Toyota TACOMA vs Ford RANGER - VIII

barlitz

I just finished reading an article on the new Ranger,here are some of the things mentioned for the new off road package.polyurethane bushings, bilstein shocks,31" BFG tires,4 rear leaf springs,front limited slip,new torsion bars,solid front axle,manual transfer case for the auto and 5 speed .There will be a 5 spd available.There may also be a supercharged 4.0 and there's talk of the 3.9 V8 that comes in the lincoln ls availaible with 4 full size doors in the next few years.Also new cupholders,less interior noise and new emergency brake system.Lots of changes it will be a totally new animal.

barlitz

4 wheel abs will be standard along with 4 doors in the supercab.

cthompson21

Where'd you get the info on the new off-road Ranger???

BTW, I just read in a recent article that Ford is making 4-wheel ABS standard on all Rangers, right down to the bare-bones 2wd XL.

hindsite

I have been off-roading with those guys and can say the pictures do not show with clarity the severity of the trails. Some here may think . . . Cpousnr . . . that we are destroying the environment, but that is not the case. The area or areas where we off-road are stripped mine coal area. Before you judge the pics maybe you can find out.

hindsite

Spoog may not have been there, but I have. I hope to go back and this time document at my web site why Tacomas are great trucks.

cpousnr

He is from Illinois. Well I guess you can own a business in Calif and live in Ill. . .

Spoog, nice pics but you should have posted ALL of the pictures like these:
http://www.lieblweb.com/tacoma/P990918A/P990918A.html
http://www.lieblweb.com/tacoma/P990918A/P990918B.html
http://www.lieblweb.com/tacoma/P990918A/P990918C.html
http://www.lieblweb.com/tacoma/P990918A/P990918D.html
http://www.lieblweb.com/tacoma/P990918A/P990918E.html

Some pretty country when you look at all of these but also some very mild terrain also.

Thats the problem spoog, look at the WHOLE picture.

cpousnr

Well, everyone can think what they may buthere is how you make something that would be CLOSE to that trail:

Take a few tons of flour, add a few tons of sand, sprinkle in rocks the size of footballs, loose in the mix, some on top just for fun, Dry it out so that when you disturb it the dust cloud comes up. Then throw it up on the largest 30 degree pitched roof you can find, pouring it about 20 inches deep most of the way, leave some thinner spots, holes, 12 inches thick, then try to drive it.

And just for fun, tip the roof to the side at maybe a 10-15 degree angle first right then left, they right then left. And all over the area you have created, put hard packed sections the size of a semi truck, to slide into.

That was the consistancey of that trail.

If you go to that guys home site, go to the posts where the whole story of the trip is posted, he states, it is harder than it looks. I would agree with that statment.

hindsite

I have read some may find that the Tacoma's seats do not give proper support. I drive one weekend of each month 900 miles round trip to see my grandson. I personally find the bucket seats to be very comfortable for long trips.

hindsite

Harshness with the ECT button engaged in the power mode? Not here.

cpousnr

The trail in the Tacoma pics, regardless of wet or dry, appears very solid. Even the bottom of the water appears solid. Think of concrete mix, at least there is SOMETHING solid to grip tires into.

On the mix I was on and the other 4 Rangers and one Bronco, the ground was always shifting, You stop, you slide either to the side or down another foot or so.

Plus it was on an angle. The Tacoma pictures, while rough, were basically flat.

Nice pictures do not get me wrong, but I will take a view of Purple Mountains majesty over a stinky swamp ANY day, oh yes ANY day.

Damn, it is just such a PLEASURE to live in the state of Colorado. And that is direct from the heart of an ex, forever ex, New JErsey boy.

hindsite

The first time I went off-roading with guys there was a Ford Explorer joining in with us. Well, the owner of the Explorer never went on the trail. Not enough clearance.

hindsite

Those trails may appear to be solid, but I can attest that was not the case. Was you there? Huh . . . I was . . . and I did not see you there.

mahimahi

I am curious if rocky sandy trails are so tough why doesn't the Camel Challenge(with the Land Rovers) hold it's 'Superbowl' of offroad competions in Colorado rather than Brazil? That's right because you don't know what's under that water. When it comes to mud you have to worry about alot more than just denting you truck. Also R.E. post number 3. Nice body alignment on that red ranger wonder if that truck ever sat on level ground with all 4 wheels touching? For what it's worth that was a full-size BLAZER not a Suburban that the white Ranger passed up. Did the white Ranger go through the same spot where the Blazer was stuck? Because if it didn't that picture only proves that the white Ranger took the easy way around...or maybe the driver of the white Ranger was smarter

cpousnr

This is what I said:
"The trail in the Tacoma pics, regardless of wet or dry, appears very solid.

Did anyone have trouble with those links I posted?
Try these:
http://www.lieblweb.com/tacoma/P990918A/P990918A.html

cpousnr

http://www.lieblweb.com/P000513A/P000513Aindex.html
http://www.lieblweb.com/P000513B/P000513Bindex.html

Kinda flat in some spots. . .

cpousnr

Independence trail system in Penrose Colo would eat those rovers alive.

It takes 5 hours to travel 1.5 miles on that system, winch is necessary all the way.

I was just commenting that shifting decomposed granate is very tough to traverse.

The Ranger came within inches of the vehicle, and the terrain is identical.
I will go with your eyes even though I stood next to the vehicle when it finally backed down. Would swear it was a Suburban.

Big Chevy POS, seen one seen em all.

Yes the Red 91 had a 6 inch lift, Swamper tires as I recall 31X10.5's but they seemed narrower and taller. And yes it did sit on the ground but the point was to show articulation.

And if any Tacoma thinks it can get better articulation than a Ranger twin I beam with anti sway bars unhooked, you are dreaming, think again.

Case in point is that white 87 with a 6 inch lift

cpousnr

Where in Colo do you live?

Interested in hitting those trails next sunday, not this weekend?

They are out of Central City, near St MArys Glacier.

I am going up with a guy I work with who owns a jeep.

Let me know.

spoog

ITs NOT the roads to the Obstacles, ITS THE OBSTACLES THEMSELVES.

Rocky Swamp, the waterfall, the mudhole, they are ALL much, much harder to do than the pics you showed.

Grasping at straws again cspounser? I plainly showed your pics verse the pics I posted. Any fool can see that the pics I posted are MUCH more difficult. We even have people coming out of the woodowork basically telling you you are wrong again.


Answer these questions Cspounser:

1. IS your water pic or the Tacoma mud/water pic tougher?

2. Where were the BIGGER ROCKS in the pictures?

3. WHat vehicles were on the BIG ROCKS?

4. Where was it rainy, wet and muddy in the pictures?


5. Which pictures had more severe dips?



The answers?

All of the ones I posted.

spoog

I dont care how flat the general area is. It has nothing to do with the crazy obstacles that lie hidden in the forest and valleys.

The highway you drive east of the Sangre Christos is flat, but does that mean that your area isnt an offroad challenge? Dont be silly. Your area DOES have some very tough runs...its just that you dont have pics of those areas.......

spoog

\\Thats good that you have your own business and you
also live in a beautiful part of the Country,\\




Unfortunately I don't live in Santa Barbara. Im only a 25 percent owner, and my best friend runs the rest of the business. Im in Illinois for the time being due to reasons I wont go into.




\\and
to be honest with you I have no beef with you or
any other Tacoma owner but whenever I read posts
from this site which isn't to often but when I do
there are always jabs at cpousner and other Ranger
owners with no real significant backing other than
magazine articles and heresay from other Toyota
owners.It kinda pisses me off a bit\\



Hey, You dont see me getting in o nthe heresay act. I post the NHSTA data results, Consumer reports, and comparison tests. And when Cspounser tries getting away with his story telling, I have to step in.

spoog

I think its time you started owning up to these facts. Your the only clog in the pipe here preventing this discussion from moving forward.

The NHSTA, Consumer Reports, Edmunds, 4wheeler, the photo's, and on and on and on.

Th 98-200 version of the Toyota Tacoma is a superior offroader, more reliable, a better performer, and more durable than the 97-2000 Ranger. END OF STORY, proven again and again.



"
Independence trail system in Penrose Colo would
eat those rovers alive.

It takes 5 hours to travel 1.5 miles on that
system, winch is necessary all the way."



Oh...it would eat a 60k Land Rover alive? But not a Ranger? Sure..................

cpousnr

Anyone other than me notice many of those Tacoma pics spoog posted had modifications, like body and in some suspension lifts, dual shocks, etc?

Just curious, thought it was a super vehicle that needed no modifications.

Notice how spoog did not post the pics of the Tacoma's that required towing when they died in the water or got stuck in that mud? Go to the guys home site, click on the links to the trips, they are there.

One other thing, does anyone know the height of the differental and xfer case vent tubes on Tacoma's? If they are not extended, going through water at the depth in those pictures will fill the differentials and cases with water.

Just curious if anyone knows. I had to lift my vents up to bed height with new tubes.

cpousnr

"when I do there are always jabs at cpousner and other Ranger owners with no real significant backing other than magazine articles and heresay from other Toyota owners.It kinda pisses me off a bit"

Like the Four Wheeler article? How many time you posted that?

But you trash the 20 or so articles I posted favorable to the Ranger.

And yes spoog, loose dirt, on a 20-30 degree angle is much worse than solid rocks on the flat.
Simple reason, there is nothing with which to grab traction on in soft shifting dirt on an angle. Not to say the area you showed was easy, would not say that.

cpousnr

I have to consider the level of the reciever of the message...

When your wheels spin in a substance that has a friction coeficient just a little better than spinning in air, it is hard to gain traction.

When your wheels spin on large granite rocks, solid rocks, traction is easier.

Is that simple enough for you spoog or do I need to go to the 3rd grade level of understanding?

cpousnr

at 11,000 feet, your 3200 lb vehicle is being powered by an engine putting out the hp of maybe 10 lawn mowers.

At less than 1000 feet in Pa, you have basically the full hp to power you over the basically flat serfaces. Flat, like no angle, no hills except the 2-3 ft climb over a granite rock.

Seriously, it was a nice set of pics, but not the most impressive I have ever seen. Heck the road to Hackett gulch crosses the South Platte River where you can only cross it at certain times of the year.

Also, if you look close at ALL of the pics in the water on that guys site, MANY only had water up to the bumper of lower.

Finally, it is just plain stupid to ram your truck through an area where you do not know the depth and then sink it. That raises the chance for engine damage due to sucking water. It can be done, but it is a real stupid driver that does such things.

rickc5

Check your e-mail.

It's difficult to convince some folks that the 4-wheeling here in Colorado truly is some tough stuff. There are numerous trails that I won't even consider attempting. No sense ruining a perfectly good truck, or putting one's life in jeopardy. Not worth it IMHO.

BTW- I also noticed that a number of those Tacoma's in Spoog's postings were NOT stock. Why would someone modify "the best off-road truck". Maybe to correct a few shortcomings??? Hmmmm....

rickc5

I regret my inference that you might be a moron. From now on I will not lower myself to your level.

rickc5

I too felt that a number of those Tacoma drivers were flirting with major catastrophies. Sucking water up the FI intake will ruin your whole day! I didn't notice any snorkels on those trucks.

The vent on my '95's front axle was just a little button on top of the differential housing. That's where all the oil came out when it began foaming at freeway speeds. Toyota's "fix" was to run a very long hose from the vent up into the engine compartment, and then split the hose into two pieces so the foam bubbles could dissipate. They mentioned at the time that there was a major re-design being worked to "correct the foaming problem". I asked if they had bothered to test-drive these trucks before putting them on the market. For an answer I received nothing but blank stares.

mviglianco1

1. So if an initially power deficiant vehicle such as the 2.9L Ranger can operate at 11,000 ft or whatever was stated, why should the Tacomas 190+ with simple mods have any trouble?

2. The articulation of the Ranger in the picture is obviously not stock. So what is its relevence? I could go find a picture of a Tacoma with more articualtion and you could in turn find a Ranger with more articulaion. The only thing that has to do with is how much money the individual wants to throw into articualtion. I could take a pinto and raise it and add all the articulation I want if I wanted to throw money away.

mahimahi

I'm making this a hidden response because I don't want to interrupt your current conversation plus I really do't belong on this subject. I own a Nissan Crew Cab 4x4 and just happen to find the current conversation of the offroading interesting, especially out West. The current topics that I am on, everybody has 2wd's and don't offroad. So I apologize for interjecting before. I used to own a '81 Toyota SR5 longbed with a 3" lift kit and 33" Swampers, my former roomate had a '90 Ranger xlt 4x4 completely stock and has gone everywhere I went, with the exception of me towing him twice(because of his lack of offroad knowledge). If you guys don't want a Nissan owner on here I understand and I won't be offended.
I'm sure that the offroading in the West does present it's challenges. There are many risks involved in offroading of any sort. I've never had the pleasure of offroading out West. All of my offroading has been in the Southeast. I don't have the challenge of 'slippery' angles to challenge me. Rather my challenge is navigating narrow logging trails with exceptionally deep ruts and many mud holes(small pond in some cases). The most unfortunate part of it is if you care about your truck you shouldn't be there. At least out west there are many 'challenging' places to go without the worry of damaging your truck...you get a choice. I've always wanted to offroad out West. I've been to Colorado and New Mexico and what beautiful places.

As to your reference to the Camel Challenge...I was just breaking your horns. They have the challenge down there because it's remote and seems really wild. It should be noted that the last one I followed(2 yrs ago) the American Team that won it, was made up of drivers from out West . They do challenge 'loose' hills and mts. down there too.

I think that the pics showing the Toyo crossing the river or whatever shows what a dumd *ss. Who does that with a $23-$26K Tacoma? I hope his warranty co. doesn't see that.

cpousnr

Would you send email again please?

I have this habit of trashing email I do not recoginize and think that is what happened as I was cleaning up the mail, oh, just 5 min ago.

I will not try to tell anyone here that Yankee Hill is beyond a 3 in overall general 4X4 rating. It has some nice little areas, views are postcard quality, there is a bit of mud here and there, a few turnoffs that whoop-de-do(will post a pic of my body damage thanks to one where I was 3-4 inches off to the left too much),the real loose area pictured and it leads to a few other trails. But, that loose stuff just does not allow traction, period. You have to hit it right, hit it more than once and God help you if it is wet, your not going up it in that case unless your a Hummer or have tracks insead of tires.

cpousnr

I think your comments are welcome pro or con anything about the topic or subject of trucks in general.

Well, in regard to water, if it is above the bumper, and your racing trough, engine damage is your general reward. The guy I will wheel with next weekend has a neighbor who sunk, basically a Grand Cherokee. He was heading to Hackett Gulch, corssed the So. Platte where he was suppose to
BUT FAILED
to listen when he was told to point the front to a certain spot and DO NOT race the engine.

RESULT?

$25K+ to the middle of the windows sunk in the So. Platte. Salvaged, but the smell of river water never left the vehicle, so it was finally totaled.

I posted a pic of an SR5 somewhere that injested water. In the pictures of the 5 Rangers I posted, that big Blue 95 with the camper shell has had his engine replaced for sucking water, $2,200.

While I understand your feeling on damage and off-road, there are difficult places to wheel that do not do much if any damage(mine is scratches to the primer on lower right rocker panel). The passes I talked about, while the drop offs were there, a reasonable drive can navigate them and the fact that the drop off is there adds to the excitement.

If you wheel in the Colo moutains, get a good book on the trails, believe the trails described are a bit worse than the writeup, and most importaintly, walk the trail first if it is getting bad and do not drive too fast, you do not stop too good when sliding on shale and or decomposed granite, let the engine break the vehicle.

That is why I challenge spoog regarding mtn 4 wheeling. I do not break the 10mph start on my spedo unless it is open field type crossing where I get into 4X4 low 3rd gear. So in my humble opinion, there is no race to the top, it is the skill of the driver being able to read the trail, read the rock combo and a whole heck of a lot of luck.

cpousnr

with those Tacoma pics, yes, you are very uneven, one tire may slip while the others are still coming up the rocks to the rear of the truck.

I do not want to leave the impression I thought that area was at all easy, but from the pics I would think it was rated a 3/4, maybe some spots of a 5.

Yes glad someone else noticed that some, actually a lot, of those Tacoma's were not stock at all, lifts, dual shocks, perhaps engine mods. Not to say they were not nice trucks.

But.....

more importaintly.....

none were spoogs truck as no one has seen the Tacoma with no 5mph restriction....

hindsite

Most of the members are from the PA & NY chapter of the TTORA club. Having been there I only recall 3 trucks that was modified. A majority of them are TRD's, a few regular Tacos, and one supercharged TRD Prerunner.

spoog

"And yes spoog, loose dirt, on a 20-30 degree angle
is much worse than solid rocks on the flat."



You mean BOULDERS sunk in 2 to 3 feet of MUD that are banging up against the bottom of the truck????? lol. Man, you really are as dumb as a Colorado sheep.



\\Simple reason, there is nothing with which to grab
traction on in soft shifting dirt on an angle.\\

Sure there is. It is very easy for your tire to kick off the thin bit if dirt and grab solid bottom. ESPECIALLY if you have a locker......

spoog

I have stalled my Toyota in too deep of water, similar to the guy in that picture. But no engine damage at all. Thats because the Tacoma is built like a tank.

spoog

Admit it Cspounser, the pictures I showed are ALOT tougher than the pics of your birdwatching tour you posted. I also like how you took the photo of the loose dirt from about 3 inches up from the ground to give a deceiving effect.
AND , only two of those tacomas were aftermarket in the rocky swamp section.

hindsite

Anyone wishing to indulge themselves to more Tacoma pics off-roading can hit this fabulous link below.

http://www.offroaders.com/album/centralia-shamokin/index.html

Cpousnr,
If you were to look closely at the pics you would see the coal pieces strewn about and the stripped mine terrain.

cthompson21

A debate about off-roading between an avid off-roader and someone with a magazine subscription.

Just halarious!

scape2

I don't think anyone ever questioned the ability of the Tacoma to offroad. Many have questioned the ability of the Ranger to offroad however. The pictures are good of the Tacoma's no doubt. But I am sure I could find just as many Rangers on the web in the same terrain. My Ranger for example has been in terrain much like many of the Tacomas. In the Cascade Range between MT ST Helens, MT Hood, MT Adams, 3 sisters areas.. As I have said over and over again, Rangers can offroad and it just angers Tacoma owners to no end.... I won't however snorkle my truck, nor mud it anymore. I burried it once and it took weeks to get all the mud off.. not worth it.. believe me..
And I notice once again spoog posts no pictures of his own Tacoma, not even a magazine pic! LOL...
This guy doen't own a Tacoma, Let alone a Tacoma TRD Supercharged, just posts pics and reviews of the Tacoma.. This guy has been around since the first Ranger vs Tacoma room. When he first entered the room he never mentioned owning a Tacoma, never mentioned owning a TRD TAcoma, never mentioned owning a Supercharged TAcoma until about the 5th post. Wouldn't you think that someone who owns a TRD SC TAcoma would start right in trouncing the RAnger??
The new Ranger is coming soon, wonder what reviews will say.....

tacoma_trd

A TRD Tacoma may have a better off road suspension than other trucks but not by much, and that does not mean a Ranger cant do anything a Tacoma can do. Ive seen rangers compete well against Tacomas. I own a mazda B-series/ranger. Do not let my name fool you. A ranger is capable of anything a Tacoma can do, plus wait till 2001 for the new SOHC 4.0L I cant wait!!

spoog

"A ranger is capable of anything a Tacoma
can do, plus wait till 2001 for the new SOHC 4.0L
I cant wait!!"


Sorry pal, you are wrong. The stock Ranger suspension sacrifices off road performance for on road ride.

The Tacoma ground clearance, suspension, stock locker, and steering, all add up to make the best offroading stock truck , PERIOD.

spoog

"A ranger is capable of anything a Tacoma
can do"


I think you should ask 4wheeler and Petersons Offroad about this. They both chose the Tacoma unanimously over the Ranger. The biggest reasons where that the Ranger wasnt a good offroader, and the Tacoma IS.

cpousnr

"I have stalled my Toyota in too deep of water,
similar to the guy in that picture. But no engine
damage at all. Thats because the Tacoma is built
like a tank."

I must assume you mean stalled because of getting stuck in the mud?

ANY gas engine that sucks in water will bend valves, break or bend rods and or blow gaskets.
Has to do with water not mixing well with gas in the expansion chamber and/or cold water on hot metal.

Come on spoog, at least think before you post. . .

allknowing

Since we're having the same running argument, I'll repeat a past comment too. I agree that the Ranger will go where the Tacoma goes, however, if you take a rocky trail like spoog's pics you'll come back with your kidneys feeling better, and your nerves in better shape, with the TRD Tacoma. The ride in the TRD Tacoma is tighter and the truck simply maneuvers a bit better in rough areas than the Ranger. Maybe the 2001 Ranger will bridge the gap between the trucks but for now, the TRD Tacoma has an edge on the Ranger. An added bonus to Ranger drivers though, you develop better driving skills in a Ranger because it takes a bit more skill to drive the Ranger off road.

cpousnr

Aluminum engine, and as I recall the compression is about 9.5 to on and for the sake of argument, has a stroke of maybe 4 inches. Well when you compress the 4 inches down to say .45 inches, if you have sucked in water, the pressure has to give somewhere, like valves, rods. . .

Get my drift spoog, you suck water, your engine goes bye bye. Now if you happen to sink it and it stalls before the intake goes under, that is a different story.

But anyone, regardless of type of vehicle owned, who says they stalled due to sucking in water, other than just splashed drops on the intake, has lost an engine, or lied.

allknowing

Your engine can stall by simply submerging the exhaust pipe too because of the back pressure. That also tends to screw up engines unless you're lucky.

cpousnr

I would agree with you except, if the Ranger is equipped with a better set of shocks, say after market Rancho STX or RS5000 or RS9000, the story would be different.

Also, notice the site that spoog found the pics, and lets be correct here, he never took credit for those pics, lists that the owner does not have Bilstines on anymore. He changed to Rancho Rs5000's more than likely because they are a better shock than the stock Toyota shocks. TRD included.

Also, true statement regarding having the exhaust under water, however, a skillful driver knows how to compensate by keeping rpms up a bit, but not enough to suck water.

My exhaust has been under water twice.

cpousnr

zero times.

I assume in those pictures the ones that made it through were skillful drivers, the one that had to be towed out may very well have lost his engine.

I can go back an post the site that had an SR5 stalled, water to mid door. He sucked water. His engine was gone bigtime. I will just go find it. . .

allknowing

I think it would take more than shocks but I'd have to drive a Ranger with better shock to see the difference.