. I do not know of any special tricks, other than vehicle height, that either company does that is different between the 4X4 and 4X2.

    I was also suggesting that perhaps the Tacoma did worse than the Ranger is because they used a Ranger Supercab and I think a Tacoma regular cab in the test. I Know, by reading the stats posted by Edmunds, that the Ranger is a bit higher off the ground than Tacoma. Also, the Ranger, in my opinion, has a better/stonger frame setup than the Tacoma. As I posted long ago, the 98-99 Ranger frame is reported to be 200% stronger as I recall than the older configuration Ranger as they brought the frame crossmembers up past the cab area to beef up the IFS system. Perhaps that is one of the reasons Tacoma had so much trouble with it's IFS in 96-97 and recalled every vehicle (180,000 vehicles as reported in the database) to beef up it's frames.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "You notice how spoog just cited data from 1999 to
    2000? That is because when you bring in the data
    from 1996-2000 like I did, which showas a HISTORY
    the picutre changes a bit and is not as favorable
    to the Tacoma."

    Keep dancing. I gave info from 1989 to 2000, Did you even read the posts?

    As for your info on injuries and total number of vehicles, you are wrong again.

    Sorry pal, I use the facts. Both in THIS discussion and in the Roadless Initiative discussion.

    And do you REALLY want me to post comments from the NHSTA comment board? Please........
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    2000 Tacoma:
    Powerful engine choices, attractive looks, competent off-road capabilities.
    Uncomfortable seats, high price for a compact pickup truck.

    Toyota hopes to attract buyers with the style and image of its Tacoma as well as a lower price tag. We like the Tacoma, but question the value it represents. Most of these Toyota trucks don't come cheap. Guess that's the price you pay for the peace of mind a Toyota provides.
    Crash Test Results
    · Driver: Rating = Good
    · Passenger: Rating = Good
    · Side Impact Front: Very Poor
    · Side Impact Rear: Not Tested
    · Crash Offset: Acceptable
    · Bumper Bash: Poor
    2000 Ranger:
    Four-door entry, five-speed automatic and optional flexible fuel/electric powertrains, thoughtful interior.
    Room in extended-cab area isn't enough for adults, questionable front-end styling.

    Ford has had the best-selling small trucks in the country for years. Fun to drive, sharp looking and well built, the Ranger delivers a solid compact-pickup experience. Its most serious competition comes from the Dodge Dakota, which is slightly larger and offers V8 power.

    Crash Test Results
    · Driver: Rating = Good
    · Passenger: Rating = Good
    · Side Impact Front: Very Good
    · Side Impact Rear: Not Tested
    · Crash Offset: Acceptable
    · Bumper Bash: Marginal
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    1998 Tacoma road test:The Tacoma's biggest demerit, however, is its price. Our test truck had a sticker that approached the $30,000 mark. We think that a $28,500 price tag is much too high for a compact pickup, even for one with a Toyota badge. Edmund's long-term Ford Ranger stickers for $5,000 less than the Tacoma, and has more equipment, more attractive styling, and a usable rear seat. It has also proven to be very reliable for our first 10,000 miles of ownership. Is the promise of Toyota reliability worth five grand? We don't think so. Give us the Ranger and the extra $5,000. We'll put the money toward the purchase of a Wave Runner, thank you.

    Sticker of $28,500. . . vs Ranger at about $20,000. Hmmm let me think a second. . .

    As I said, here you can get a Ranger 4X4 dressed out for $2,000 down and $175 a month. Do not think Tacoma even comes close to that.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    My cruise control was never fixed under recall, never.

    Understand the facts before you jump on something. You do not look stupid that way.

    Check all my posts, never had a recall for my cruise control because I have the dealer add on factory style cruise control and it has never failed or been recalled.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    and electronics of my system are identical to factory cruise, with the exception that the cruise light does not come on. However, even that can be fixed by running a 12 volt power line from the cruise system to the idiot light.

    I had the dealer put it on as they made a $400 mistake on the paperwork on my purchase.

    Did you remember that my vehicle inital negotiation price was $15,886? Quite a bit lower than the $21,000 price of a TRD.

    Less than $16K for a 4X4 supercab top of the line trimline and engined vehicle.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    1998-1999 Explorer/Mountaineers
    1998-1999 Rangers
    1999 F250/F350/F450/F550
    and 1999 F-53

    A lot of vehicle types that inflate the numbers. Perhaps there were 100,000 Rangers recalled for this issue? And the issue was not an indication that all vehicles had the problem. As it was a safety issue, all vehicles had to be checked. You never see the numbers of how many vehicles actually had the problem.

    By the way, you never answered my question as to how many of the Tacoma recalls or hidden recalls effected your vehicle.

    But I will state with 100% accuracy and honesty that to date, my vehicle has never been the subject of a recall.

    In regard to TSB's it has only had a supplier, non Ford produced wiper switch replaced, that particular switch developed corrosion as I understand it and one door interlock switch that resulted in a door chime coming on.

    Absolutely nothing serious with my vehicle, it has been a great, strong running, reliable, fun to drive, economical (16mpg worst ever and 25 best ever mpg, average 19-22mpg normally) excellent handleing truck, WELL worth the price paid and quite capable off-road.

    It is really not fair to compare the Ranger with vehicles such as the Mustang and Escort. The Musting may have problems due to the type of car, a sporty and in my opinion, over priced/over powered vehicle. The Escort on the other hand was not a very well constructed vehicle, but it was a very cheap entry into the market of that class of vehicle.
  • xena1axena1a Member Posts: 286
    Thanks, CP. Looks like the tire size difference for my truck is right at 4%. The recalculated MPG average for my road trip from AZ to CO and back was just under 22 (21.9) to be exact. Not bad considering I had the AC blasting away most of the time. I'll also have to watch my speedometer. I was apparently driving about 2 MPH faster than I realized!
    To answer your questions about Hermit Pass - the round trip mileage was about 23 and did take about 4 hours to drive it. There is no altitude marker at the top like there is on Medano or Hayden. One of my hiking books indicates that the top of Hermit Pass is 13,020. There were 3 Quadrunners at the top, but no other vehicles besides them and my B3000. Hermit lake is located just below timberline and you pass by it on the way up, but we did not stop and hike back to it. The road up as far as Hermit Lake is rough, but fairly wide and can handle two-way traffic pretty well. Above the lake, however, it gets progressively more narrow and difficult. Would recommend a weekday trip to the top if you can arrange it. Very few places to pull over or turnaround for two-way traffic. But it is certainly worth the effort to get up there!!! Great views, challenging 4WD trail. It was one of the high lights of my trip. Thanks again...
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    Porsche's cost more than mustangs......I wonder why.......

    And who would be dumb enough to pay 28,000$ for a compact pickup? I got mine for around 24 with the Charger, and Allknowng got his for 21.

    By the way....I suggest you read the Ranger long term test...Edmunds is singing a different tune altogether.......
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    Ouch. Heres the Edmunds Ranger long term test-

    only 28,000 miles, yet quite a few problems already......

    "1998 Ford Ranger

    June, 2000

    By the Editors at

    Our Ranger was again left in the care of Lev Stark, our vice president of corporate development. And Lev again treated our truck to daily runs up and down the 405 freeway, one of southern California's loveliest blocked arteries.

    After sitting for a while and then a bit more everyday, Lev had the courage to rail against the Ranger's seats with vehemence approached only by technical editor Scott Memmer, who drove the truck last winter. Lev's rant goes as follows: "I didn't want to say it at first because I thought it may seem trivial, but it is driving me crazy. THE SEATS OFFER CRAPPY COMFORT. Were the designers at Ford absent from car-building school on the day ergonomics were being taught as an important design feature? There. It's off my chest now. Spending 45 minutes a day stuck on the 405 in this vehicle has allowed my chiropractor to buy his wife a new Jag."

    Lev then turned upon the Ranger's racy flareside bed. "The flareside might look cool when viewing this truck's profile, but a view from the rear might make a reasonable person think that our truck had cosmetic surgery that went awfully wrong. It looks like someone liposucked its tush but forgot its thunder thighs." Besides offending his aesthetic sensibilities, the tailored bed design reduces the hauling space, thus undermining the functionality that trucks are supposed to have.

    After criticizing the red truck, Lev attempted to ply the Ranger with praise for its elevated driving position. "With all of the monster SUVs in Tinseltown, you'd better be in a truck, or your own SUV, or something like a Diablo (that is so low that you can see under the monsters in front of you), if you want to be able to see anything while you're in traffic."

    How did the Ranger respond to his lightened tone? It seems that our truck tried to slip away so as to end the conversation altogether. Sort of. Lev reports that the Ranger began drifting slightly to the right. At first, he attributed such behavior to the incline of the road. Then, it seemed that the Ranger really did try to wander off. "After a few controlled tests, it's clear that the car needs some sort of alignment."

    And we still need to repair the driver's side breakaway mirror that no longer breaks away.

    Current Odometer: 28,308
    Best Fuel Economy: 16.1 mpg
    Worst Fuel Economy: 14.0 mpg
    Body Damage: $0
    Maintenance Costs: $0
    Problems: Pulling to the right - may need alignment"
  • hindsitehindsite Member Posts: 590
    I have been very unlucky to have own Ford Trucks including the Mark III conversion van which is a F150. Both were horrible and more expensive to fix. However, I will say that Ford is better than my Dodge experience.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    Here are the problems the Edmunds long term Ranger test has had so far with ONLY 28,000 miles:

    "We've noticed a strange sound while shifting into "reverse" and "drive." Could it be the very same exhaust clamp problem we had in our long-term Xterra? (See the October update.) We'll be sure to check that out when we take our truck in shortly to have the still-broken armrest fixed. One driver expressed a preference to leave the armrest be, as it added a bit more rugged machismo to the compact pickup. Majority rules here; no worries, it'll be fixed. "

    "Helke had the urge to take the truck out into the high desert to test its ruggedness, but he had to settle for a trip to Hollywood Ford on Sunset Boulevard. Our Ranger's transmission, you might recall, was suffering from two problems. First, when we moved the lever through the gears it felt jerky and sounded clunky. Second, when accelerating, upshifts were sometimes hard and the transmission sounded as if it might fall out at any minute. Hollywood Ford was also going to take care of our broken-off armrest. "

    "Helke still griped about the decaying plastic aftermarket add-ons and the fact that nothing about the Ranger "wowed" him.

    "Aftermarket parts continue to take a beating, both physically and figuratively, from our drivers. Chase reports that the kickplates on the running boards are a disaster (the passenger side one is completely gone and the other one dangles by one screw). Also, the bedliner was more warped this time around than in August, and although one can still use the bed, Chase thinks it "can't be good for rain and car wash water to be getting down behind the walls of the liner."
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    Just like the recall quote, you quote from Edmunds and it ends up backfiring on the Ranger. Here are MORE quotes from the Edmunds long term Ranger road test. This is just TOO rich:

    ".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." "

    "When we got home, we noticed that the door-ajar idiot light was illuminated on the dash, but went out once we stopped the truck and put the gearshift lever into park. We checked the doors - they were all closed tightly - and then cleaned the contacts in the doorjambs just to make sure dirt wasn't the culprit. We'll monitor the problem to see if it happens again"
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    Again quote another source that backfires. I wonder why? See....the Tacoma is the better vehicle, plain and simple. YOu just haven't gotten it yet. Enjoy:

    "There comes a time in every relationship when little things can build up to the point of being a hassle. That's how we felt about our long-term Ford Ranger last month, when little things about this truck started to grind us the wrong way, both literally and figuratively.

    First off, you'll recall that in our previous report, our friendly Metro Detroit Ford dealer (who performed the Ranger's 25K service) told us that the truck's front brake pads were down to about 20 percent of their remaining life. Our service advisor had said we'd likely need the front brakes redone by the time the 30,000-mile service interval came around. Well, we didn't quite make it that far. It was at 26,458 miles, to be exact.

    Over a period of about two weeks, an occasional faint front brake squeal turned to a regular discernable grind, so we deemed it wise to go back to the dealership -- Roy O'Brien Ford, Inc., in St. Clair Shores, Mich. -- to schedule the front brake job. As usual, we were greeted promptly and courteously, and the service person, Kristen Benson, took it in right away without an appointment.

    The good news is, she called later that same evening to tell us the truck was done. The bad news is, it would set us back $295. For the three bills, their technicians removed and replaced the front pads, overhauled the calipers, machined both rotors, bled the lines and adjusted the brakes. Sure enough, the new brakes were both quiet and firm. But there was still more work that needed to be done this month.

    You'll also recall that we had been planning to get the Ranger's cracked windshield replaced this time around. (During the truck's cross-country trip out to Detroit from LA, a stone tossed by an SUV outside Flagstaff, Ariz., struck the Ranger's front glass just below the wiper arm on the driver's side. By the time we made it to Detroit, a crack had traveled all the way across the lower portion of the windshield.) We had investigated three different independent auto glass contractors before deciding on Speedy Auto Glass, also in suburban St. Clair Shores - thanks mostly to location, a good price and decent service reputation.

    The glass shop was teamed with a Ziebart auto care franchise, and after finding our way back to the service desk, we asked assistant service manager Heath Caldwell for an appointment. He said he'd order the glass and have it delivered within 48 hours, and to come back in a couple of days for the installation. Two days later we arrived right on schedule at 9 a.m., and the truck was pulled in and promised by 6 p.m. that night.

    The good news is, the new windshield was done on time, with no gooey glass sealant leaking out anywhere. The bad news is that for the $242.58 we paid to have it done, you'd think the shop could have vacuumed out the bits of old windshield glass and rubber shavings that littered both front floor mats. If only the service industry could learn to do that "little extra" to make the repair experience a satisfying one ... Geez!

    Even more disappointing was the fact that the night after the windshield was replaced, we took the Ranger out for a shopping trip to Home Depot, and on the way home, the new glass took a stone square-on while traveling on Detroit's crumbling I-94. No crack this time, thankfully, but a very tiny pockmark has now christened the fresh windshield as if to say, "Hey, NO auto glass can go untouched in THIS town!"

    Detroit's time with their Ranger is now up, and even though the Clor family has lived with a Ford Ranger of some sort in their garage for the better part of a decade, they're not going to miss this one much. Oh, sure, they'll miss the easy hauling service the Ranger provides - especially since spring has sprung and there's a lot of landscaping to do around the house. But they've simply outgrown the Ranger, as it just can't handle all the transportation needs of a family of four despite being a four-door SuperCab model.

    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. It's louder than any of the half-dozen or so Rangers they've owned - but then again, it's a 4x4, and they never had one of those before. (Just for the record, they only shifted the Ranger into four-wheel drive once this winter, during a snowstorm.) "

    Leave it to Ford to make totally unnacceptable brakes. Gee, what a surprise. What a joke. I haven't changed my Taco brakes yet, and my older Toyota truck I had didn't need changing till around 100,ooo miles.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    The price as tested fdor the Edmunds long term Ranger is 23,591. Thats a far cry from the 17 grand Cspounser likes to spout about.

    I wonder what the Ford "offroad" package gets you?

    "Off-Road Package (includes painted platinum bumpers and grille, fog lights, P235/75R16 OWL A/T tires, 16-inch polished aluminum wheels, off-road decal, tape stripe delete, specially-tuned shock absorbers)"

    BWahahahaha! Who was it that liked to call things a "sticker"?
  • barlitzbarlitz Member Posts: 752
    My arguement is ridiculous? You are comparing a $50,000 porsche to a $25,000 camaro.I am comparing similar trucks same size,same price range.Ford just blows away Toyota in Full size,compact and suv in sales.Check out for yourself.Most people do there homework when making a large purchase and Ford still outsells them all which tells me Ford makes a very competive priced right vehicle.#1 full size 23 years #1 compact 13 years.Toyota dug themselves in a hole with the Tundra priced it way to high now sales are lagging they have to cut prices to reach yearly projected goals and that will effect Tacoma sales.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "With night temperatures dropping into the freezing zone in the Mile High City, our Ranger's first problem has made an appearance. It's nothing serious like hard starting or a weak heater performance. Just an annoying combination of rattles and squeaks that disappear once the interior heats up. This unwanted symphony emanates from behind the dash and was described by our editor-in-chief as a loud "bowl of Rice Krispies"

    lol! this is from the FIRST [email protected]!!!!!!!!

    Hilarious!!!! Heres more from the first couple of months! Who has seen quality control? Anyone? It seems to be missing!

    "The truck’s most serious problem to date is also found inside. Besides the aforementioned creaks and groans from under the dash when cold, the Ranger’s passenger-side electric window is showing resistance when being lowered. Specifically, it acts like the glass isn’t properly seated with a "slip-slip-slip" sound and visible shuddering. This is in addition to the problem of not having illuminated window switches, which makes nighttime operation a lock-unlock-lock-roll-down-the-window procedure.

    Engine noise and rough idling is another concern noted by our online editor. The Ranger still displays an abundance of power and is getting adequate mileage, but the squeaky sounding engine, along with the jumpy window and creaking dash, are on our list of items to be checked at the 5,000-mile service (which is coming up fast)."

    Unfortunately, we just recently noticed that it is refusing to go into 4WD low, so a trip back to the dealer is planned. "
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "rattles like a diamondback off road."


    Unbelievable. Absolutely unbelievable. My oh my.

    Once again Cspounser quotes from the wrong source and opens a monster can of worms.

    Long term tests and offroad tests are a bit different from a 5 hour test to the grocery store eh Cspounser? MY oh my. Heres more:

    "Reactions are less complimentary from our resident off-road expert who says the Ranger "rattles like a diamondback off road." The noise comes from where the front and rear doors meet as well as from the dash area, which has been squeaking more and more as the miles accumulate and the temperature drops.

    The cold weather has all but dismantled the truck's bedliner. Every major panel now has a wave in it and the liner has separated from the bed, leaving gaps for water and snow to get trapped beneath it. This could eventually lead to rust and has us ready to test out the "lifetime warranty" that Rugged Liner is supposed to offer on all its products. "

    "It seemed extremely whimpy climbing up I-70 towards the Eisenhower tunnel." "

    "No 4-low gear, creaks and rattles during off-road driving, fully warped bedliner (aftermarket product), annoying safety feature that makes locking the keys in the cab very easy"

    "Unfortunately, as Chris is quick to note, the Ranger doesn't have a power driver's seat or sufficient padding, and he can barely stand the "crappy driver's chair for more than a trip to the mall."

    "There's also not enough room for a large baby stroller in the cab, which means it must ride in the bed, even on snowy Colorado days. Perhaps the most challenging aspect of child toting in the Ranger involves the large windshield and small sun visors. Depending on the time of day and direction of travel, it can be nearly impossible to keep the sun from damaging junior's delicate eyes and skin. "
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "Only one mechanical problem cropped up this month, but it's a potentially scary one. What started as a slight pull to the right when driving became a strong lurch to the right under semi-hard braking. Our editor-in-chief had his hands full keeping the Ranger in its own lane the first time it happened. A sticking brake caliper seems likely, so a trip to the dealer will be scheduled in the near future. "

    WOW. Three months into the test!

    "Shortly after its trip to Castle Rock, the Ranger and our technical editor embarked on a voyage to Los Angeles, Calif., by way of Sedona, Ariz. The truck was still suffering from a subtle, yet annoying, pull to the right. A last-ditch effort to cure the problem involved a tire rotation at a dealer-recommended tire store in Boulder, Colo. But the rotation didn't cure the problem, and actually seemed to make it worse. DOH"

    "the Ranger would drop out of overdrive, gradually rev up, and rumble past these slow-moving vehicles at a rate that made passing a challenge on anything but flat or downhill terrain. The problem was less extreme at low altitudes, but for truly authoritative acceleration, the Ranger needs a V8; too bad it's not an option. "
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "Finally, Bob noted a strange, high-pitched "clink" when slowing down that he could only attribute to the transmission downshifting. Our tech editor also noticed the noise when backing up the slight incline in his condo's parking area. He suspected it might be a transfer-case issue. The noise is somewhat disconcerting, but no other symptoms, such as driveline shudder or shifting problems, are present. Another dealership visit is in the Ranger's future. "

    "A trip to Beverly Hills Ford already happened this month to address the cruise-control cable recall and perform the 10,000-mile service. We also had them check a slow leak in the right-front tire. The cable was replaced free of charge, the engine oil and filter were replaced, the tires rotated, and all fluid levels were checked. Total bill: $43.94. "

    "Problems: Squeaking rear springs when loading or unloading cargo."

    "Ergonomically, the Ranger has few faults; but those that it has are quite annoying. The overdrive switch continues to be a major pain. Our managing editor claims that for every two times he had to move the shifter, he hit the overdrive button inadvertently at least once. Even worse is the fact that this is not a particularly convenient place to hit the button when you really want to. A console or dash mounting would make more sense"
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "Ranger problems don't bode well for long term durability"

    "The worst aspect about driving the Ranger, aside from sitting in the back seats or accidentally hitting the overdrive switch, is the amount of noise it makes from various locations. The rear springs squeak, the drivetrain clunks, and a noticeable whistle emanates from the roof area above the driver's side doors. Our guess is that the quad-cab design has sacrificed a bit of body rigidity, which has created the poor seal in the door area. None of these problems are extremely troubling when viewed separately, but when you add them up it doesn't bode well for long-term durability. "

    "Problems: Continued noises from the drivetrain and suspension, and a new air leak around the driver's side doors"

    "Unfortunately, squeaks now plague our Ranger, the most noticeable of which coming from the rear suspension. We're not carrying any old boxsprings in the bed, but it sure sounds like it. One staffer found more than mice noises to gripe about, "I don't know if it is the heavy-duty suspension or what, but since I've been in the Ranger, the commute down Santa Monica Boulevard, an admittedly bad street, feels like an off-road adventure in the Canadian Yukon"
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "Disconcerting, however, is the fact that our center armrest has broken off after only 16,000 miles"

    Well gang! All this and not even 30k miles. lol.
  • barlitzbarlitz Member Posts: 752
    you need to get a life.
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    from the Edmunds long term test. They are there for all to read. As for any negatives, different people have different tastes.

    I will cite one positive from the tests. One person said the Ranger stereo was better than his BMW's stereo.

    Hindsite, read the Four Wheeler article on the 10 Best Buys. However, it raises a couple of points.

    1. When the Ranger XL was given this award last year, one of it's many recognition awards, spoog was very quick to comment that Best Buy is not Best Vehicle.

    Are we to be consistant on this recognition of the Tacoma? Same statements you made about the Ranger must apply?

    2. The vehicle recognized was the 2.7 4 banger, not the TRD.

    3. Do I read that article correctly that the lowest axle ratio available for that vehicle is a 3.42:1?!? That, with the transmission ratios for the Toyota 5 speed would give it a terrible final drive ratio, something under the Ranger automatic 3.73 rear and automatic tranny ratio that spoog loves to jump on with that 2-3 year old Four Wheeler article.

    Do I understand, given his track record, that spoog would laugh and ridicule this Tacoma 4 banger due to it's final drive ratio?
  • hindsitehindsite Member Posts: 590
    In typical fashion Cpousnr has to find something negative to say about the Tacoma. Bottom line the Tacoma won for best value in quality and durability.

    BTW I did not mention the TRD just to clarify that point or the engine for that matter. You should ask Spoog that question Cpousnr instead going in a round about way to hit below the belt.
  • hindsitehindsite Member Posts: 590
    As always you provide a great informative link.
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    I see nothing has changed since I have been gone. Hind is still backing spoog, who by the way wishes he even owned a Tacoma TRD supercharged. Spoog, the one who uses his truck as a race car, and doesn't even realize he shot himself in the foot, the Supercharger doesn't help offroad by the way....
    My Ranger XLT 4x4 offroad is at 32,737 miles and I have not had ANY problems at all... I take mine into the Cascade mountains and can get any place a TRD can... When I arrived there were 173 posts!! I wish I could respond to just half but there is no way.... The New 4.0 @OHC will outperform the Toyota 3.4 in both HP and Torque.. The present 4.0 HP/Torque curve is better for hauling/towing, what a truck is really made for...
  • scape2scape2 Member Posts: 4,123
    By the way Toyota boys..
    What about the Clutch pedal squeak in you 1995-1999 Toyota TAcoma's? On the inline 4cyl models replace the pedal bracket, on V6's clean the grease front eh torsion spring, and replace the pedal and u-bushing TSB TC005-99. Oh, thats right, nothing ever goes wrong with Toyota's right? And I know I'm going to hear, "Mine is fine", Mine doesn't squeak, bull.... Its happening to all TAcoma's!! its a design defect..
    While on vacation I ran into a Toyota mechanic.. Has been doing Toyota's for 22years!! This guy even said Toyota quality has gone down hill over the last 5 years or so. Toyota is using less costly parts and is finding ways to cut costs. Ask any mechanic at a Toyota dealership.. He said he doesn't like to do warranty work because it doesn't pay as well as normal shop work... Over the last 5 or so years he has seen a very sharp increase in warranty work come into his shop... He readily admited Toyota isn't what is used to be! LOL. Right from a Toyota qualified mechanic of 20+ years! He told me tons of stories of Camrys with electronic problems, chasis problems, Tacoma's with the same, along with complaints of squeaks, rattles and more... in the Toyota line-up.... I just wonder how Toyota hides all this??
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    If you're really trying to be fair in all this why bring up these one incident Tacoma problems? For every Tacoma problem you find, I can find two Ranger single incidents but you'll just blow that off because they sell more Rangers. Also I personally don't put much credence in Consumer Reports and just used it because you seem to respect it. The Tacoma is the first vehicle I've owned that they gave a top rating in every category in their Annual Auto Issue. I've never had problems with other vehicles in the areas they rate low and I question some of their testing techniques.
    I also don't understand why to you Ford guys when Ford has recalls it seem to be great from a company that cares about improving their trucks but recalls or TSB's from Toyota are a symbol of poor quality.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    It's amazing how Vince runs into Toyota Mechanics wherever he goes that just happen to have bad things to say about Toyota. They seem to be everywhere waiting to tell their story but only Vince seems to be able to find them. As coincidence would have it, while I was on vacation I ran into the President of Ford and he told me that they know that the average Ranger owner has an IQ of 100 or less because everyone else can see that it's an inferior truck. I was astonished to hear that they gear their marketing to children. Thats why they have better sales than other manufacturers considering the average person, particularly in the Oregon/Washington area, has an IQ of 100.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Yes your argument is ridiculous and you even gave one of the reasons why in your own post. I don't contest that Ranger outsells Tacoma but it certainly isn't because it has a better Quality reputation or more recommendations from satisfied owners. There are many reasons that Rangers sell well and I'll give you a few because you seem to have no clue.
    1) They're cheaper - you even figured that one out yourself and that's why I gave you the Porsche/Camaro analogy you don't seem to understand.
    2) The buy only American crowd - some will buy a lesser quality item to support American workers even if it isn't as good.
    3) Rebate and low financing - Related to #1 and Ford makes it easier to but a new vehicle than Toyota. That's just a few of the reasons.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    Yes your argument is ridiculous and you even gave one of the reasons why in your own post. I don't contest that Ranger outsells Tacoma but it certainly isn't because it has a better Quality reputation or more recommendations from satisfied owners. There are many reasons that Rangers sell well and I'll give you a few because you seem to have no clue.
    1) They're cheaper - you even figured that one out yourself and that's why I gave you the Porsche/Camaro analogy you don't seem to understand.
    2) The buy only American crowd - some will buy a lesser quality item to support American workers even if it isn't as good.
    3) Rebate and low financing - Related to #1 and Ford makes it easier to but a new vehicle than Toyota. That's just a few of the reasons.
  • allknowingallknowing Member Posts: 866
    OK I found that old (1998) Consumer Reports I had. In all fairness, the Ranger didn't have any fair or poor ratings for 96 or 97 but looked pretty bad with black dots all over for the previous years. It did seem to be improving every year. The Tacoma had no black dots but a few "more than average repairs" for 95 and then all good or excellent for 96 and 97. In fact in 97 Tacoma had all excellent with only one "better than average" (second best rating) in 97. The Ranger did pretty good too with only four areas scoring less than excellent in 97. In their summaries for 1997, however, they scored Tacoma the best in reliability (red dot-excellent) while The Ranger got an average reliability (empty dot). It's also interesting that in their "Used Cars to Avoid" section they list the 90-92 and the 95 Ranger among various other Fords. No (NONE) Toyotas are mentioned.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    "It's amazing how Vince runs into Toyota Mechanics
    wherever he goes that just happen to have bad
    things to say about Toyota. They seem to be
    everywhere waiting to tell their story but only
    Vince seems to be able to find them. "

  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    well....I would say those Edmund's comments hit the nail right on the head.

    Who are you going to quote next Cspounser?

    Your tried the NHSTA, which totally backfired, you tried Edmunds, which UTERLLY backfired. Now Im just waiting for you to quote another source.......
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    I will agree Cspousner that the Ranger stereo and even the inside ergonomics beat the Tacoma in terms of look.

    Ford has REALLY stepped up to the plate in redesigning their interiors to look good. They used to have the worst interiors this side of Chevy.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    when your a national magazine that carries full
    page ads for Tacoma on the back cover, and your
    PAID for certain reviews, sometimes you fudge things"

    Oh boy, here it comes. Now that Cspounser has been defeated on every account, he is now grasping at straws and making big conspiracy claims.

    But...I guess this makes sense seeing as how he believes that Clinton and the United NAtions are trying to take over the world, and that black helicopters are dropping off wolves in Idaho .
  • cpousnrcpousnr Member Posts: 1,611
    magazine, in bold red capital letters,
    Four Wheeler, a great mag, does get it wrong quite often.

    Consumer Reports accepts NO advertisment fees, sues companies that due cite them. That speaks alot..

    No, no conspiracy theory, just a liar from the getgo he is. . .
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224

    Have you even BOTHERED to look at the Toyota pickup/Tacoma ratings from 89-2000 in Consumer Reports?

    Lets just say it is AMAZING. Mostly all full red dots.

    The Tacoma's record is comepletely amazing. It really puts the Rangers record to shame.

    Then go take a look at the Toyota 4runner record from 89-2000. Then go look at the Camry record in Consumer Reports.

    Sorry Cspousner, C.R. isn't exactly a good thing to quote if your on the side of the Ranger. The record of both trucks is very clear in C.R.
  • spoogspoog Member Posts: 1,224
    Let's just put it this way-

    You are comparing an average truck to a LEGEND,plain and simple. The Toyota pickups are LEGENDARY for their reliability(as seen in Consumer Reports, NHSTA) and offroad ability(as seen in 4 wheeler, Petersons offroad and many other fine magazines over the years).

    There is a reason why they are a bit more expensive.
This discussion has been closed.