TOYOTA TACOMA vs FORD RANGER- Part XI

allknowing

Stang - Although I can't argue with the concept, I must have missed the post when you made the same critical observation to Vince. It amazes me that many Ranger regulars will defend Vince's outright lies about Toyota owners (not to mention his false information) yet have no problem condemning a Toyota owner practicing similar tactics. I'll admit that I'm a little hard on Vince sometimes when he brings my name into his post claiming that I've said something that I haven't or just something completely erroneous. Maybe I should just ignore his post. Perhaps others should do the same with a post criticizing Vince. Then again, let's acknowledge that Vince is one of those guys simply attempting to aggravate people. As a result of his effort, he typically comes out looking stupid to most. If you go back a year or so and examine his posts in other forums, you’ll discover that he admittedly enjoys irritating people. If he’s having fun, and we can make him look like an idiot in the process, maybe it’s a "win-win" situation. I’m sure that Vince is enjoying this discussion immensely.

midnight_stang

I was mainly talking to ACF2001, as her post was more slanderous than anything pertaining to Tacoma's or Rangers. I have no argument against anyone proving someone else's post to contain invalid information. My argument lies in those who resort to insults in lieu of compact truck debate. Whoever is ignorant, stupid, feeble minded, etc. is beside the point. I'm here to support my argument that Rangers are a better truck overall, be it by sales volume, standard equipment, price, value or quality.

midnight_stang

Reply to your above post.

Festiva now? Can't the same be said about a Tercel, Prius, Echo, or Matrix? EVERY car offers it's own amount of value, quality and quantity of features. The Ranger does offer More for Less money, and that's a fact. If you want the ultimate 4x4, in stock form Tacoma has it.
2. Rangers are boiled cabbage now? I know you have and love a Tacoma, but you can't ignore the two publications you quoted to show the Ranger is a best buy 1993-'98, '00-'01(edmunds). I think Best Buy means MORE bang for the buck.
3. You should take ANY car or truck for a long test drive. Especially USED, because that's where the original quote originates from.
4. Initial quality test is conducted by survey to actual truck owners. This means more Ranger and B-Series owners like their truck better than Tacoma Owners. I think that proves beyond the scope of this forum's audience, which truck offers and performs up to owner's expectations. Thats more opinions than all regulars here combined.

Finally, Toyota definately has it's reputation for it's long lasting drivetrain, and that should carry on to the Tacoma models. But how come Rangers has been the leader in sales since 1987? Seems the reputation isn't enough...

cpousnr

for both:

When I can get a Taco 4X4 that has a standard tachometer, I will consider one.

That is a critical tool in 4 Wheeling, equally as critical as a skid plate. Ford now has skid plates standard on 4X4's.

Toyota still has the tach as optional.

greatdane:
I never said that because spoog will not wheel with me that the Tacoma is inferior to a Ranger nor do I feel it is an inferior vehicle. I do just believe that the Ranger is an excellent vehicle, well priced, outstandingly equipped for the price and can hold it's own with the Tacoma. Heck, I only paid $17.3K for the vehicle, added the tires and skid plates bringing me up to just shy of $18K

I will say this, spoog is showing more and more that he more than likely does not own that Tacoma which really is not a problem. He does not have to own one to post here. However, in a bit longer than 3 weeks, I will post the links where my Ranger and at least 3 others will be on Medano, Imogene, Engineers, Cinnamon, Breakneck and Brown's pass's in Colorado. And if I see a Tacoma owner, will gladly shake his hand, comment on the great view and smile, knowing that we both got a chance to see a great view.

spoog:
First on the pictures, that was Crown King area north of Phonix, temp 112 degress that day. It is rated as a Class 6 trail, very hard. But read about it from 4X4trails.com. . .read the part about taking 7 hours to go 26 miles. Right spoog, a real easy trail, just one of the worst in Arizona by independent standards.

"I recently drove this trail in April of 1999. It had been about 7 or 8 years since I was last on it. I was surprised at how much trail erosion had occurred since my last trip. In these past years, I would imagine that this trail is seeing increased travel. I noticed a lot of motorcycles and ATVs on the trail in April. I imagine that because of this increased traffic, the trail is breaking down more and more each time it gets a good rain. A number of years ago, I would have rated this trail a 4 or an easy 5. It is certainly a 6 or maybe a 7 now. The first 10 to 15 miles is easy. On the last portion of the trail, starting around waypoint 8 or 9, you will see more washed out portions of the road and an increasing number of large rocks becoming exposed.

My first trip on the trail was in a very stock '89 Jeep Cherokee and I had no trouble negotiating the trail. On the April '99 trip, I drove the trail with a stock suspension '98 Jeep Wrangler, limited slip rear diff, and 30"x9.50 tires. We had to stack rocks at one point in order to get up a rock ledge. My son spotted for me, since a misplaced tire would cost me about an 18" drop and I had nowhere near that kind of clearance under my front end. As it was, I caught the front transfer case after the front wheels settled down on the ledge, but the rear end hooked up and got me over. Closer to Crown King, the trail became more of a continuous rock-dodging driving course. A vehicle with larger tires and ground clearance will do better on the upper half of the trail. As time goes on, I would think that parts of this trail will continue to erode more and more. This will require a more capable vehicle and/or driver. Be aware that portions of this trail could easily become more difficult in a short period of time.

Trail Specifics- My '99 spring drive took about 7 hours. We stopped several times to take a few pictures and to have lunch. Plan on making a full day of it when you figure in the return trip back to I-17 via the Bumblebee Road (25 miles of gravel and then the freeway).

Crown King is an old mining town located in central Arizona in the Southern Bradshaw Mountains at about 7000' altitude. Crown King is now known for the large number of summer vacation cabins that it supports. The Bradshaw Mountains run North-South through the central part of Arizona. A lot of gold and silver were mined through out these mountains during the west's gold rush era.

I ran this trail about 3 months ago with my then recently modified TJ (4.56 gears, lockers, lift, tires, etc.) I would still rate it the same although I was now able to do all of the optional sections of the trail! (there are 4 of them) A lot more fun too! You can make this run in less time if you don't stop to play around, take photos, have a picnic lunch, etc. After you get to Crown King, you can either go back the same way you came, or you can return to the Phoenix area via a county gravel road and the freeway. This return trip takes a couple of hours, depending on how the washboards are doing on the 25 miles of gravel road. On my last trip up, I pulled a high centered 4x4 vehicle off of the rock ledge located in the upper section of the trail (photo of ledge included, less truck). It was a 1/2 ton pickup with no lift. (hey, it had 4x4 on the side of it!) With the longer wheelbase, it high centered on the mid section of the frame after the front wheels were up and over the ledge. I had to pull him off the ledge, then go over it, and then pull him over the ledge with my TJ. (He was stuck damn good, as they say!)"

I only disputed the obvious technical errors in the 4Wheeler article. The rest of it was personal opinion of the editors of the piece.

But by your constant rebuke of the Ranger, it should have died while attempting to go where a Tacoma went. By that standard, spoog, I even win that part of the argument.

See you in the San Juan's. . .oh, sorry, thats right, you declined. . .

borzoi

Stumbled onto this site in comparing Ranger and Tacoma. Am considering both. Presently I drive a 1986 Toyota 1-Ton which I purchased new. After 15 years, 1 head gasket, 1 alternator, 1 caliper and several sets of front brakes and shocks from heavy towing the poor truck may not pass VT inspection due to rust. The rest of the truck is original, motor, auto trans, rear end etc. The shame of it is the truck still travels I 91 in VT at 80 mph with ease and gets over 25 mpg. Never has it let me down or even a whimper. Has anyone here had such similar luck with a 4 cyl Ranger? Would be interested in hearing as the Ranger's price tag is much less for what I want. Am looking at a new Tacoma Prerunner SR5 Xcab 2WD. Around $20k. Similar Ranger around $17k. 4WD I view as a waste of fuel and cost as I don't off road or plow. Most vehicles in VT that fall off the road in snowstorms usually are 4 wheelers with CT or Mass plates anyway :}. In any event, I don't recall seeing a mid 80's Ranger around my area for quite awhile except in the boneyards or as planters in the trailer parks. Several Toyotas though, still hauling, burning a little oil, leaking fluids here and there, and basically serving their masters without a fuss. Is it worth the $3k? You tell me.

ebbgreatdane

1. So can anyone post an article that states that the Ranger has a better or more optimal 4X4 system that Tacoma?

2. Can anyone state facts or articles that suggest that other than the price, the Ranger is better suited in terms of quality, reliability and driveability than the Tacoma?

Have yet to see those...

CPO - I'm glad you have names and places to take your Ranger but you are incorrect about the Tach.

Please find me someone who has a found a Tacoma 4X4 V6 truck that doesn't have the IX, LX or LL package. My guess is you won't be able to find such a truck because it is an unpopular combination of options; and dealers know what is and what isn't hard to move. So they order what will move and if you want the SR5 package you have to code a trim level. I understand the Tach is an "Option" but if you stop looking at Edmunds a take a look at the lots, you'll see what I mean.

To say they don't come with one standard is one point of view. I would tell you that you won't find a 4X4 on a lot without a tach since most code the SR5 pacakge which forces you to select a trim level which gives you the Tach.

Any other misconceptions? Seemed like there were a few more but I seem to be last rational Tacoma Guy standing and I just can't read every post... heh heh.

And I do not subscribe to the Spoog, "Cut and Paste the Same Thing Over and Over Again," model. Nor do I believe, that Tacomas are inherently superior. I just haven't found evidence to the contrary. And I do own one. I've taken enough pictures of damned thing you'd think it was my new baby. I'm sure with the first dent or chip, I will manage a tear.

John

ebbgreatdane

Yeah, sorry but the Ford Festiva just popped in there. Must be the wiseguy in me. I don't think I would have lumped the Tecel, Prius, Echo in there since they (as well as the new Focus) were/are very popular and not so much of a flop; not that the Ranger is a flop. Suzuki Swift would have been a good one but basically best buy or best bang for the buck doesn't mean the most bang. ;-)

Eh... If I thougth I could have afforded it we would have gone with the Silverado. Now with all the problems I've been reading about with those and after washing a "compact" pickup for the first time, I'm glad we stuck with the Tacoma.

I know Rangers have totally out sold Tacoma's since 1987 but if you look at the market data, I think this has more to do with the fact that with a lower price over the last 20 years and the abilitiy to sell your trucks in the same country you manufacture them in, that you will sell a ton more than those coming over on slow boat to the USA for distribution all over the US to a market who in the last 20 years hasn't looked to fondly on Japanese automakes for fear of loss of American jobs.

Rangers are Good but Tacomas are better I think. There would have been a Ranger in the driveway had Ford dealers dealt better with me in the past an if the Ranger had better styling (just can't get into them). Maybe when the drive train gets a little more refined without things like leaking seals and loud AC units with better styling and a kick [non-permissible content removed] 4X4 packagae for the same $X$ amount, I'll feel better about giving up Toyota Reliability. For now, it would cost me more to be in the shop than drive a more expensive truck.

Cheers,
John

acf2001

Cars and trucks have always captured the hearts and minds of Americans. I believe that one buys a vehicle on both intrinsic worth (quality of components, value, etc...)and esoterics (styling, marketing effects, etc...). If you watch the commercials for Fords, Chevys, and Toyotas... they are NOT selling the intrinsic qualities but the feeling qualities. Now to get back to the arguments made here that Fords are a better value...It may be true money-wise but worth is so much more. I am tired of this argument of consumer best-buys!!. The way we move cars is by advertising and marketing to key age groups by IMAGE. Pontiac is great at this. They build their performance into their marketing - NOT their cars. So you get a ton of young people who think their cars are fast, riding on your butt. Ford trucks - now they try to sell the COWBOY image and that common theme, so popular (#1 in music format,too)in this country, SELLS! Toyota, I believe personally, sells itself not in its ads (although they are changing to the tough image too). I never saw one ad on TV for a Tacoma before I decided to purchase it. I went with what appealed to me in looks and interior quality. After all I want to look outside and see something nice in my driveway. The styling of American stuff to me is ugly.... and that just doesn't sell in my book.

plutonious

My 1998 Tacoma TRD 4x4 V6 Ex-cab came stock with the following:

1. 31" Goodyear Wrangler GSAs
2. Heavy duty suspension with beefier
springs up front and beefier leaf
springs in back, Bilstein shocks, and
a thicker sway bar
3. Over-sized fender flares
4. Clutch-start cancel feature that allows
the engine to be started without pressing
the clutch (no rolling backwards down the
hills)
5. A fully locking rear differential in the
rear that can be turned off (probably the
most useful 4x4 feature in ANY 4x4)
6. Highest ground clearance in its class
7. A smooth dual overhead cam V6

While others are whining about the Tacoma's tach not being standard (hmm, I've never seen a Tacoma that didn't have a tach and I think you're REALLY reaching for an argumentative point here), I think it's the domestics that are short on options. None of them ever put together a package like my truck, in 1998 or even now. And I also it's high time Ford, Chevy and Dodge got with the program and junked their archaic pushrod engines and went DOHC.

In my humble opinion, the options Toyota offers with the Tacoma, combined with Toyota's reputation for quality and durability, makes this a no brainer.

One last point. Everytime I look in the classifieds, I'm amazed at how many Rangers and S-10s are being sold, at least 75% of them being late models. Then I to to Toyota's column, and there's just a handful of them being sold, usually late 80s and early 90s models. What's that tell you? It tells me a lot more than Edmunds, Consumer Reports, JD Powers or Car and Driver Magazine ever could.

midnight_stang

1. I believe this comes from CPO's posting about the FX4 4X4 package for 2002 Rangers. I don't recall anyone stating Rangers better currently, just that it can definitely hold it's own on the off-road, and coupled with the vast after market for Ranger and great availability and low price of replacement parts, Ranger is pulling ahead in capability. Of the factory floor, Tacoma has better off-road capabilities, but I'd bet 90% of the people who will off-road won't know the difference. Those who do, will be modifying their vehicle anyway, so that capability difference gets shortly thrown out the window. To date, the only place I can find any information on the 2002 FX4 is edmunds, and that's little more than a blurb.

2. "Get behind the wheel of this truck, and you'll note the excellent handling and the nearly flawless ergonomic layout in the cabin." Edmunds Most wanted 2001. I think and believe based on articles like above and my test drive of 2001 models Tacoma and Ranger that seat comfort, standard features, on-road ride/handling, and reliability (driven by proper maintenance) that the Ranger is a better offering for a compact truck. With the new 2.3l 4v 4banger and 4.0l v6 (and updated 3.0l), 5 speed automatics, and the tried and true 5 speed manuals, the drive train reliability gap is either negligible, or none-existent.
Epinions.com: Ford Rangers receives overall 4 star ratings for years 1995-2000. Toyota Tacoma receives 4 stars in 1996 and 1999, but 3.5 stars in '95, '97-98, and '00. 90% of reviewers recommend the Ranger, while 88% recommend the Tacoma. This is similar to the ratings given by JD Power's initial quality phone survey to owners.
It's definitely a close running, but these indicators clearly are not in Tacoma favor.

About the tach, I think that point was made because it is optional on Tacoma's. Most probably still come with them, as seen on the dealership inventories, but you are paying more for something that should be standard with any manual transmission or off-road vehicle. The tach is standard on even the most basic of Rangers. And leaking seals and loud A/C units are not typical of Ranger's either, even if there are some posts under the Ford Ranger Problems forum. And styling is a good argument; who can justify buying a vehicle they just don't like the looks of? That's another reason I'm all Ford... The latest Tacomas front fascia looks cross-eyed to me...

midnight_stang

You think the options available are in Toyota's favor?
Power Package (power doors, windows, mirrors, etc)
Ranger: $405 Tacoma: $500 to 660.
A/C
Ranger: $650 on XL(Std w/ Edge or XLT) Tacoma: $985
Clock:
Ranger: Std. Tacoma: $82
Tach:
Ranger: Std. Tacoma: $95
Cruise& Tilt Steering
Ranger: $325(both) Tacoma: 250+245=$595
Bed Extender:
Ranger: $195 Tacoma: $269
Trailer Hitch:
Ranger: $214 Tacoma: $339
CD Player, radio, cassette(Clock for Rangers)
Ranger: $130 Tacoma: $330, 275(minus cassette)
6-disc in dash
Ranger: $270 Tacoma: N/A?

If you want Power accessories, Air Conditioning, a clock, a tachometer, cruise and tilt steering, a bed extender, a class III trailer hitch, and a CD Player with cassette deck,Here's what you would pay:
RANGER: 1409 TACOMA:2680.(I averaged as Power accesories vary per Taco model.)

Ride height and a locker is on Taco's side, but with the price of a TRD package you can easily get a suspension or body lift to make up the difference. But then you start sacrificing on-road manners. Lockers are great if you want to go forward in rough territory, but little else. Fender flares are on Rangers, tires are inconsequential. You wither paid more for them at the dealership, or replaced the cheaper ones you bough off the lot with something that fits your needs in driving.

Options? Ranger has 24 different models to offer in 2002, and 41 in 2001!! Tacoma has 17 in 2001.
Ford has many 4 door models available, Tacoma only in Double cab varieties.
Ford has v6's available in Regular cabs, Tacoma does not. Ford offers standard ABS too. Ford has better crash statistics, and are cheaper to repair in fender benders. 6 disc in dash cd player's are available in Fords, plus a mp3 player in 2002!

Your last point about why there are more Rangers in the paper than Toyota's? Ever look at the sales numbers per year? If you add in the fact that Rangers are #1 best selling compact pickup since >1987<, you should then soon realize there are more on the market to sell.

Also that clutch- cancel things sounds neat, but how do you put in it gear without having to experience the same rolling downhill problem? Of course you could just hit the brake (or e-brake) while holding down the clutch to start it. How much extra did that cost you?

barlitz

The stock ZR2 has a higher ground clearance than the TRD, it is also better equipped for offraoding than the trd. although it doesn't have a true locker it does come equipped with a gov locker,which locks all 4 wheels and sends power evenly to all 4, not just the rear 2. Sorry TRd owners you've been had.

plutonious

I wouldn't quote Epinions.com as being a reputable source of vehicle information. I've read a lot of their reviews and, well, there's a lot jackasses and other self proclaimed "auto experts" there who shred vehicles they don't even own. I couldn't care less what Epinions.com may say about Toyota trucks.

If you look around at buying trucks, it's obvious people aren't selling their Toyotas at anywhere near the rate Rangers and S-10s are being sold. And the Toyotas command a higher resale value. And to me, that says a whole lot more than Epinions or even JD Powers. People like their Toyotas and keep them for the long haul.

I do agree with the Tacoms's front end being botched. It looks silly, and so does all that stupid plastic molding on both the new Tacomas and Rangers. I guess the manufacturers feel they MUST change SOMETHING every year, even if it's not an improvement?

midnight_stang

I guess you missed the new Chevy commercials that point out, spec for spec, where the silverado beats F-150's and Tundras. That's not the "feeling" marketing you claim. As far as "intrinsic" values not being presented, it's kind of hard to get down and dirty with the specs of the truck, when you've got oh so many models to represent. The F-series alone has an ungodly amount of model variance. Everything from v6's to v10's, and more options that can be listed here. The F-series is the more popular vehicle of all time, as it recently surpassed the VW Beetle life long numbers. Funny you mention they try to sell to a cowboy theme. I do live in Texas, and Ford does sell more trucks in the South-west than any other brand or model(for like the past 15 years). So maybe we're all buying into the "cowboy music and image" of it. Or maybe everybody knows which truck can be abused like a red-headed step child and still do the work for you. You say you are sick of the argument of best buys, but it will always be the interest of those who are buying. That's why BEST BUY is beating out all the Mom & Pop electronic stores, and Consumer reports is so populaur. People want the most for their hard earned dollar, and Ranger gives them more truck for the buck. Because more truck for less money sells(and has be outselling since 1987). A higher percentage of Toyota's are more likely to run without any major problems, but that doesn't mean Rangers aren't as capable or as long lasting. There are stories supporting both end of the spectrum of that statement. The reputation for quality goes to Toyota, but it seems reputation is not enough the masses who are voting with thier pocketbooks.

midnight_stang

Epinions may not be valid in your opinion, but they are a group of opinions just as valid as ours... (How Zen). It was just some supporting documentation to the posts made above. Either way, any publication, article or review is subject to the recipient's acceptance of such gospel. It could be considered scripture, blapshemous, heretical, or just evangelist BS.

spoog

\\The stock ZR2 has a higher ground clearance than the TRD, it is also better equipped for offraoding than the trd. although it doesn't have a true locker it does come equipped with a gov locker,which locks all 4 wheels and sends power evenly to all 4, not just the rear 2. Sorry TRd owners you've been had\\

Barlit- please refer to the 2001 pickup of the year contest at fourwheeler.com.

Click on trucks and events, then road tests.

You will see the Tacoma TROUNCING a full size loaded chevy, GMS, nissan, and the s-10.

" Simply put, the Tacoma opened a can of whoop-a@@ on the other trucks"

" The Tacoma could simply go places the other trucks couldn't"

-fourwheeler.com

spoog

whats funny is that I constantly provide solid sources as to why the Tacoma is better offroad , yet these Ranger dudes just wont accept it.

I mean COME ON people , the Tacoma outdid a freaking HUMMER in a head to head test.

Time and time again I have posted information from Edmunds, Fourwheeler, the NHSTA , and JD powers that eloquently demonstrate that the Tacoma is:

A. a better offroader

b. Tougher, more reliable

These are the facts. Pretending they are not is just an act of lying to yourself.

plutonious

Of course more Rangers are up for sale because there's more of them. What I find interesting is if you take the time to average out model years being sold this is what you get: basically, the Toyotas being sold are old models with high miles, and the Rangers being sold are late models with fewer miles. Why don't people keep their Rangers for the long haul like the Toyota people do? Maybe there are no more old Rangers with high miles being sold because they died a long time ago?! And why do the Toyotas have better resale values (despite some reviews giving other trucks higher ratings)? Regardless of the numbers being sold, this average age of the vehicles is saying something important. Like longevity and owner satisfaction.

Now for options. Your argument in purely quantitative, while mine is qualitative. I place more value on having that Toyota DOHC V6 (not available on Ranger or ZR2), better build quality, better reliability, better resale value, better warranty, longer vehicle life, lower cost of long term ownership and probably better customer service than having a 6 disk changer versus a 3 disk changer in my dash. So I guess it depends on your priorities, not just the NUMBER of options that may be available. And as far as cost of options go, well, you get what you pay for... But if you're willing to spend low to mid $20,000s on a truck, what's the big deal about an extra $1300 for a Toyota?

Don't know what the ZR2 is offering these days (hey, I bought a Toyota and won't have to go car shopping for 15 years!) but only time will tell if it becomes as respected and popular as the Tacoma on the off-roading scene. I wouldn't dismiss the Tacoma, a time tested and trued design, just because of Chevy's latest offering. A little too early for that, I think.

modvptnl

Give it a rest!!! Your Pontiac remark was just silly. No, I'm not a Pontiac fan but when you sell 320 HP pony cars and supercharged Grand Prixs that usually out perform their respective class, I think it's a little more than image. Toyota's Tundra commercial is flat goofy. What the hell does running over a gnome have to do with ANYTHING??? I'll give you the taco ads, haven't seen any but than again I'm not looking.

You're obviously subjective in your purchase by your "looks in the driveway" comment. Even a fellow toy owner after you said they're ugly.

To the Toy owner that was complaining of push rod motors, not only does Ford run a SOHC but the Chev push rod V8's still out perform all OHC configs in the pick ups. (with the exception of Ford's SOHC 5.4 regarding torque)

Tried and true tacoma???? They've been out what? 6 years and have had head gasket probs and the toys before them would rust to the ground.

Toys are good trucks but they're not "all that".

plutonious

I'm not saying Toyotas are perfect. The fact of the matter is for every one of the Toyota's quality issues, the Ranger and Chevy had 10. Sorry you didn't have better luck with your Toyota. You were just the unlucky guy who got the Toyota with a problem. Hey, I think that's great. I'm glad you were the statistic, not I, because you seem like a jerk!

Hmm, am I the only one here who doesn't see how comparing Chevy and Ford engines to eachother has anything to do with Toyota engines?

And maybe we would see more rusted-out domestic trucks if they lasted longer! LOL!!!

modvptnl

"Hmm, am I the only one here who doesn't see how comparing Chevy and Ford engines to eachother has anything to do with Toyota engines?"

WTF are you talking about???? Was it you that INCORRECTLY stated that Ford doesn't have an OHC motor?? Now I know why you're so defensive.LOL!!!

modvptnl

I feel like a toy owner now!!!

Here's goofy's er....I mean pluto's quote:

"And I also(sic) it's high time Ford, Chevy and Dodge got with the program and junked their archaic pushrod engines and went DOHC."

Hey Einstein, both Ford and Dodge and Chevy have OHC designs. While not DOHC, except chevy(which is a waste in a truck) they have no push rods.

I'll try this again since you obviously didn't understand it the other way.

What advantage in the CURRENT state of tune does an OHC motor have over pushrods?? Why is this such a big selling point for you??

Clutch cancel switch??? BFD!! If you're uncoordinated I could see its benefit but I can put my right foot on the brake and depress the clutch with my left to start a truck.

Locker?? GREAT option. Can be added to ANY truck at any time. For that matter you could pull the safety switch and jumper it on any truck to defeat the clutch/start mode.

I'll say it again, toys are good trucks but they're not infallible.

plutonious

Please point out to me where I said anything about OHC motors! Boy oh boy, I'm looking forward to this...

An OHC (over head cam) IS different from a DOHC (dual over head cam) engine. Either way, I ask AGAIN, what does comparing Ford and Chevy OHC/SOHC engines have anything to do with Toyota DOHC engines????!!!!

Does Chevy or Ford put a DOHC engine in their compact P/Us?

Go get your bifocals, man. And chill out!

spoog

\\Clutch cancel switch??? BFD!! If you're uncoordinated I could see its benefit but I can put my right foot on the brake and depress the clutch with my left to start a truck.\\

An invaulable tool especially on steep terrain.

I take it you havent really been off road?

\\Locker?? GREAT option. Can be added to ANY truck at any time. For that matter you could pull the safety switch and jumper it on any truck to defeat the clutch/start mode.\\

Not in the manner it is instilled in the Tacoma. See the fourwheeler "ultimate 4x4" and "98 truck of the year" and "2001 pickup of theyear" contests at fourwheeler.com for its ultimate superiority.

modvptnl

"And I also(sic) it's high time Ford, Chevy and Dodge got with the program and junked their archaic pushrod engines and went DOHC"
These are your words.

"Please point out to me where I said anything about OHC motors! Boy oh boy, I'm looking forward to this...'

OHC motors have no pushrods...comprhende'(sp?)

Please explain the advantages of your wonderful DOHC motor. I really don't think you even know why you like it so much....except that it's a toy and you have blinders on.

modvptnl

An ARB locker is just as good as the electronically switched one that is in a toy.

I LIVE for offroading. Please explain the benefit of your clutch/cancel switch. The ONLY benefit I could see is if your motor is dead and you needed to use the starter to move the vehicle while in gear. That rolling backwards on a hill nonsense is just that. You'd still have to push your clutch in to engage your trans once your motor started.

plutonious

And what is your point about any locker being able to be installed in any truck? If I can buy a brand new truck with it already in and under warranty, don't you think that makes more sense than installing one after buying a new truck? I'm sure Ford is really going to stand behind their warranty (which is weak to begin with) if you upgrade the suspension and start putting lockers on it. Yeah, right.

Yeah, you could probably put ANYTHING in any truck, but I usually reserve that kind of work for my beat-up Jeep, not a brand spanking new vehicle. How many people out there buy a NEW truck and start taking everything off it to modify it?

Basically, your argument is you can modify a Ranger or S-10 to maybe perform as well as a stock Tacoma. Weak argument, don't you think...

Toyotas aren't infallible. But I'll take one over a Ranger or S-10 anyday.

You seem to be shredding the Toyota but at the same time you're not praising the Ranger or S-10. WHAT IS YOUR POINT?

modvptnl

I've said they are good trucks.

"Basically, your argument is you can modify a Ranger or S-10 to maybe perform as well as a stock Tacoma. Weak argument, don't you think..."

That's EXACTLY what I'm saying. For me, a TRD Tacoma is a weak off roader stock. I'd destroy it with how I off road. I DID have a '96 F-150 off the show room floor that went right into the shop for mods. After beating it for 3 years, I removed most of the suspension, sold it, and turned the lease in.

Ya know, I'm not sure where you are coming from. I simply pointed out that you were wrong when you said Toys aren't the only ones that don't use the "archaic pushrods" and that one toy owner says her truck is "pretty" and you said they look goofy. Give it a rest already.

plutonious

Well, so I don't know a thing or two about engines, huh? A DOHC design allows a smaller engine to really breath, producing as much power as a much larger displacement engine. Physics lesson. A given volume of fuel and air has a finite amount of potential energy in the fuel/air mixture. This potential energy remains constant, no matter which engine is burning it. If two engines are burning the same fuel/air mixture in equal time periods, and they are both burning equally efficiently, they will produce the same power. Torque/horsepower curves can be shaped by changing the bore, stroke and valve diameters/shapes. The biggest advantage of the DOHC design is that it allows a smaller engine to burn as much fuel/air in the same time period as as a larger displacement pushrod-configured engine. The smaller engine, having less mass of its moving parts and less area between articulating moving parts, offers the advantage of having less internal friction and less inertial resisitance than the larger pushrod engine. And it's no coincidence these engines use aluminum engine parts with less mass and timing belts instead of chains. The goal is to push as much fuel/air through the engine possible, while keeping internal engine friction and inertial resistance at a minimum. While the OHC design is good, and eliminates the need for pushrods, the DOHC design offers more flexibility in valve opening/closing movements and timing and is also a better choice when using 4 valves per cylinder.

Oh yeah, don't pretend to be a Spanish speaker if you're not. I assure you I will run circles around you in both Spanish and English. Got that, chico? Don't give me the chance to embarass you with this one.

As far as the clutch/start cancel is concerned, I've never had to use it because I don't stall my truck while driving it. And besides, I never said anything great about that feature anyway. Again, READ!

modvptnl

While a DOHC is superior to a push rod motor for breathing it's mostly all HIGH RPM breathing where a DOHC starts making sense. Now you see why I'm comparing GM's pushrod motors to the OHC designs??? Please explain why Honda still uses SOHC in their 4 valve V6 motors???

Where a TRUCK motor is supposed to spend most of its time (lower RPMS) the more important thing is port volume vs. velocity. Does Toy use variable valve timing on its truck motors?? If they don't the 4 valve head actually will REDUCE low end torque. Your internal friction case is debatable and has NOT been proven an advantage. You really think turning 4 cams is significantly less resistance than a single cam with roller lifters and roller rockers???

You see, I own a DOHC 4 valve motor in my Cobra. It is advantageous because that motor spins to 7000 RPM. The Toy motors are ONLY DOHC because it was easier to use existing platforms that were already in production (Camry and Lexus) then to design a ground up truck motor. That last statement is not a cut down but simply fact because Ford does the same thing withe their SOHC motors. DOHC 4 valve motors are a waste of potential in a truck. BTW, your DOHC, SOHC reasoning is also flawed, but that will be another post.

As far as the clutch/cancel switch, please read YOUR OWN POST #2010!!!

Oh, I thought you were Chico.....now I'm Chico???

plutonious

YOUR reasoning is flawed. The Toyota makes its maximum torque at HALF the RPM you stated (7000 RPM). I thought you said DOHC only makes sense at high RPMs? You seem to think that any DOHC design can't be shaped to produce its torque at low RPMs. For a mecanico wanna-bee, eres muy ignorante en lo que estas diciendo. Sorry, chico, estas equivocado otra vez.

Even the S-10's 4.3L OHC engine was a slug when compared to the Toyota's smaller 3.4L DOHC and perfectly illustrates my point. Go to fourwheeler.com, truck of the year. The Chevy came in dead last, 5th place, much of it due to its lousy engine. Not only was the Toyota's engine superior in performance, it also offers the advantage of being smaller and lighter. Hmm, that might come in handy when fitting it into smaller engine bays... Oh yeah, the Toyota also came in 1st place again in that competition. And that's not the first time it's taken top honors, either.

While I can appreciate your point about how a truck engine should have it's "sweetspot" down low, that applies to heavy duty towing trucks who need mountains of torque available down low where it can be used. But in a compact truck, which is rated to tow only 5000lbs (which is the Tacoma's rating, not bad for that little truck), the DOHC is perfect for this application.

And I NEVER praised the clutch/start cancel feature. I simply mentioned that it was one of many features that came with Toyota's TRD package. Again, READ, READ, READ. Is English a second language for you? I certainly know Spanish wasn't your native tongue.

barlitz

I can honestly say I don't offroad, the reason why I bought my truck( ZR2) was the price, the engine with tourque combo.195hp 250lbs tque, the 3 doors and the size. It will, just like a ranger w/limited slip will take you any where you need to go.Question for you taco owners can you get a 4x2 with limited slip. I have a 4x4 I don't even think the 4x4 taco comes with LS.My truck will take me to 99% of all places I need to go, The trd is a terrible mud truck and that was proven in last months 4x4 magazine, the ZR2 will crush it so won't a ranger 4x4.
Spoog the S-10 tested in that test was not a ZR2.

barlitz

you're wrong about the vortec 4.3. You probably didn't know but it is the same engine used in a lot of small 2 passenger aircraft. It is also the same engine used in the typhoon and syclone.

modvptnl

Chico, What's the problem??? I didn't say the 4 valve motor can't be "tuned" for whatever you may want it for, I simply said in the rpm range that the truck motors need to operate at there is NO advantage. Witness the GM push rod motors. The 4.8 PUSH ROD motor handily out powers the toy 4.7 DOHC motor. The Ranger SOHC 2 valve motor out powers the taco motor (yes, I know there is a displacement advantage) So where is the benefit of a 4 valve head that's "tuned" for max torque at 3500 RPM???

Where did I say you "praised" the clutch/cancel switch? You mentioned it and I commented it had no benefit IMHO. Of course spoog ran when I asked him to explain the benefits and will return with some subjective link and nothing else.

I will give Toy its due. And if you have to keep something 15 years, I'm sorry.(I have heard that toy has fixed the rusting and head gasket problem) I don't NEED to keep things that long and would rather have something new every few years. After incentives and initial cost a Ranger will come in waaaay less expensive than $1200. Money I can spend on other toys while getting the same level of performance.

You basically attacked me in a post that wasn't even directed towards you and now you can't accept the fact there are other just as competent trucks out there that are less expensive to buy.
This was fun for awhile but I'm seriously doubting your mental capacity to understand what is actually being written.

Buenos dios(sp?) Chico.

plutonious

Everybody is going to have their own opinions on trucks, and that's good. The world would be boring if everybody thought the same way and nobody had a different opinion.

For a guy who buys a truck and trades it in every few years, the Ranger probably is a great truck. But that isn't an option for me. Everything I own, or have owned, belongs to me and not the finance company. I keep my vehicles for the long haul and I don't want to be in perpetual debt owing money on cars. Toyotas are great for the long haul. They really go the miles (in most cases) and that's what I'm after.

I guess I like my engine because it's powerful for its size and extremely smooth and reliable. The domestic engines, to me, seem rough and unrefined in comparison. Believe me, I understand your point about some of these VTEC/OHC/DOHC engines buzzing to 8000 rpm to get a little torque. I HATE Honda's 4 cylinder VTEC engines, always buzzing to 7000 RPM to have a little power on tap. But I assure you my Toyota's engine is a different animal. 80mph and the thing is spinning at 2900 rpms. I never have to run it faster than 3000 rpms to get all the torque I need.

Well, this is a mute argument at this point. And, believe it or not, I enjoyed debating with you. It's rare finding people you can have an intelligent debate with on many of these automotive forums.

Buenas noches!

modvptnl

And points that make sense. The Toy motors are refined, I don't think that can be debated. I think the domestics are catching up though. But I still don't believe it's refined BECAUSE of the configuration. The toys going the long haul (in most cases) is a fair statement IMHO. I just wanted it remembered that toys have had problems also. The starlet(non-truck) has an un-rebuildable carb that costs more than the car is currently worth. I've beaten the rust and gasket issue to death.

In the previous posts I was debating the so-called advantages; TRD, DOHC etc. Your personal views, obviously, can't be debated.

My personal experience on Fords, that my friends or family have kept, are: '95 Bronco with 302, 185,000 miles; Early 90's Explorer with rough 4.0 push rod motor, 140,000+ miles; '83 Ranger with 2.8 V6, well over 100,000 miles.....

My current F-250 V10 SOHC 2 valve motor has been flawless(for 2500 miles LOL!) and my '97 Cobra has aprox. 42,000 trouble free miles(throw out bearing covered under warranty)

As far as paying for everything and not owing anything, that's a whole 'nother topic. But why would you give up $20,000 cash when it can be financed @ 4-7% interest???? Believe it or not, when Vinny was bragging about buying his Ranger for cash a few years ago I questioned him also.

midnight_stang

my pushrod 2.3l never has to break 3000 rpm either to get to city speed limits. And it's made in 93. FYI, Ford's 4.0l SOHC makes 238 ft/lbs of torque at 3000 RPM, while Toyota's 3.4l DOHC makes 220 @3600. See the trend? There isn't much advantage of SOHC vs DOHC. DOHC is just easier to drive 4 valves. And that is why your truck produces it's power high in the RPM range. That's the only advantage of DOHC, easier set up for 4 valve configuration. (And if you think 2 valvers aren't good for making power, please see the Ford Lightning) Now, unless you have any variable valve and timing adjustments, like Honda, or at least a lower intake with a vacuum driven plenum to lengthen or shorten the intake runners, your hurting the low end power. Since you say it is "tuned" for low end torque, that means that the intake runners are shortened, for better velocity at low flow rates. And this will hurt your upper powerband. You also bring up the point of "less internal friction and less inertial resisitance" make more power [than in the pushrod]. So 2 cams per head holds up that argument? Think about it, more cams to rotate, more valves to move, more springs to push, more drive needed from the crank.

spoog--->Your repetitve argument is moot if you want to talk 4x2's, which is definately the majority of compact trucks sold, domestic or import. Even to GO off-roading, you must use a paved road to get there in America. "An invaulable tool especially on steep terrain." And the brake or e-brake must be pure genius then.

Modvptnl--->Nice truck, my girlfriend's father has one in Oklahoma. That thing tows 12 bales of hay on a 1500 pound trailer like nothing.

acf2001

Pertaining to the post where you said to me, "Give it a rest!!!",it was not EVEN directed to you, yet you waste no time jumping on me. So all bets are off. NO, I won't give it a rest, I have enough right to post on here as you do. And your comment about Pontiacs having 300+ HP beating everything, PAHLEEZ! I'm not talking about high end modified versions, I am talking about the average person's purchase. Sure anything can beat anything else given enough $$. Looking at Motortrend's road test results for 9/01 shows Grand Prix GTP($26,665) at 0 to 60 at a sad 6.8s. My 1990 Laser Turbo did better and the new WRX due out is under 6 for under 25,000. Fuhgeddabout it! If I could purchase a F1 car I'd do it. But I'll bet you are a NASCAR fan..... just a hunch. You like going around and around in circles just like they do...

acf2001

I had a situation where my 4x4 came in exceedingly handy. While on a trip, a tire came off a van (going the opposite direction than me) on a four-lane highway. It broke off part of the axle and the wheel with it and was careening towards me. In order to save my life I had to go off into a horrendous ditch. Got that Toy 4x4 with 16" tires out easily. And the important part is that I didn't have to think twice about going "off-roading" which might have made the difference between L & D .

modvptnl

Sometimes it sounds like you know about cars and sometimes you look a little silly.

The Pontiac Formula v8 comes STANDARD with 310 horsepower and the Ram Air has 320. These cars have been running high 12's and low 13's off the showroom floor and can be had for that $25000 barrier. No high end modified version needed.

NASCAR fan??? Well, I pretty much like anything that has horsepower. Coming from someone that buys a truck because it looks pretty in her driveway... I realize now what kind of consumer you are. Cough...choke....YUPPIE!!!!

Please stop taking everything to heart. From your first PMS episode on Vince to trying to correct the word decaf(f) it really makes you look vindictive and mean. I hope you don't teach that way!!!

midnight_stang

Nascar is more of a sport than she'll ever understand. I doubt she would even have the strength to depress the clutch on any nascar car, none the less handle 180+ speeds down the straightaways, and going through the balancing act of throttle, air drafts, turning, and etc.

acf-->Good thing about your quick reactions. An extended cab tacoma only has a 3/5 star rating on frontal collisions. Not the greatest of compact trucks, and certainly not the cheapest to fix. http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov

Did you have to put it into 4 hi or lo to get out of that ditch?

Pontiacs are the performance segment of GM. If you don't think so, take a ride in a Grand Prix (family car), v8 Formula or Firebird, or a Bonneville. But is this the Discuss Pontiac Forum? NO!

acf2001

I had a situation where my 4x4 came in exceedingly handy. While on a trip, a tire came off a van (going the opposite direction than me) on a four-lane highway. It broke off part of the axle and the wheel with it and was careening towards me. In order to save my life I had to go off into a horrendous ditch. Got that Toy 4x4 with 16" tires out easily. And the important part is that I didn't have to think twice about going "off-roading" which might have made the difference between L & D .

indacurl2k

Saw the patch, nice.

I was in Louisiana all last week. Hot. Real hot. Went to a lot of job sites down there, mostly shipyards. Saw a lot of Chevys and Fords, mostly the bigger stuff though. F250, F350 and Z71. I liked what I read about the new Ranger. I'm interested in the price tag.

Vince, for the life of me I can't figure you out. Sometimes I wonder if you work for Ford's marketing department. Is it your goal here to refute any and every opinion presented by Tacoma owners? Is it your goal to see everyone driving a Ford Ranger? Or do you just like to pretend that all Tacoma owners aren't as smart as you when it comes to comparison shopping on compact 4x4 pickups? Is that how you normally treat people who you feel aren't as smart as you Vince? Your personal experience with the Toyota Tacoma is little more than nothing. You don't own one and you don't care to own one. Your "friend" had or has one and that's it, and even that is open to debate. I have about as much experience with the Ranger, but then again I'm not bashing it.

As for Toyota, I drove a Camry Solara all week in Louisiana last week. What a piece of crap. Nice ride and everything. The air conditioning is so cold in that thing I swear my toes are just now thawing. The seats in that car may be the most uncomfortable seats I have ever sat in. By comparison, when I got home to my Tacoma, the seats felt like butter. How one company made both of those seats is beyond me.

I think it's funny that people buy a vehicle, be it a car or truck, and then begin to believe that their experience is in some way representative of everyone elses who own that particular brand or make & model. They fail to realize that people are different and even their vehicles are different. Things like maintenance, climate, elevation and driving habits all factor into how a vehicle will handle over the long haul. I have a "friend" who touts Chevy all the live long day. He's had a Chevy for years now and swears by them. I came to find out not long ago that he drives the truck once every few months and only for a few miles.

Vince, maybe you've had nothing but good experiences with your Ranger. I'm glad for you. I've had nothing but good experiences with my Tacoma. My experience with my Tacoma is equal to yours with your Ranger.

eagle63

What (if any) changes will there be on the 2002 model tacoma??

acf2001

Well, I was talking not about Firechickens (I'll admit Americans build cheap speed and cheap everything else) but I see a ton of Grand Pan's and Prix's on my tail...from their commercials. Wide trac.. what is that?? OK if you got some HP and handling. And as for knowledge about cars: I helped rebuild 2 cars for increased performance...I teach Physics so I know a bit from that. Ya, compression ratios (I can figure those) and racing suspensions are nothing new to me. As for looks, well, most people CARE. According to your ideas it shouldn't bother you to drive around in a rustbucket as long as its got some horses under the hood (afterall all your money should be tied up in there). Stang, don't presume anything about me either... I just don't like Nascar racing... BORING. Europeans laugh at our brand of racing. It's popular because people like to watch wreaks. Who's the higest paid athlete in the world?? Michael Shumacher.. except you don't even know who that is.

sc0rpi0

Hi all. I must say, a very entertaining discussion. I've pretty much made up my mind on Tacoma, but I have a question:
I just moved to TX, and was wondering if there were any trails for a beginner to try out offroading (I've been driving since 10, but mostly highway/small town mud roads), and do I really need a TRD package for some non-professional weekend offroading? I am going for the Xtracab 4x4 V6 Taco (I want a manual tranny, kind of a bummer that 4x4 is the only normal-looking configuration as far as I am concerned). What would be a good site to find info on trails in south-central (Austin area) TX?
Thanks in advance,
Andy

modvptnl

Shumacher is one of those spoiled little F1 drivers.....big deal. Liked him when he had Ford power though. LOL!!! NASCAR has a road course thrown in and it's the brand identification that makes the series more popular in the States then watching some insect looking cars with spoiled brats driving them. I do dig on their motors though!!!

As far as Europeons......who gives a rat's [non-permissible content removed] what they think. Don't they drink warm beer??? And I know the English have rotten teeth...I watched Austin Powers ya know. Why don't you take your pretty toy and move to france where they treat foreigners with such dignity.

Looks are purely subjective and it's ironic that you mention rustbucket AND own a toyota.

As far as ads go, it's sort of like when you tore Vinny a new one by critiquing his grammatical skills then butchering your own post. So Pontiac has commericials you don't like. I'll accept that. But if it's a toyota ad where the tundra is running over a ceramic gnome it's meaningful, artistic use of ad space????

Since you like trivia so much, what are the only 2 motors sanctioned for IRL??? No cheating by looking it up now!!!

Almost forgot!!! The teachers(especially the physics teachers) are soooooo much better in Europe and in Europe they laugh at the way we teach our kids. And one time in band camp........

acf2001

Oldsmobile and Infinity engines. And Guiness may be warm when its served but it is sooooo good! BTW teeth can be fixed but obnoxiousness??? I'm afraid there's no cure.

midnight_stang

Funny you talk about rusting... I guess you missed that older Tacoma's really had trouble with that. Besides you presume all our money is tied up in the "rustbucket" because it has some horses under hood. This is so much over generalization you've made it onto my silly list.
And NASCAR, don't presume to make comments on something you also claim to know anything about. If you even looked at the rules in Nascar, and the specifications they have to adhere to, you would understand how competitive a sport it is. To you it's just left turns...
Besides Stock car racing is a breed apart from F1 or any open wheel racing. Enjoy them for what they are, and don't criticize because you or Europeans find it "boring"...
The only thing I presumed was that you had quick reactions. I was talking physical in lieu of you dodging a oncoming axle and tire, but now I'm starting to think you are just quick to react mentally.
I ask again, (since you posted again) "Did you have to put it into 4 hi or lo to get out of that ditch?"

acf2001

L4 - H4 is for winter driving. The only comment I made on Nascar was that it was boring. And that I do know - nothing else (by choice).