Toyota TACOMA vs Ford RANGER - VII

cpousnr

http://members.aol.com/uncchrisb/cr.jpg

lower right hand of page. . .

A lot of things happen between April 98 and Jan 99. Head gaskets blow...body integrity gets ranked worst ranking, hardware gets ranked below average...Ranger gets selected a "Best Buy"...

cpousnr

Well if you scrap CR, then you accept vinces MSN Carpoint which ranked the Ranger Better than Toyota or at least equal.

Was that not the deal? One or the other?

allknowing

spoog you'll enjoy this and It's getting clearer why you do what you do.
OK cpousnr, I went and borrowed a 1999 Consumer Reports Buying guide, the one you get if you subscribe, but a year later than the one you say you're quoting from. On page 277 in the "Used Cars to Avoid" section, there's lots of Fords, including the 90-92 and 95 Ranger. There are NO (ZERO) Toyota's mentioned at all. In the recommended "Reliable Used Cars" section, they list both the 2WD and 4WD 1995 Tacoma (page 276). In the "Reliability Records" section, the 95 Tacoma is rated Good to Excellent in pretty much every category (pages 305-306). Even if by slim chance there was a misprint in the 98 book, you apparently subscribe to Consumer Reports so you have the 99 book and know that the 95 Tacoma is top rated. That suggests that you're very likely knowingly using false facts hoping that no one checks your sources. I don't have a 98 book here and I hope you're better than that but I'm not impressed by your attempt to print both sides when one side is erroneous. If the Ranger Folks have to use garbage information to promote their viewpoint, don't expect the Toyota supporters to take you seriously. You guys don't like spoog because repeats a lot of the same articles but at least they're easy to verify and not intentional misrepresentations. If this was really a simple mistake on your part I apologize for my soapbox speech but you made a similar one, though much smaller, condemning the Toyota guys for withholding the info you used which is false.

allknowing

Just looked at your picture and I'll give you that it must be a misprint, but as I said, look at your 99 book. What does the "Reliability Records" section" say in the 98 book? If they rated the 95 Tacoma Excellent in April 98, then rated it poor at the end of the year, and then moved the rating back to excellent in 99 what does that tell you? Either it was a misprint, it was listed based on bad information and they resolved it in 99, or Toyota had a problem (like the gasket perhaps) which was totally taken care. Whatever the reason, Consumer Reports recommends the 95 2wd and 4WD now so why post that page and give people tainted information?

allknowing

As far as carpoint being more reliable than C.R., coulnt't tell you except that if they rate the 95 Ranger better than the 95 Tacoma, the forums must be full of liars. If I use statistics like you Ranger guys like to, i.e., they sell three time as many Rangers as Tacoma so that's how you justify more negative posts, then you should also have three times as many positive posts and I've yet to see a forum demonstrating that.

allknowing

All in all, I could be just like the Ranger crowd here and not accept any of the Negative articles on the Tacoma and make up, or stretch the meaning of negative articles on the Ranger. It seems to work for you guys.

allknowing

You guys are always asking where the Tacoma is in sales. At least it made the best selling import truck.
http://carpoint.msn.com/jump/windowshopping/Jncbswin_2888.asp

cpousnr

Read the 8th paragraph of the data on the URL you posted?

allknowing

Yeh I know that Ford is the top selling truck. I can't dispute that and good for Ford. I just posted that URL because Toyota is still the best selling import.
As far as the other stuff, I'm just beginning to become impatient with people trying to find anything written anywhere that has something negative to say about the Tacoma or Toyota in general. You'd be hard pressed to find any other car company that has no listings, as with C.R., in the Used cars to avoid areas and pretty much every model recommended. The notion that the Tacoma is lower in quality than past Toyota trucks strikes me as strange too. The old trucks ran great but they rusted out. The Tacoma doesn't have that problem and is still rated very good to excellent in every category by publications like Consumer Reports etc. I guess it makes Ranger owners feel better if they believe that Toyota's quality is going down. The Ranger is a good truck with above average capabilities and quality. Even the price difference can't be disputed by a Toyota owner. As I've said before, I only wish that the Ranger guys would center on that rather than give misleading information on any Toyota problem they can find, substantiated or not. Guys like Vince post these things and disappear when they're shot down. His example certainly isn't helping the Ranger's side of the discussion.

allknowing

Los Padres is a few hours north of me and I've never been off road there though I have camped at a few lakes there. It's generally a pretty dry area with few trees except Oak trees. I've been on an old stage road there and have seen the old stagecoach markings. It's an easy hike by the lake there and the paved road is next to it. To be honest, there's lots of better areas to off road but there could be a few nice surprises there. With all the winerys there I can see why there may be a resistance to people plowing through the area.

allknowing

oops---"wineries"

spoog

In case you didn't know, those decisions are being made at a local level. So get your butt involved with the planmaking this late August/early fall. All you have to do is call that NAtional Forest and request meeting dates and their forest plan for the Initiative.

Quit acting like everything is a conspiracy. Get involved and give your input.

spoog

Excellent, excellent points.

cpousnr

In order to harvest 100 acres of trees, companies normally to do 2-5 year impact assesment with detailed studies. 60 million acres were decided to have thier use changed in 6 months and it effects roads in that there will be no re-construction in significant areas.

Wrong about local level decisions.

Meetings for input were only announced way in advance on the internet. You had to know to go to a certain site, know what to look for and then decipher where the meeting was held. Some meetings in Utah were announced in the paper the day before, no chance to attend for many.

spoog

I am not saying it AGAIN. If you have an interest in the "goings-on" of a certain national forest, they HAVE TO divulge all information and planning.

All it takes is a simple phone call.


Another thing, Our national forests have 400,000 miles of roads Cspounser. We have an 8 billion dollar road maintenance backlog. The Roadless INitiative represents 17 percent of the total national forest lands. Another 10 percent is widlerness. The REST is open for resource extraction . Thats 30 PERCENT for water, wildlife, and environmental protection , and SEVENTY percent for resource extraction.

In the past, logging companies havent treated the National Forest lands well. Why? BEcause it isnt their land. They dont care. CUt and run, cut and run. Time to wake up Cspounser. The corporate welfare on our N.F.'s must end.

spoog

The FINAL plans in September will be reviewed as LOCAL decisions. Did you EVEN read the Roadless plan at the USFS website?


The problem is that we CANt afford to maintain all the roads in our forests. There is an 8 billion dollar road maintenance backlog. It makes NO SENSE environmentally OR economically to build more when we cant even afford to maintain the ones we have. PURE LOGIC cspouser.

allknowing

The activity in this forum has come to a long pause. As the dust of battle settles, the Toyota Tacoma drives on leaving the Ranger behind. Tacoma, still the standard others strive to equal, still the best quality and performing small truck on this planet. Brings tears to my eyes.

spoog

"The activity in this forum has come to a long
pause. As the dust of battle settles, the Toyota
Tacoma drives on leaving the Ranger behind. Tacoma,
still the standard others strive to equal, still
the best quality and performing small truck on this
planet. Brings tears to my eyes. "



Yet again..........

eagle63

I'm still not going to let spoog get away with thinking that tacoma's have better interiors than chevy's. I looked inside a 2000 tacoma TRD today. the dashboard layout is very simple and plain. -and that's just fine. but what blows me away is the small, thin little seats with the unbelievably ugly upholstery. I looked on the window sticker and it said the interior color/design was "beige oak." very 70's. also, the door handles were thin little plastic jobs that looked very cheap. except for the fact that I was sitting up nice and high, I felt like I was sitting in a '82 camry.
All I keep hearing about is how high quality and legendary this vehicle is. judging by the interior at least, I disagree.

cpousnr

Ran into it while I, 4 other Rangers and a Bronco were out. He was doing quite fine. It went thru the area in that previous side pictrue of my Ranger. Only thing is he had his locker engaged the whole way, places where I was using 4X4 High.

Spoog, you should have seen "Vanishing Fredoms" on Fox tonight. States my postion exactly.

Re-read the plan. Employes scientific analysis of land, determines it's futures use, all out of DC, no local input. What a concept, run a program, make an analysis after never even going to the area under question and then lock it up as a museum with strict limited access. What is 10,000 jobs in the far west to people back east anyway.

Ready to agree that roads will close? All you have to do is place them in a roadless area, designate them for decomission and non maitenance and you got it.

Would agree 100% in closing old logging roads and resead/forest those areas, not historic passes in current use. But the plan is everything in the area of designation.

cpousnr

So my pictures were a joke eh?

Well that joke as you called it had a converted Chevy van and a Suburban burried and unable to climb that hill today. Got pictures of an 87 and 89 Ranger blowing by the Suburban, did not take pics of the 91 and 96 Ranger's that did the same. Seemed to have heard, over the noise of the tires, something that sounded like "Ford Power. . .". Took the pictures this time, 100 yards or so closer, on the level to give the true perspective of the steepness and looseness of the dirt/rocks. I would say the loose dirt and rocks was maybe 10-12 inches deep, angle approaching if not over 45 degrees.

Will post when developed.

BTW, that Tacoma refered to earlier declined to make the climb up that hill. "Dude I just bought the thing and look at how much trouble those Chevy's are having." I suggested the owner look at the two rRangers about to pass the Suburban.

The TRD departed the field of contest, heading for safer ground. . .

cpousnr

8^)

spoog

To each his own.

I have provided links that continually trash Chevy interiors for fit and finish. All you have to do is read any Edmunds Chevy/GM review.

Then read what every magazine says about Toyota interiors.


BUT I WILL agree with you on this:

Toyota CAN do a better job on the Tacoma interior. While the Tacomas interior fit and finish(read: durability, quality) is superior to all trucks, full-size and compact, it just looks pretty plain.

As for those seats...its not how they look, but how they feel AFTER a 6 hour road trip.

A big,cushy seat is nice, but what kind of support will it offer in the long run?

To change the topic....

Toyota used to make a Landcruiser that looked just like a Jeep Wrangler, except bigger.
It was a convertible and all.

Come on Toyota, bring that baby back out!!!

I would trade in my Tacoma in a second for a Toyota Landcruiser soft top.

spoog

More fairy tales on magic mountain.....


Like a Tacoma TRD has anything to worry about from your econo-Ranger.

allknowing

Give me a break. Everyone's beginning to sound like Vince. I guess you just missed the Toyota mechanic hiding out there waiting to tell all the new bad stuff about the Tacoma.

cpousnr

My 71 cruiser was great. Did not like the change to the bigger SUV type but they were trying to compete with Suburbans and that type.

Yes the old cruiser was very nice, not plush but a workhorse. I think the last year was 77-78 for that style Landcruiser. Far superior to any Jeep in my opinion.

In regard to the Tacoma interior, I do not think it is all that bad, older looking compared to say the Ranger, but not too bad.

Now Chevy s-10, bad interior... nothing else to say about it.

allknowing

My last post was refering to CP's latest adventure.

cpousnr

No, was with a ford mechanic.

Seriously, he had his locker on the entire way. We told him he did not need it for the areas he was in. Now with a locker, that hill climb I talked about should have been no trouble.

Allknowing, I do have the pictures if you will wait a week.

cpousnr

All I can say is film in a week.

True story, the Tacoma declined to make the climb after seeing the Chevy's having trouble. And left right after the 4 Rangers made the climb.

allknowing

I don't really doubt you but there are lots of TRD owners that won't back down on a tough trail because their truck is new. The story just sounded similar to Vince's tall tales. I also know that some trails can be a lot tougher than they appear in pictures so I wouldn't criticize without trying the trail first.

cpousnr

an older Toy 4Runner made the climb earlier and was coming down before the Rangers went up. Think it was maybe a 94 or so, maybe it is in the background of one of the pics I took, not too sure.

Also, with my 3.73 gears and 31 tires, am not in the best of drive ratio to make that climb. If I had 4.10's should have not been a problem. But I don't so I at least tried it once a month ago.

Also, if the mud on the outside and under the truck is any indication, should have some fair mudding pics. We also took some articulation pics of Rangers, with the right rear wheel oh maybe a foot and a half off the ground, truck body rocking. Will include a few of them too. . .

cpousnr

http://www.4x4now.com/bstb.htm
The [Colorado] 4x4 Trail Book - Number 4
Look for Yankee Hill, St MAry's Galcier

As I said, I tried the trail and did not make it. As I had gotten body damage earlier in the day going over into a big dip, was not wanting to continue on that area for potential damage.

Ever get out this way, that is a good area, moderate to hard areas. Views are to kill for. Particularly liked the view of the blonde in the haleter top that got out of the back of that TRD.

cpousnr

was slight, scraped the paint off to the primer below the right door. Going to take it in to get the same material that is in my bed liner put on the lower panels. They match it to the color of the paint.

Also, I respect a persons decision not to go up a certain hill or area. You need the confidence that you can make it in order to do it, regardless of what you drive. All in the group I was in felt the TRD could have made it with the locker in. We just had a frindly chuckle as the guy left, more than likely his girl friend talke him out of it our it was really his daddy's TRD and he did not want to damage it.


Allknowing:
You do not believe vince but believe spoog who seems to see broken down Rangers every time he goes out?
Only thing I have seen broken down was a C1500 truck with a flat and one older SR5 Toyota that could not get out of a snow drift. Now the 87 Ranger we were with today lost the nut on the top of one of his shocks, but I do not consider that a breakdown.

cpousnr

Thanks for the comment on pics, but I admit the longer shots do not truely show the degree of difficulty. Hope to rectify that with new pics.

I need to invest in an inclinometer to tell the degree of a hill or side slant.

Also, that area is very loose. If you try and fail and brake coming back down, you tend to slide a few more feet. I do not like that feeling, too uncertain. We were worried that when the Suburban got stopped, that an older Bronco in front of it would slide back into the Suburban. That old Bronco finally did finish the climb.

I really just do not like the feel of loose dirt and or shale under the tires and that sliding feeling. MAybe you will stop sliding, but maybe not.

allknowing

I've seen broken down vehicles of all kinds in remote areas because many lack the experience and, of course, some have poorly equipped vehicles for the area. I don't doubt that spoog or even vince has seen lots of different kinds of disabled trucks. It's when I hear stories that only the Rangers are saving all the Toyotas, and that Toyota execs. and mechanics are out there telling tales of new Tacoma problems every time he takes a trip that the whole thing becomes a fairy tale.

spoog

"Ever get out this way, that is a good area,
moderate to hard areas. Views are to kill for.
Particularly liked the view of the blonde in the
haleter top that got out of the back of that TRD."



No kidding. Did you get a pic of the blonde?

hulk66

Well i have to agree on one thing cpousnr that is the back seats need redesigned on the TRD. There is no cushioning at all. I feel like i am in school. Let's get another thing out and that is i see alot more FORDS broken down than TOYS. I have NEVER heard 1 complaint or problem from anyone owning the TACOMA. But when i talk to the RANGER guys they have had 1 problem or so when they bought their truck.As for dodge i heard alot of leaking windshield problems on their dakotas.Of all the people i have talked with many of them said they would always buy TOYOTA. Just my research i did around and many people love their TOYOTA'S.

spoog

"As for dodge i heard alot of leaking
windshield problems on their dakotas.Of all the
people i have talked with many of them "



My friends 2500 v-10 Dodge 4x4 has had several leaks in the windshield and windows, not to mention new rotors, brakes, front suspsension, cruise control, airconditioning unit, and heater, all before 30k miles.

scottssss

..and ther are over 400 new post..

For all the toyota boys out there who think #1 in sales doesnt mean anything... Toyota seems to disagree. Here in CO they are pushing the camry by touting it as #1 in sales for the last 3 years. I bet they wish they could say that about the Tacomas Flat sales of recent.

eagle63

Cpousnr- I wouldn't say that S-10's have bad interiors. they're not as good as ford's I'll certainly admit, but I think they're above average.
Spoog - you're right, to each their own. I guess it's a little pointless to try and debate something as subjective as interiors (or exteriors for that matter).

Any of you guys lease your truck? I asked this once before and didn't get a response, and I know it's off the topic, but I'm just curious.

rickc5

Indeed, Tacomas can have their share of problems too. Here are the problems I encountered with two 4x4 extra-cab, SR5 Tacomas:

'95: 1) Very leaky front axle at highway speeds (Oil would foam and blow out the vent hole, coating the entire underside of they truck in 90 weight oil). This happened on a friend's '95 as well. 2) A truly horrible and unsafe suspension, as reluctantly agreed to and documented by Toyota. Toyota agreed to try and fix it, but at that time, no aftermarket shocks or parts were available. Different tires were tried as a possible solution, but there was no noticeable improvement. According to the Toyota district rep, many other '95 Tacoma owners complained about their suspensions, which resulted in Toyota releasing the TRD suspension two years later, which has special "Toyota" Bilstein shocks.

'99: 1) One of the power steering hoses leaked after a couple of months and sprayed power steering fluid all over the engine compartment. 2) Hard shifting automatic transmission, in my opinion. This may be a peculiar Tacoma trait, and not an actual problem, but it made the truck feel cheap and junky.

BTW- IMHO, the seats in both Tacomas were just awful. No lateral support and very uncomfortable on long trips. Interestingly, the seats in my '89 Toyota pickup, '90 4Runner, '93 and '96 Camrys were quite comfortable. Toyota has made and CAN make comfortable seats if they choose to.

cpousnr

40ounces, you may want to read this.

http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/2001/ford/ranger/first_drive.html

"Ford Rangers have led in the compact pickup truck market segment sales for the past 13 years, appealing to a broad range of consumers"

"The 2001 Ford Ranger compact pickup model lineup is definitely on a roll with trucks that should readily capture youthful new customers with active lifestyles, as well as appeal to loyal owners who are looking for a vehicle to better satisfy their ever changing lifestyles."

and a new 4.0 liter SOHC V-6 that

(read closely spoog)
pumps out 207 horses and a torque rating of 238 pound feet."

"Transmission choices consist of either a five-speed manual floor shift with overdrive or a five-speed adaptive automatic transmission that automatically adjusts to driving style. Later this fall, an all-new inline four will replace the current iteration."

Two Pages!

http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/2001/ford/ranger/first_drive2.html

"The existing four-wheel drive system which is electronically operated by an instrument-panel mounted selection knob will be augmented later this fall by a manually operated, true "shift-on-the-fly" transfer case as part of a Premium Off-road package (yet to be named -- also yet to be priced) that will also provide enhanced suspension tuning, 16-inch wheels and tires, and uniquely specific interior appointments."

"Ranger pricing will range from $11,840 for an XL Regular cab 4x2 with a 6-foot Styleside box, powered by the 2.5L four-banger to $29,930 for a loaded Edge 4x4 Flareside with the 4.0L V-6 and automatic transmission."

"As for 4x4 operation, the electronic function, on-dash knob selector for drive mode is easier to use when going 'over the river and through the woods' gets a little on the hairy side -- while the soon-to-come, Premium Off-Road Package provides a better ride with a more confident level of control during the rough stuff. The "Best of the Desert" practice course (though toned down some for our use) threw down the gauntlet with powdery, silted, tight banking turns, dips and bumps, mudholes and greasy, steep grades. Both the regular Off-road and Premium Off-road versions came through with flying colors (mostly muddy brown tones)."

"Kudos go to the standard four-wheel ABS braking, seat belt minder warning, on-board vapor recovery system with a missing gas-cap alarm, second generation air bags, the air bag on/off key switch and the extensive improvement in insulation and noise reduction."

"Bottom line, the 2001 Ford Ranger stable is a more refined vehicle, is quieter, provides more power with greater fuel efficiency and a longer range and it promises to extend its sales leadership title as a result. It is also more environmentally friendly -- Mark Bill, Ranger Chief Program Engineer, points out that "The 2001 Ranger will meet low emission vehicle standards and achieve approximately 20-29 miles per gallon, allowing customers to use their vehicles for work and play while still being an environmentally responsible citizen." If that's not friendly enough for you, the electric version -- the Ranger EV, will return for 2001."

cpousnr

Thanks for an honest opinion on Tacoma, but expect to be slamdunked as "...a phony Ranger guy logging on and spreading false stuff." I believe you, sorry you had problems with an otherwise good vehicle.

I think you talk about the suspension issue that was a recall. The suspension frame was cracking which could result in loss of vehicle control.

spoog

"The existing four-wheel drive system which is
electronically operated by an instrument-panel
mounted selection knob will be augmented later this
fall by a manually operated, true
"shift-on-the-fly" transfer case as part of a
Premium Off-road package "




How sad......

A real, "tough" transfer case offered as an option????? muhahahhahahahah!!! LOL!!!!!


" look mom, I get a real transfer case in the 'offroad package' "

LOL!!!!
ahahahahhahaha!!!!!

barlitz

All you toyota owners talk the talk but I don't see any sales #'s to back any posts if anything sales #'s are dwindling on both the Taco and Tundra.And I'm in the market for a compact right now and if I wanted to I could buy a taco they are UAW made.I did test drive the dakota crew cab not the quad cab with the 4.7 and auto not bad but I wouldn't buy seems cheaply made and way to expensive 23,600. without power windows or locks and no limited slip,sorry not for me.I could get a 00 4x4 flareside supercab 4x4 xlt with the 4.0 and auto for 18,000 w/3.9 financing from a ford dealer near me,but I really want to wait for the 2001,as for the taco I'd rather buy a moped and attach a little red wagon for the bed, better off road capabilities,add a supercharger and I'd be untouchable as long as my cooper 3 peice hockey helmet doesn't fall off.

allknowing

Toyota makes the best wagons and only the Japanese are making mopeds anymore.

allknowing

You're right. It has been clearly documented through several governmental audits that there has never been a verifiable unhappy Tacoma owner.

hulk66

Yes, that was probably the worst year for toyota trucks(95). Why was that year rideled with problems on their trucks? Was that the beginning of the head gasket problem? Never heard of any problems with the 99. Hard shifting occurs when you have the tranny in power mode. But in economy tranny mode it shifts alot smoother and quicker. The power mode allows the rpms to climb before it shifts into next gear.If you want good gas mileage then stay in econo mode and it gets you in higher gear faster and more smoothly.Thanx for the input.

spoog

95 was the first year of the Toyota Tacoma. Toyota did have a few bugs to work through.

But at least the 4x4 Tacomas came standard with a manual t-case. lol.

barlitz

does cooper still make hockey helmets?if not I could always wrap my head with aluminum foil and make 2 slots for my eyes.