War of the Compacts:Frontier, Ranger, Tacoma, S10, Dakota, B-Series, & Hombre - II

eagle63

take it easy on the Explorer man! of course the Explorer is lousy for offroading. -it wasn't designed for that. but it is a very good SUV, and handles other duties quite well. But I will make the argument that the older explorers ('91 thru '94) are terrific platforms for building an offroader. there is a TON of aftermarket support for these trucks and they provide an alternative to going the usual jeep route. -eagle

steve234

You might as well hold your breath. Certain people have now attachment to reality. They believe everything they want to and other facts are lies. They also get pissed that the manufacturers build SUVs to suite the public and not the offroaders. The 2002 Explorer is going with independent suspension for ride quality, stability and light duty offroading. For that it will work great. A long time ago, Ford built a rugged little SUV (pre-Bronco) that was beloved by the offroaders. You know how many were sold? If you seriously offroad, you are going to have to build what you need or spend big dollars for a Hummer or HD Land Cruiser or Rover.

mahimahi

Are you saying the walls are woth more than the foundation? LOL

mmcbride1

The funny thing is, no you don't.

Any Land Rover will be great. Same with Jeeps. Toyotas offer (IMO) the best compromise between offroading and opn-road manners.

cygnusx1

Go to any Land Rover dealer and ask them about the horrible history the Land Rover has with steering boxes just up and failing for no reason. Ask them about the EGR systems and how wonderful they are. Land Rovers have their pluses, sure. But god forbid yo experience a problem out on the trial. Land Rover ain't without a it share of quircky probelms.

mmcbride1

I'm not defending LR - I got my 4Runner instead of a Discovery because of LR's sketchy history. What I meant is you can get a great 4WD without spending $50k and up. That's also why I avoided the Jeep Grand Cherokee.

steve234

While my first choice for a offroad vehicle on a budget would be a used jeep, IMHO for what you get they are overpriced because of the popularity. When you buy one, they are usually street versions and seriously need a good set of wheels, guards, winch and a few other goodies. The LR and LC have their virtues and with the right setup do great, but at a huge price to my opinion. I can't afford to spend $35,000+ for a vehicle that is going out to possible damage or destruction.
Anything on four wheels can be made into a offroad vehicle. We had a guy stick a Lincoln on a F250 4x4 chassis. When people get into more extreme endeavors, there is always something just a little bit out of reach that can be attained by buying one more item. At least that is the argument I use on my wife when I want new ski gear.

mmcbride1

Actually, I think you can get a used one that doesn't need more than $1-2k (including winch) put into it to make it a serious offroad machine. Reliability is another matter, though.

gooba

When we are talking Jeeps,I take it to mean prior to the CJ-5s.It is hard to beat the old Willys Jeep for all around off road utility.

scottssss

I have now had my 2000 Rnger for almost one year now. 16,000 Miles on it already. The 3.0 L engine Broke in at about 15,000 miles. I am now getting about 23 Mpg. I have had no problems whatsoever. It has only seen the dealer to get its oil changed and tires rotated. When my i was visiting my Father in Vegas, he was very impressed with it, With both the ride quality and cab comfort. Granted he does drive a Silverado

mmcbride1

Actually, I'm talking about a CJ-7. That was my first car and I'd like to have another one someday (as soon as I have a place to put it).

beatfarmer

The CJ5 started production in 1954, one year after Kaiser took ownership of Willys-Overland. The changed the name of the company to Willys Motor Company. That was the name until 1963 when they changed it to the Kaiser - Jeep Corporation. So older CJ5's were actually Willys Jeeps.

cygnusx1

Anybody ever see any old International Scouts on the road? I see a few here and there, but not many.

The old Jeep CJ's were awesome, both the 5 and the 7. As a kid growing up I had a friend that had an old CJ-7 and also a Comanche Truck and they were both awesome off roaders. We beat them to all get out, but they still got us through the rough stuff.

keith24

You'll see a BUNCH of those old Scouts in Colorado. Per capita, I've seen more Scouts there than anywhere else. I've got one I wouldn't trade for ANY new SUV on the road today! Well, I WOULD trade for a new AM General Hummer! There's not anything else on the market that could go where my old Scout's taken me!

No, its not the best looking suv out there, nor is it the most economical. However, it gets me anywhere I need or want to go, fairly comfortably.

Its just SCARY looking! I don't have to worry about people cutting me off, or weaving in & out of traffic in front of me! It is a TRUE sport utility vehicle!

Thats the view from here!

keith24

gooba

That is correct that the CJ-5 was started in 1954.I guess I should have clarified a little better.I was referring to the MB,CJ-2A,CJ-3,CJ-3B,M38,and the M38A1.The later CJ-5 just got too light in my estimation.

guitardude

Hay, do u have any idea what TTB stands for??? Didn't think so. Twin Traction Beam. It means the pre-97 ford IFS. The '97+ "highway" torsion bar IFS (also used on all other 4x4's) sucks bad. They are not built for offroading, regardless of what brand it is. If u want to do some "serious" four wheeling with a toyota, you need to spend about 1,500 for a complete replacement long travel suspension. Spoog, i bet you have never seen the underside of a vehicle. Look under a PRE-98 ranger, the only modifications needed for an extremely long travel suspension are: remove the sway bar, and replace the stock control arms with some $300 long link control arms.

I would not buy any of the new torsion bar IFS fords for off-road use. And i still hold that there aren't any 4x4's that can go anywhere in stock condition except for the hummer. In fact, the only true 4x4 (solid axle, manual hubs) still being manufactured in the us is the ford F-250/350. Jeeps naturally kick butt, but wranglers have this cheesy little setup called "center axle disconnect". The same failure-prone setup used on kick-butt dodges. They use vacum, which is not something u want on your 4x4. Also, pre-'95 explorers are just as easy to modify as rangers and make excellent 4x4's with little mods. None of these 4x4's, though, will ever compete with willy's, cj's, and early bronco's. Facts are Facts.

beatfarmer

Sorry if I seemed nit picky. The '70 were a bad time for all American manufactures. How do you like the early Dodge PowerWagons?

scotti81

Yeah we have some Scouts here in Pennsylvania. They are awesome. Those vehicles go where no other goes. We use them when we go hunting. There is just nothing like em. Night All!!!!!

mahimahi

Hey guys,
I just wanted to get yur attention. I sarted a 'posting' site at driveway.com I purchased the November issue of Truckin'. They have a cool article about a factory shootout between trucks like the Quad Cab Dakota, S-10, Lightning, Frontier and some others. Sorry Toyota and Ranger guys, they didn't test these...not really sure why? Th TRD supercharged 4Runner wasn't available at testing but I'm not sure why they didn't at least test a Splash. Anyway the article makes for some good reading, check it out. Just go to: http://www.driveway.com/web/catalogView.jsp

If that doesn't work go to: www.driveway.com Our member name(username) is: compactwarspace
password is: pickups

Then just double click on the folders. I saved them in med. jpeg quality so it would d/l faster.

Oh btw, I scanned the separate articles on each of the test vehicles, it gives a little more detail of each of the rides...ENJOY!!!

scape2

Scott! Don't say you like your Ranger here. You'll have all the Nissan clan jumping all over you! Remember Ford Bad, Nissan good...
On a serious note. I had conversation today with 3 different people about a product called Zmax. Anyone heard of it? All three of these guys own 4x4's of various types/models. Each claimed this product actually worked. Helped MPG, engine became smoother, acceleration better. So, I picked it up for 40 bucks at the car parts store. I put it in my 4.0 and there was a noticeable calm to the engine. Now, I'll be the first to admit the 4.0 is not known for its smooth running features. (I know I am going to hear bashing from goob, mah, cncman and the normal guys for admitting a fault with the Ranger).. may want to check this product out.. I am logging mileage and keeping records to see if my MPG increases..
See you in the Cascades, fall is arriving here in Oregon and the Mountains are beautiful this time of year..

mahimahi

I've heard the same thing about that product..although I've never tried it. The reason why i haven't is when DuraLube came out I talked to several people about it and they claimed a difference, but I didn't notice anything. My understanding is that Zmax is used in the racing arena? I saw it at a NAPA last week and played with their display and saw a hudge difference in what it does to the oil...it looks awesome! Please keep us informed because I live in an extemely hot and humid climate that will make the "smoothest" running engines run "rough" at times.

gooba

vince,believe it or not I am curious about the product also.I have seen the benefit of Duralube.If it works as well or better then it should be something to seriously consider.I know mahimahi did not see a difference in the Duralube,but it is not always noticeable.The way I found out about it was on a dirt track Late Model that we put some in.The car,during the main event,3 laps from the end lost oil pressure.It hit 0.He ran those last 3 laps and tached 8800 rpm.The engine did not scatter nor did it knock.We got it back to the shop and took it apart and found minimal wear on the bearings.Cam or crank.There was no evidence that it had lost oil pressure and continued running.If Zmax can do something similar,then it is something that should be added by anyone,especially people who may take their vehicle through some desolate areas.A little insurance like that always helps.

david6

Guys, keep in mind that you are adding volume to what is in your gas tank when you add this product, so be sure to correct your fuel economy numbers accordingly. These products advertise mileage improvement when that usually comes because you are adding to what's in your tank!
Of course, the smoother running engine, better acceleration claims are another thing altogether. I also saw a paid advertisement for Zmax that claimed that carbon build-up would be reduced significantly. It probably can't hurt to try it!

rickc5

David,

ZMAX is an OIL additive, not a GASOLINE additive. Check out their web site for details:

http://www.gozmax.com/

cygnusx1

Didn't Druralube get their pants sued off for making false claims about the engine being able to be run w/out oil? I know Car and Driver tried it and the engine lasted 11 seconds in their test.

**DuraLube dealt a crippling blow.

The manufacturers of the DuraLube engine additive have also been dealt a smack in the face by a Car & Driver Magazine report into their product. C&D tried the same tests as Consumer Reports did on ProLong, and had similar results, but in a much quicker time. The C&D engines lasted a staggering 11 seconds without oil. You do the math. The Federal Commission has been handed the details and are 'processing' it.

tacoma_trd

What I dont understand about ford bashers is, what made them hate ford so much in the first place. I am not taking sides in any of this but I am a very big Ford fan and I love the Rangers. I have never had any problems with a ford product in my lifetime, and I am very happy with that. On the other hand I do really like the Tacomas and Fronitiers, now I do not particularly care for the way that the 2001 Frontiers look or the 2001 Tacomas, but I do like the 2001 Rangers and I will probably buy one early next year. I was leaning towards a 4x4 Tacoma for a while but I really cannot get that new '01 look to grow on me. I really have never been a fan of the Sanomas or S-10s, Ive just seen too many of them fail. Anyways, I really just wanted to know what happened to spoog, gooba, and mahimahi that made them not like Rangers so much. I am not taking Vince's side on this. If any of you guys have ever owned a Ranger and it didnt work out so well, then I'm sorry to hear that, but if you are satisfied with your Frontiers then thats great. I just dont like people to come down on Ford all the time.

obyone

if you've been following the saga...it's not about the ranger....more to do with vince

mahimahi

obyone's right for me I have never owned a Ford Ranger. My comments were to be directed at Vince8, nobody else....but that's all behind us now. I say we all enjoy each other's contribution of info, CONSTUCTIVE criticism and the fact that we ALL belong to the BEST group of vehicle ownership(pick ups).

spoog

msnbc.com

Ford loses records of Explorer tests,
says trials were not on actual SUVs



By Joseph B. White
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

DETROIT, Sept. 20 — Ford Motor Co. cannot find original records of key 1989 tests of Firestone tires used on Explorer sport-utility vehicles, company officials said in a news conference Wednesday.

FORD ALSO REVEALED that the tests were conducted using a modified Ford F-150 pickup truck designed to mimic the load distribution and performance of a Ford Explorer, not an actual Explorer. Ford spokesmen Jason Vines and Ken Zino said such testing was common practice.


Ford has submitted an affidavit from a retired engineer that tests of the Firestone tires designed for the Explorer were done in 1989, using tires inflated to 26 pounds per square inch. That’s the pressure Ford recommended for the Explorer. Bridgestone/Firestone Inc. officials have since said they recommended the tires be inflated to 30 psi.

Rep. Billy Tauzin (R., La.) and his aides have questioned the adequacy of Ford’s testing of the Firestone tires used on the Explorer. The Ford spokesmen said data they have submitted shows the auto maker conducted extensive testing.
Advertisement

eagle63

Thanks for that helpful post Spoog!!

scape2

I'm done, I have found inner peace and contentment. No more name calling or bashing from me. I guess it was gooba who kept posting my posts from other rooms that made me see just how counter productive I really was. To each their own, enjoy your trucks. I will keep you posted on the Zmax and tell you if it increases my engines MPG or is just anothe fluke.
Hope to see you someday in the Cascades!!.........

cygnusx1

Vince extends the olive branch? I thought I'd never live to see the day!

tacoma_trd mentioned above about seeing too many S-10's fail. I'm not boasting about GM here, but my own personal experience with my 1991 S-10 4x4 was great. I had 160K on it before I unloaded it. I read for years about all the horror stories and braced myself for some hefty Visa bills, but other than regular stuff like the alternator and starter both going around 100K, I never had any trouble with it. Towards the end, it did develop the classic "puff of blue smoke" upon start up that sems to have plagued most S-10's in the 1990's. Then, it was totaled when a guy in a brand new Mercedes ran a light and plowed into me. The damage actually wasn't all that bad, but since the truck was almost 10 years old, my ins company decided to just total it. The Merc was nothing but a twisted piece of metal though.

I'll admit that I did shy away from another one when I got a new truck based on reading all the horror stories. Plus, after 9 years I was ready for something different. Various experiences with other brands and a zillion little subjective things made me end up with the 00 Frontier which I love so far.

cncman

Ok, who are you and what have you done with Vince?????, well, this sounds nice, lets see how long it lasts?

barlitz2

so what!

spoog

Just tonight, they have SWITCHED the Explorer tire air inflation recommendation to 30, which is what Firestone was saying all along.

So, now we have tires that were never tested on an actual Explorer or Ranger, and now Ford is balking and changing the recommended tire PSI.

Tsk Tsk.

thesandman

When I took delivery on my wifes Dakota Quad Cab their was a small ding on one of the doors.The Dodge dealer sent the truck,my daughter and myself over to a body shop to have it repaired while we waited.In their holding compound was a fairly new Toyota Forunner that had been rolled cause the woman driver didn't want to hit a dog.Her daughter was in the car/SUV with her and neither one was injured badly,just cuts and bruises.They were traveling around 35 mph.The Forunner was a total loss. Spoog,don't ever pull out in front of a Ford F-350 Crew Cab like the one I drive. Side impact ratings on the Tacoma are poor at best.I hope you don't put your kids in the back seat or whatever that is in the back of your Tacoma.I'm putting my money in my family's furture.Ford F-350 Crew Cab for me,Dodge Dakota Crew/Quad Cab for the wife.You don't even have to be the one making the mistake.Someone runs a stop sign/light and......

spoog

Thats ok. I don't have any kids.

By the way, the Dodge Dakota pickup scored significantly less than the Tacoma in crash tests from 97-99.

Do you do work with your f350, or do you just commute with it?

tacoma_trd

ok thanks for clearing that up a little guys, Its good to see people satisfied with their trucks, its just seemed like there was a little ranger bashing along when people were going at vince. I hope Vince is telling the truth and he has changed. It would make the posts much more nice to read, where we would actually have good discussions about trucks and not back and forth with the same posts over and over on ranger crash tests and torque curves. I mean I love the ranger and I love the engines and it does have good crashs tests. Its just once you have seen the figures once, thats enough. There is no need to repost them 50 times. I own a 98 B-series(same as ranger) and I love it. A friend of mine owns a 94 ranger with 259,000 miles on it, the only problem he has ever had was 2 weeks ago he had a transmission fluid leak. So suprising some people a Ford can last.

thesandman

I read in post #92 that you had kids but you were just quoting gooba,my mistake.Thats fine being single and driving your Toyota works for me.When I was single I bought a new 83 Toyota 4x4 for myself and still own that truck. As I've said in past posts it now resides in El Salvador C.A. The 96 F-350 Crew is used for towing the dune buggy trailer.I commute with a 66 F-100 4x4 stepside and sometimes I'll drive the F-350 just to keep the battery up and the fluids moving.
Spoog check with the NHTSA site again on frontal and side crash data unless you are using information from another source and if you are I'd be interested in that source of data.Dodge Dakota Extended cab rates 5 stars on side impact and 4 stars in frontal crash data from the years 97 to 00.Five stars is best one star is,well,not good for those of you out there that are not familiar with the NHTSA site. www.NHTSA.dot.gov

bigal31

Totota taco- 1-star side impact.
Dodge Dakota 5-star side impact.

Allen-

scape2

Driven!! Test drove a New Ford Ranger 4x4 4.0 SOHC today. It was an automatic and I am telling you this thing moves. Transmission shifted wonderfully and felt solid. Acceleration was wonderful, engine growl was pleasant. Dealer only had 1 and was not willing to sell it as of yet. He claimed they were expecting a larger shipment within the next couple of weeks. No matter, I wasn't buying anyway, LOL.. I'm telling you the days of the Toyota group laughing at how slow Rangers are are gone.. I asked about a 5spd and was told that they have been delayed for about 6 months? anyone else heard of this??Now before you spout off spoog, don't forget your S/C cost you a bundle. And superchargers are available for the 4.0 SOHC form Paxton.. I know I am going to get hammered about trucks being race cars. I don't think they are but some folks do..

eagle63

do any compact pickups offer side-impact air bags? if not, are any planning to in the near future?

cncman

Vince;
What do you think of the looks of the 01 honestly?
I saw one driving by the ford dealer saturday, it looks so plain to me, I know they try to make it look like the big ford trucks, but I think that was a mistake, they shouldn't look that industrial. Maybe the delay on the 5speeds is the same reason for the delay on them in the sport trac? Have they put the manual tranny in the ST yet?

steve234

How pleasant it is to know that there are no little spoogs running around. FYI spoog, all manufacturers will recommend pressures that suit the vehicles. Firestone recommended 30 psi as a general pressure and Ford asked if 26 psi would be a problem. Firestone gave the green light. Now Firestone is trying to excuse their way out of a defective product and blame everyone else. A check of the web would find many people using the same tires, on all makes, that have had problems. Firestone is dead and is trying to drag Ford and everyone else down with them. It is a pity since they once were a decent manufacturer but not for the past couple decades.

spoog

"It is a pity since
they once were a decent manufacturer but not for
the past couple decades."


So are you saying Ford has konwingly contracted out to an inferior company for years to provide safe tires for it's customers?

lol. Try not to paint yourself into a corner the next time you post.......

eagle63

remember spoog, toyota also uses wilderness AT's on some of its tacomas. better make sure you don't paint yourself in a corner either...

cthompson21

I've heard they've had some bugs to work out with the 5-speed, as it's new.

Hopefully, Ford has learned from its recent troubles with the Focus and Escape not to release the vehicles before all preproduction glitches are worked out.

I personally like the looks of the new Ranger, especially the Edge. It goes towards the agressive truck look that Rangers used to have back before the poor '93 styling (which was resolved/improved in '98).

You don't think that '01 Frontiers look just as or even more "industrial" than the '01 Rangers?

cthompson21

I'd steer clear of side impact air bags, especially in the smaller confines of a compact p/u.

They're more likely to break your arm than save your life if they aren't the curtain style of airbag, which doesn't deploy directly at the occupant.

I dislike airbags in most vehicles. They're more likely to injure you than save your life.

I've heard of actual decapitations happening to young children in fender benders from airbags deploying.

guitardude

I agree with cthompson. The pre-'94 rangers looked good and the '98-00 rangers looked good. I dont think the '01 ranger looks as good as the current one, but it's not all that bad. And the new sohc 4.0 really kicks butt. I heard that it will also have 31" tires as an option. Someone was spreading rumors previously that the 4x4 package would have a solid axle. Those rumors are not true, unfortunately. I took a trip into mexico recently and, guess what??? They're still making ram chargers. With the current ram front styling. It leads me to wonder if there are still bronco's and blazers being made. U never know. Down in the mexican mountains, more then 75% of all the trucks there were fords. Tons of '70's fords.

cthompson21

Ford has been kicking around the idea of a premium off-road package. It's supposed to have Bilstein's, 31" tires, and possible front and rear LSD's.

Who knows, though. We've been hearing the same thing about the Adrenalin for over a year now.