Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
Toyota TACOMA vs Ford RANGER - X
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
"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."
Notice it is a review of the TRD. . .
Also, sorry that review in the last post was on the 99 Tacoma.
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?
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.
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.
Ranger has 2 forward and 2 rearward hinged doors.
See you in the Cascades, snow is coming!!
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.
" 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.
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.
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).
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...
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.
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?
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.