Toyota TACOMA vs Ford RANGER - X

allknowing

I'll add to that last comment by saying that Edmunds appears to have had more problems with their Ranger than others I know. I've had pretty good luck except for the recalls, the tie rod end failing after two years, and having to buy new tires prematurely because they used Firestone Wilderness tires. Then again, maybe I've been lucky so far too.

allknowing

Oh yeah, just remembered that the accelerator was sticking and Ford had to replace the throttle body too. All in the first two and a half years. Still OK for those used to owning an American vehicle but I'd rather not take my vehicle back for anything, as has been the case with my Nissans and Toyota so far. Just keep in mind Jesse that this will probably be the case if you go with the Ford too. Not a knock of Ford as they're the best American vehicle in my opinion, but you may have a few more dealer trips than if you go with Nissan or Toyota unless you're luckier than the average buyer.

cpousnr

Now here is the summation of what Edmunds has to say about one road test in teh 2000 Tacoma:

"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."

"Give us the Ranger and the extra $5000....purchase a Wave Runner,

thank you."

cpousnr

http://www.edmunds.com/edweb/whitmore/99Toyota.Tacoma.Limited.4WD.TRD.rt.html

Notice it is a review of the TRD. . .

cpousnr

http://www.edmunds.com/edweb/editorial/mostwanted/2001/01.ford.ranger.html


Also, sorry that review in the last post was on the 99 Tacoma.

spoog

\\our Ranger tied with our dependable long-term
Toyota Camry for the fewest days spent out of
service (among all vehicles that have taken part in
our long-term program\\




Notice the sentence here:

Fewest days out of SERVICE. This means nothing.

The Ranger was FALLING APART. Their findings correlated EXACTLY with the NHSTA TSB board.

" anyone who is thinking of buying a used Ranger should take a long, long test drive".

-Edmunds.com

Big deal if it didnt spend alot of TIME in the shops the first 30,000 miles. The problems it did have took no time to fix, and the other problems it had were PERSISTENT, QUALITY CONTROL problems that the dealerships couldn't figure out!

lol! How can you defend this vehicle even after Edmunds.com basically says it's worthless after 30,000 miles?

cpousnr

2001 Tacoma, one of it's 12 configurations:
PROS AND CONS

Pros:
Powerful engine choices, attractive styling, competent off-road capabilities, crew-cab configuration.
Cons:
Uncomfortable seats, high prices, aging design, no third or fourth door on Xtracabs.
http://www.edmunds.com/newtrucks/2001/toyota/tacoma/basev64wdxtracab.html

Also, for Tacoma, Four Wheeler 4X4 of the year, 1999. BUT, Four Wheeler in this test ONLY tested 3 vehicles as the test is oriented around "newly designed, redesigned vehicles for a given year. They do not test ALL vehicles.

2001 Ranger one of it's 20 configurations:

PROS AND CONS

Pros:
Four-door extended cab, besides Mazda B-Series twin it's the only compact pickup with five-speed automatic, functional interior, impressive towing capacity.
Cons:
Room in back of extended-cab area isn't enough for adults, lousy seat comfort, questionable reliability of five-speed automatic, still no V-8.

http://www.edmunds.com/newtrucks/2001/ford/ranger/xlt4wdsupercabsb.html

Also for Ranger, in the XL configuration, Four Wheeler "Best Buys" Compact Pickup for 1999.

and

Consumer Reports "Best Buy in Class" for basically 90% of the last 15 years.

I will have to look at the upcoming Four Wheeler magazines to see what they say about the new Ranger. Sorry to say since according to Edmunds, this is the only change to the Tacoma, we will not see a driveoff test between it and Ranger:

"Jumping on the crew-cab truck bandwagon, Toyota releases the attractive Double Cab. Also, in an effort to broaden the Tacoma's appeal, a new StepSide version is available. Revised front styling and new alloy wheels give Tacoma a more rugged look. New exterior colors and option package content shuffling sum up the obvious changes for 2001."

New for Ranger:

Most notable for the '01 Ranger is the availability of the Explorer's 205-horsepower, 4.0-liter SOHC V6. In other engine news, the flexible-fuel feature on the 3.0-liter V6 has been dropped and there will also be a new base 2.3-liter four-cylinder coming soon after the model-year introduction. ABS is now standard on all models. A new Edge trim level has a monochromatic appearance, which includes color-keyed bumpers and wheel lip moldings. Exterior changes are numerous. All models get a new grille, bumpers, and headlamps, while the XLT 4x4 and Edge get a new hood and wheel lip moldings. Four colors are new as well as an in-dash, six-disc CD changer.

cpousnr

Tacoam:
1. Double Cab(do not think it is a 4 door).
2. Step side box (Ranger has had for years).
3. Wheels and grille new.
4. More colors and more options to buy(at extra cost.

Ranger:
1. New engine configuration, 15 more hp and about 20+ more lb/ft troque than Tacoma.
2. Dropped flex fuel 3.0, more than likely due to sales. Could not get the true environmentalists to buy it.
3. New 2.3 L 4 banger.
4. ABS STANDARD on all models.
5. Numerious exterior changes.
6. 6CD in dash system.
7. Four new colors.

There are the differences, make your choice.

2k1trd

The new tacoma double cab does have 4 doors.

cpousnr

Guess your correct, four FORWARD hinged doors.

Ranger has 2 forward and 2 rearward hinged doors.

scape2

Seeing new Rangers pop up all over the place here in Oregon. This unending folklore of the Tacoma being the "tougher" truck with better quality just never seems to end. The Rangers interior far out does the Tacoma's, is far more comforatable and more appealing. Along with this garbage that the RAnger can't 4 wheel drive or go places a Tacoma can. Ford answered the TRD package with a package of its own. Soon to arrive in showrooms in the next 5 months or so. This package will be every bit as good as a TRD package but for far less $$$. The rear diff will also be much more useful than the locker. Nice that you Tacoma guys spend thousands for a locker that can only be used in 4low and at about 5mph. Enjoying your open axles?? and your stickers boys?
See you in the Cascades, snow is coming!!

cthompson21

That's pretty good, especially at this time of year for a '01. I paid 18.5K for my '98 (fully loaded sans ext-cab and LSD). But, I did forego a $1500 rebate for special financing. BTW, what is the "back-pack" option?

sparkplug1

It's a factory bed liner plus a hard two piece tonneau that hinges in the center (latitudinally), has a front cover that locks and a back cover that will fold flat onto the front piece, plus a removable divider at the hinge point. There is a shorter version on the 2000 explorer sport-trak. It also has a glow in the dark release handle on the inside of the front cover in case a child (or spoog) happens to lock him/herself inside.

allknowing

Funny!!! Cpuosnr only prints the good stuff in Edmunds long term road test while ignoring the negative and spoog does the opposite. Neither of you printed the problem list. To you CP, all I can say is that you really have low expectations from
your vehicles if Edmunds experience is acceptable to you. That's one hell of a lot of problems and return trips to the dealer in my view, particularly for a two year old vehicle. Hopefully Edmunds just had a lemon. If not, and that is what the average Ranger buyer sees, than I guess it's no mystery why Ford's warranty is only three years Vs. five years on the Tacoma. Here's what Edmunds says cpousnr since you seem to keep missing this section and you guys like the long posts.

Warranty Repairs: 5
Non-Warranty Repairs: 2
Scheduled Dealer Visits: 5 (we missed the 20,000-mile service)
Unscheduled Dealer Visits: 4
Days Out of Service: 7 (stranded at a dealer for a week)
Breakdowns Stranding Driver: 0

Recalls:

1 — Potentially defective cruise control cable that could have interfered with the speed control servo pulley and thus not allowed the throttle to return to idle when a driver disengaged cruise control. A stuck throttle, of course, could result in a collision.

Problem History:

1.Snap, Crackle and Pop apparently took up residence behind the dash when we drove in freezing nighttime temperatures in Denver. Later, we heard rattles coming from the junctions of the front and rear doors. Fortunately, the noises subsided after the interior heated up. We did
notice them again, but they seemed to be isolated to cold weather driving.

2.The passenger side window resisted when occupants attempted to lower it — it made a sound that suggested the glass wasn't properly seated and we noted visible shuddering. A dealer technician lubricated it and that solved
the problem.

3.Some editors noted excessive engine noise and rough idling during our two years with the Ranger, but complaints were sporadic. We did find a TSB (#0054) that seems to cover a rough idle. If you're concerned about this problem in
your Ranger, check the NHTSA Web site.

4.During the Ranger's first winter, we encountered a brief period during which we were unable to put the truck in 4WD Low. We had planned to take up the matter with a dealer, but the problem resolved itself. We did note that several Technical Service Bulletins (TSBs) had been issued for this
problem and its corollary (stuck in 4WD Low), so other 4x4 owners can seek relief (covered by the warranty) at Ford dealers if necessary.

5.Our features editor made the unfortunate discovery that the Ranger's remote keyless entry would not work if the engine was already running. One morning, the editor wanted to warm up the truck in order to melt the 5 inches of snow that
had fallen overnight. Rather than leave the doors unlocked with the engine running, she removed the key fob with the expectation of using it to unlock the truck a few minutes later. Instead, she learned that Ford had installed a relay (as a safety feature) that prevented the locks from
responding to the key fob's signals. Two hours and $50 later, our features editor was able to access the toasty Ranger.

6.We observed that the Ranger was pulling to the right,sometimes more so during braking, throughout our two-yearlease. The truck was given two alignments (one covered by the warranty, one not) and the tires were rotated regularly.
When the second alignment still did not cure the pulling,the dealer blamed it on the all-terrain Firestone Wilderness tires. As of September 2000, the recall on Firestone tires included only 15-inch tires — we have the optional 16-inch
tires. Still, we have learned that Bridgestone/Firestone will
replace some 16-inch tires as part of their Customer Satisfaction Program. Regardless, we would advise those with similarly afflicted Rangers to replace the tires.

7.We had asked Beverly Hills Ford to check out a slow leak in the right front tire during the 10,000-mile service, so we assumed that the problem had been remedied when we picked up the truck. But a few days later, executive editor
Karl Brauer came out of his house to find a flat tire. After kneeling down next to the tire and listening carefully, he diagnosed a bad bead seal. Instead of charging back to the dealership, Brauer drove to a nearby gas station and pumped up the tire to 70 psi, at which point the hissing
stopped. He lowered the pressure back to 35 psi, and all was well. We suppose that technicians at Beverly Hills Ford either did not find anything wrong with the tire and simply refilled it, or that they did not examine the tire at all.

8.We encountered disturbing transmission issues in
mid-1999. We first noticed “clinks” when decelerating and backing up an incline. Later, these became clunks that occurred when we moved the shifter from “P” to “D,” “P” to “R,” etc. and during acceleration. Hollywood Ford lubricated
the driveshaft yoke under warranty, which seemed to help for a while. Near the end of the lease, we noted harsh shifts again. On one occasion, the transmission freewheeled when our editor-in-chief selected overdrive-off while coasting down a steep freeway descent. Our service adviser at Santa Monica Ford told Wardlaw that technicians would not pull the transmission if they were unable to duplicate the harsh shifting. Well, they weren't, and the sick
transmission remained intact all the way back to El Cajon Ford for the lease return. A search of the NHTSA Web site revealed several TSBs for Rangers equipped with automatic transmissions that specified grinding or thumping. If you're
not satisfied, find the bulletins that apply, print them out and take them to your dealer.

9.Some drivers noted excessive noise coming from the Ranger's rear suspension, but complaints were not consistent. We suppose that either the suspension was sufficiently lubricated during regular maintenance appointments so that other drivers did not notice or that the amount of suspension noise was “normal” for trucks
equipped with the off-road package.

10.A couple of editors noticed wind noise originating from the roof area above the driver's side doors. They speculated that the four-door design sacrificed a bit of body rigidity,
thus creating a poor seal in the door area. Complaints were few, so we never pursued this issue with a dealer.

11.Our center armrest broke 16,000 miles into our lease. It was repaired under warranty.

12.During the Ranger's stay in Michigan, our Detroit editor, John Clor, noted that the “door ajar” light would illuminate on the dash while he was driving the truck, even though none of the occupants had opened or closed any of the
doors. The problem went away on its own, but not before Clor went to the trouble of carefully cleaning the electrical contacts in the doorjambs.

13.An occasional faint squeal from the front brakes became a noticeable grind within a two-week period, so we splurged on a front brake job at 26,458 miles. Technicians replaced both pads, machined the rotors, bled the lines and adjusted
the brakes. Clor observed that subsequent brake
application was quiet and firm.

14.A stone tossed by an SUV resulted in a crack across the lower part of the windshield – the injury occurred near Flagstaff, Ariz., on the Ranger's trip from Los Angeles to Detroit. Clor compared the pricing and reputation of several
auto glass retailers before deciding on Speedy Auto Glass.
No sooner was the new windshield installed than it was hit squarely by a stone while Clor was driving on Detroit's crumbling I-94. The hit left a tiny pockmark, but at least no crack.

15.Near the end of our lease, we had to replace the driver's side mirror, which would no longer break away due to some damaged plastic on the housing. We were never certain of the source of the damage, and all $312 came out of the company account.

16.A power point in the dash went dead; we had it replaced under warranty during the 30,000-mile service.

17.Our aftermarket equipment deteriorated far more quickly than we would have hoped. During its first winter, the plastic bedliner became so warped that it pulled away from the sides of the bed, allowing rain and snow to seep down onto the metal. Our tubular side-step bars quickly lost their
foot grips as the screws holding down the grips were sheared off. The edge of our driver's side floor mat began to curl up, because one of our drivers attempted to pull out the mat without untightening the screws that held it down.
Though these issues were mild irritations, we might try get the product manufacturers to replace these items under warranty next time around.

spoog

Cspounser has no answer for that.


" IF you plan on buying a used Ranger (with 30,000 miles), take it for a long, long drive"

--Edmunds.com


This is basically calling the vehicle a piece of crap after it's small break in period.

cpousnr

That is a very good price.

Just curious, did you check Tacoma to compare prices? What did you find?

allknowing:
Spoog only cites the bad things about Rangers. I CLEARLY cited what is good and bad about both vehicles.

You failed to mention that some of the recalls for Ranger only apply to 29 vhecicle, 310 vehicle... i.e. a small number. Also, one of the recalls effects only the 3.0 engine and even that it was not the entire fleet.

My vehicle, other than the tires which I consider not to be mechanical on the vehicle, has NEVER, repeat NEVER been the subject of a recall. None of the recalled items for my year are on or applicable to MY Ranger. Just about ready to turn over 36K and it is running great. 22.1mpg on my last trip to So. Colo which included hauling almost a ton of water to and on my property.

allknowing

All I'm saying is, for Fords sake, the 98 Ranger they have is hopefully not representative of what most get. Edmunds had too many return trips to the dealer for a vehicle to be called reliable in my view. A more descriptive term may be a piece of ____.

rickc5

Using the (Edmunds') number of dealer visits as a basis for determining whether a vehicle is reliable or not, I must conclude that our experiences with our '95 Tacoma indicate that it was a much BIGGER P.O.S. than any '98 Ranger. In fact, it seemed to be a whole TOILET full of S. That Tacoma was in the dealer about once a week for the entire three months we owned the truck.

Let's not forget that the dealer was completely UNABLE to fix the worst problems with the Tacoma (suspension and front axle). They were waiting for Toyota to "develop" a fix (LOL).

Rather than enter into arbitration (with one of their best customers) for a full refund of my purchase price, the dealer (NOT Toyota) gave us a new T100 and took the Tacoma back. It sat on their used car lot for months before they finally dumped it on some poor, unsuspecting soul.

BTW- Toyota's "suspension fix" turned out to be the TRD package. Another TuRD (or pogo stick).

allknowing

I wouldn't be happy either if I had the same experience. In addition, I wouldn't call your truck reliable with that many return trips either so I don't understand why you'd think otherwise. I haven't had any problems with my Tacoma after a year but who knows. My Ford has not fared as well after two years. What was wrong with the suspension?

scape2

And the never ending Ranger bad, Tacoma good crap goes on, and on, and on. The same people bashing the Ranger and twisting the the data, showing only the bad not the good.
Now we have someone who has owned a Tacoma with problems, rickc5. Can't wait to see how alknowing and spoog wiggle out of this one.
18.5 is an awesome price for a new 01 Ranger with its new 4.0 SOHC mated to a 5spd!! Try to get a Tacoma for that price with it 3.4 and you'll get laughed off the lot.. Tacoma has been around now for 5 years and has yet to make even a dent in Ranger sales. And with the new 01 with the SOHC 4.0, Toyota can only dream of catching the Ranger...

allknowing

Vince8 stated: "Now we have someone who has owned a Tacoma with problems, rickc5".
You're not helping you pet cause buddy. You give the impression that Rick is the first guy that has ever had a problem with a Tacoma entering this forum!!
As long as you're on the Ranger side, the Tacoma guys don't have to say much because you destroy the Ranger's reputation yourself better than we can.
I think it goes more like Vince bad, Tacoma good rather than the way you stated it.

sparkplug1

Keep in mind guys (and girls) that the pricing I am giving you is Canadian dollars converted to American at the going rate of 1.48 Canadian to 1 U.S. (ouch). The similar Tacoma with "B" package was $21,700 U.S. before our dreaded 15% tax and the "C" package was $23,000. I would think that the "C" is the comparable price to what I bought. Add on to that the cost of a factory bed liner and tonneau (soft one at that) and you are looking at $23,600. And I still ended up with a 6 CD stereo , security system, block heater, and two rear (albeit small) doors included with the Ranger (at that trim level) that the Taco doesn't offer. The price difference was $5000 U.S. Now having said that, the Ranger doesn't come with the moon-roof that the Taco does and they "quoted" a 10 day delivery for the Taco and the Ranger is going to take 8 weeks! There are other things about the Taco that are preferable like the wheels, tires, instrument panel, tilt-out extended cab windows and of course the quality issue. I will cross my fingers and hope that I made the right decision. Both brands have their lemons and Ford sells way more so they have more lemons out there. I hope it is a proportional amount. By the way, I ordered it in silver. Black looks great, but only for about a day or so. Silver doesn't show dirt or scratches nearly as much so I hope I get used to the color. As for Ford quality; I owned a 5.0 mustang and it was a hoot but quality was questionable. I now have a leased company F-150 and it is pretty decent but we are hard on our vehicles at work.

cthompson21

You're gonna love silver. My SVTour is silver frost. It never looks dirty (except the rims, which are brake dust magnets), it seems to be one of Ford's best colors quality-wise (nill chance of swirls, etc), it hides any nicks and dings easily, and it has that wonderful classy look of a metallic paing.

Enjoy your truck. You might want to entertain the idea of swapping tires, as Ford's OEM tires are usually passable at best. Check out www.kustomz.com for a few inexpensive and effective mods. You can approach around 240hp and 270ft/lbs with $500 in mods (intake, exhaust, and chip).

I really like the idea of the back-pack. Any idea what it would cost me should I go to the dealership?

cthompson21

paing? what is paing? I meant "paint" Duh!

sparkplug1

The cost for me was $650 U.S. The msrp is $750. The dealer told me I beat her down to $500 above cost for the vehicle. Tried to get her to through in some rubber floor mats but no go. I think she would have if I got up to leave but I didn't want to make her cry.

sparkplug1

Through? I meant throw, and I used spellcheck. I guess it isn't grammar check.

cpousnr

Ford Ranger Reviews:
http://carpoint.msn.com/vip/Overview/Ford/Ranger/new.asp

Toyota Tacoma Reviews:
http://carpoint.msn.com/vip/overview/Toyota/Tacoma/new.asp

Overall pickup data:
http://carpoint.msn.com/Browse/win_2914.asp

America's 1999 best sellers:
http://carpoint.msn.com/Browse/win_2889.asp

jessiemai

Just thought I'd let you know... I decided to put snows on my Civic and keep it for a while. I'll see what it does in the snow, then if I still want a new vehicle, I'll wait for the 5spd 4.0 2001 Ranger.

If I don't wreck it this winter, then I'll keep it. I could use some time off from a car payment anyway.

But I am disappointed. Driving a new truck would have been so cool. Sigh...Oh well.

spoog

IS that the same carpoint that claims the Tacoma is the best offroader and that the Ranger has reliability issues?

rickc5

We bought the first "fully-loaded" '95 SR5 Tacoma in Boulder (CO) in June of '95. The price was over $27K, and this was five years ago! One of the options was some sort of wheel/tire/off-road package, specific to the 4x4.

It had to be the WORST suspension ever put under a factory built pickup. It was EXTREMELY stiff and harsh at low speeds, and yet felt mushy and VERY loose at freeway speeds (never did figure that one out). It was so stiff under 45mph that the rear and of the truck would "hop" to one side if you encountered a small bump in the middle of a turn. I mean HOP about 6"-8" toward the outside of the turn. Not very safe if the road is icy!

Toyota send a district "specialist" to the dealer to investigate my claims that the suspension was lousy and unsafe. Not only did the specialist agree with me, he said that many other new ('95) Tacoma owners were complaining of the same problems. We tried lowering tire pressure and even different tires to no avail. The suspension WAS the problem and Toyota offered no solutions.

Given the Tacoma was a totally new vehicle, no aftermarket suspension parts were available and wouldn't be for many months to come. I called all the major suppliers (Rancho, etc.) to find out WHEN new shocks might be available. I was told a minimum of six months (1Q-2Q '96).

After reaching this impasse, and not wanting to drive this truck any longer, I contacted Toyota and prepared all the arbitration paperwork. Before I mailed it in, I visited the dealer ONE last time to inform them of my intentions. They asked me to wait and I received a call in less than four hours offering to trade me the T100 straight across for our Tacoma. I accepted without any hesitation and we drove the T100 for three years without any problems until the head gasket let go. BTW- the T100's suspension was identical to the suspension in the '89-'94 trucks and was a MUCH better suspension.

The TRD package in my '99 Tacoma was a pretty significant improvement over the '95, especially the ride quality at freeway speeds. However, in my opinion, the TRD suspension is STILL too harsh and stiff for an everyday driver, which my trucks are.

FYI- at freeway speeds, the oil in the front axle would foam and blow out through the vent hole, spraying the entire underside of the truck with oil. Smelly and yucky. Toyota's short-term fix was to run about three feet of hose from the vent into the engine compartment, then split the hose and put little breathers on each end. The "specialist" said that some new baffles were "under development" that would eventually be a permanent fix to the problem (his words, not mine). I have no knowledge if the baffles were ever produced/installed.

My opinion of the '95 Tacoma is that it was NOT well tested before being sold to the public, and that a multitude of fixes had to be done in the field to correct the problems.

A friend bought a Tacoma at the same time we did and had even MORE problems with his. Rather than deal with Toyota, he traded it in on a Dodge and lost a pile of money.

cthompson21

Hmmm... Maybe early Christmas present for me??? Is that painted or unpainted?

cthompson21

You should do fine in the snow with your Civic (especially if it's a stick and you get snows). My Toyota Corolla was a champ. FWD + skinny tires = traction.

allknowing

Rickc5 - Interesting. I never drove a 95 but it doesn't sound too good. I have a 2000 TRD and I personally like the stiff suspension.

sparkplug1 - You're using Vince8's flawed logic in thinking that just because a vehicle sells in greater numbers it will automatically have more problems and/or lemons. If that would be the case, the Toyota Camry would have a much worse reputation than it has.

cthompson21

How is the logic flawed where:

A = B X C



Where:
A = number of "lemons"
B = probability of getting a "lemon"
C = number of vehicles produced


It's just simple mathematics.

allknowing

Greater numbers doesn't have to result in greater failures. Good quality control as well as various other factors can influence the numbers. You have a business background and know that. The Camry, from what I've read, has one of the best quality records for sedans and is also a top seller. Can you produce data showing me that the Camry has more cars classified as "lemons" than a Ford Taurus, a hyundai, or a Dodge, etc.? You would probably find the opposite.

cthompson21

"Can you produce data showing me that the Camry has more cars classified as "lemons" than a Ford Taurus, a hyundai, or a Dodge, etc.?"

What has a Ford, Hyundai, or Dodge got to do with the number of bad Camry's?

That right. Absolutely nothing.



Variable "B" is a constant. As produces more [insert favorite vehicle here], they will also produce more "lemons".

Yes, there are many factors, such as good quality control, that can increase or decrease "B". But, in most cases there's just no difference in producing 200,000 [insert favorite vehicle here] versus producing 300,000.

cthompson21

This does bring up an interesting observation. I think that most of feel that the Tacoma has less of a chance being problematic (a lemon) than a Ranger. For the sake of argument, let's say that 2/100 Tacomas are lemons and 3/100 Rangers are lemons. If you take approximate sales figures of 350,000 Rangers and 100,000 Tacomas and plug them into my formula, you get:

Lemon Rangers - 10,500

Lemon Tacomas - 2,000



Based on this, I would expect to see approximately 5 bad Rangers for every 1 bad Tacoma. But, the chance of getting a bad Ranger is only incrementally larger (just 1%).


Bear with me that this is an extremely simple example. There are so many factors involved that someone could spend a lifetime analyzing them. I just brought it up to show how sales figures can harm or help a vehicle's reputation with miniscule changes in the probability of a lemon.

cthompson21

All of this talk about "lemons" has made me wonder what everybody actually considers a lemon.

To me a lemon could be either of two types:

(1) The vehicle has a fatal flaw where failure has a high probability of failing. It will render the vehicle inoperable and be expensive to repair. My H.O. Quad-4 powered Olds comes to mind.

(2) The vehicle is in the repair shop on a regular basis. It could have either recurring or diverse problems. It's just one of those vehicles that just seems like someone drinking a fifth of jack put it together.

sparkplug1

The Ford factory tonneau that is part of the Back Pack option is heavy rugged black plastic or vinyl. A version is already out as an option on the Explorer Sport Trac. It's not meant to be painted, you can get any color you want as long as it's black. I have a photo of it from one of the websites but I don't know how to post it. I will try to find the website again and let you know where to see it.
As far as the whole Ford / Toyota lemon thing goes, I know the Ford isn't as high up the quality ladder as the Toyota and as I said before my first instinct was to get the Taco. But the Ford offered more for less so I am taking my chances and going with the Ford. My experience with my 5.0 Mustang Cobra was not great. The dealer was a total A**hole and I swore I would never deal with them ever again. You wouldn't believe some of the stories. The dealer I am ordering my Ranger from has heard of their horrible reputation. I will be VERY disappointed if I get put in that situation again.

sparkplug1

The only one I can find at the moment is at www.pickuptruck.com/html/2001/ford/ranger/first_drive.html
It also shows the interior of the up coming off-road option package that is not available in Canada (I checked very thoroughly trust me) on the 2nd page of the report.

allknowing

Having been a Production Manager for 15 years plus an additional 5 years running a Quality Department, I have to disagree with your formula. I brought up the other vehicles in my example compared to the Camry because, in the same sedan category, units sold were less than the Camry. At the same time the Camry retained a higher reported quality level even with more units sold. This doesn't correspond with your formula. The train of thought that quality problems will always increase with units sold is flawed and one reason Japanese businesses hurt American business in the late 70's. With proper tooling and quality systems in place, increased production can even lower total unit failures for reasons too numerous to get into here.

cpousnr

Where is Deming when you need him. . .

As a QA person too you will agree with me that Ford should do a bit more sampling at it's suppliers. Most issues seem to center on supplied products to Ford.

obyone

qualified for Deming Award...last being Toyota.

cpousnr

do not forget that GM with the Caddy got the Baldrich(think that is what it is called)award. . .(named after the a cabinet Sec who's claim to fame was falling off a horse and snapping his neck)

cthompson21

"This doesn't correspond with your formula."

Oh contrare! (pardon my French) It corresponds EXACTLY with my formula. Variable "B" is lower for the Camry than the other makes of vehicles. Their quality control and production techniques are better than that of its competitors.

I think you're getting confused that I am applying my formula only to one make/model of vehicles, not a whole class of vehicles, to determine an estimate of the number of lemons out there for that particular make/model.

If you applied it to something like the compact truck class to determine the total number of compact truck lemons out there it would be something like this:

A = (B1 X C1) + (B2 X C2) + (B3 X C3) + etc...

Each number in the equation represents a different make/model of vehicle, such as 1 represents Tacomas, 2 represents Rangers, and so on.

cthompson21

Thanks for the info and pics. I'm kind of undecided. For that kind of money, I think I'd rather have a painted hard tonneau. My father-in-law has a really nice one for his Ranger. It mimics the power dome in the hood in reverse, and the underside is carpeted. I looks very nice. I think his cost around $700 painted. But, I can get a free paintjob at a body shop, so I'd probably be looking at $500 or so. Choices, choices...

sparkplug1

What brand is his? The price I gave you includes a bed liner as well, but I appreciate your preference. One bonus with the Ford supplied unit is that you can put something tall in the back without taking the tonneau off (hopefully). I think I will like the look of the vehicle being silver and all trim pieces being black in contrast.

allknowing

Believe what you will but if I followed your thinking, I wouldn't be able to keep my job.
Your formula has an undefinable number in the "probability of a lemon" that kind of overshadows and negates the quantity variable anyway. Nevertheless, your argument started by you simply trying to prove that the quantity of units produced corresponded directly to the number of bad units. From lots of industry experience I can confidently restate that that is untrue. You can throw as many formulas as you want at me and it will still be untrue. I've been very successful in my manufacturing career and know what I'm talking about. You may as well not even try to convince me otherwise.

cthompson21

I didn't know that price came with the bedliner, but I've already got a Duraliner anyways. I'm not sure what brand his is. I'll have to ask him where he got it. The black liner probably wouldn't look too good with my truck (dark green with gray trim pieces), so I've got to go with a body-colored lid.

cthompson21

Do you actually read my posts? It seems like I've got to keep repeating, repeating, repeating myself to get through to you.

As I've said before, B (the probability of a lemon) is a VARIABLE. It has many factors that influence it of which I'm sure that you deal with a multitude of in your job.


If you can't accept that if you build more units while generally holding the manufacturing process constant, that it's more likely that you'll have more defects, then...

I give up.