It surprises me you have not heard about this. Thousands and thousands of Explorers have left the Ford factories with slashed tires. This happened because the new Explorers, with wider frames, were assembled on the same lines as the older, thinner Explorers. As the new Explorers progressed down the assembly line, their tires were slashed by protruding assembly equipment. Now, that in itself is poor planning. But how in the world did these cars leave the factory without anybody noticing the damage?
And now to top it off, it's being discovered that the new Explorers have a roll-over problem in the event of a blown tire. Hmmm, let me think, rollover problems, slashed tires...not good. Ford has already discreetly settled numerous multi-million dollar lawsuits involving people getting killed in these vehicles. To my knowledge, there is almost 300 more lawsuits pending against Ford as a result of these accidents.
I did more searching. The incident your talking about was about 5 months ago. The recall only involved 50,000 vehicles that 'might' have had a tire problem caused by the assembly line..
However, I also did more searching on your claim that 2002 Explorers have a rollover problem but have not found anything yet..
But, this is not Tacoma vs Explorer, its Tacoma vs Ranger.. Facts remain that both the Ranger and the Tacoma are good high quality trucks..
I think it's a bit unfair to talk about alleged rollover problems on the new Explorer at this point. That's a favorite line thrown out at SUV's that has proven to be overblown in the past and there isn't any proof as yet that the new Explorer is any worse than the earlier versions (or any other SUV). Although I do believe that Toyota does have a quality edge over Ford in general, Ford is far from junk and has done its best to satisfy customers even at great expense to the company over the last few years ( tire replacements, etc.). At least Ford is attempting to stand behind their products. I also agree that the Ranger is at a higher level of quality on average than a lot of Ford's other vehicles.
I agree that manufacturing processes for both Japanese and American autos is on equal footing and said as much, however, there still exists a gap (small) in engineered and designed auto parts. (Not the process but the specs) Just take a look at the Dodge Problem web sites or research the TSB sites and compare the number of recalls for Japanese autos with those of American autos.
Even though Firestone is owned by Bridgestone a Japanese owned company the Ford tire specs on their tires were/are not the same as those spec'd by Japanese auto companies. The jury is still out on the tire issue but you have to ask yourself why so many rollovers/tire failures on the Explorer? (I think it was a combo of poor tire design and quality control by Firestone) U.S. auto makers still cut corners on parts. It's not so much a problem with poor engineering by U.S. auto makers it has to do more with keeping costs down.
Having said all that, my brother owns a 1986 Ford Ranger Ext. Cab with 150,000 miles on it. It's beat to heck but it still runs. My 91 Nissan p/u had 129,000 miles when I sold it. Still has the orginal clutch and as I mentioned the brakes front and rear made it 100k. I know several people with Ford/Dodge/Chevy vehicles that were replacing brakes after only 40k.
Unfortunately the Ford Sport Trac was too Explorer like for my taste and it will be 2004 before the Ranger is in a 4 door crew config. similar to Nissan/Dodge/Chevy/Toyota.
Pluto--->The explorer tire slashing problem is not as bad as you think. It was caused because of the 2 inch wider wheelbase on the new explorers. The assembly line was basically a close shave with this incresed width, and some of the tires might of been nicked. Not in the sidewall, if I recall correctly, but in the belt or tread. This was before they even became available to the dealers for sale. Ford caught the problem, and only 50,000 of them "might of been affected". Very pro-active, Ford asked dealerships to check those 50,000, and again Ford paid up for the replacement tires. You and I, and the general public would have seen nothing of this problem, had Ford not brough it to our attention, and the media jumped on it. The explorer is still be best selling SUV. As far as rollovers and safety concerns, you really out to check out the stats...
the quality of Toyota products in general is better than the quality of Ford products in general. This quality difference may be "very small" to quote Vince, but the difference is there nonetheless. Having said that, I don't mean to imply that a Ranger is junk. Now Vince, please don't jump down my throat. You already burst my "Toyota is God" bubble a long time ago. Take care......Steelman.
Just a quick note on my new 2001 Tacoma 4WD, 4cyl, Xtra-cab. I love this truck. I have about 4000 miles on it and have not had one problem with it. My mpg has ranged from 23 to 24 mpg, which has surprised me based on what I have read from other posters here. So far, so good. Couldn't be any happier with any other vehicle!
Glad to hear you are enjoying your truck. I too have a 2001, 4wd, 4 cyl extra cab with approximately 4000 miles on it (most of those miles being offroad miles). I too love the truck and have had no problems whatsoever. However, my average gas mileage is lower than yours (anywhere from 18 to 23 mpg depending on the usage). I am sure we will both be able to enjoy a long trouble free life from our trucks. Take care....Steelman.
There exists a number of simple ways to increase gas milage for Taco (as well as give you better hp). 1. deckplate mod. 2. Amsoil air filter. The above two are by far the cheapest ways to get more performance out of the stock Taco.
As for the Ranger vs. Taco..in my personal opinion, Ranger blows chunks . Sure, bigger engine, but to me the truck looks like an oversized hotdog with all its curved body structure
Thats weird that everyone says a Ranger has more room than the Tacoma. I sat in a 98 Tacoma and it had more space. Maybe the seats were thinner in the Tacoma. Also i'm not a Ford die hard fan or anything like that, but when i popped the hood on the Tacoma i thought i was gonna pull half of the lower dash off. I think there is no comparison between a Ranger's inside materials as compared to a Tacoma's.
Hey, Is any one from Colorado can tell me if I need 4wd truck to go to the mountains in the winter? I wonder if 2wd with anti slip deferential would do the job? What are the state rules in regards of snow chains? How often would I need them?
I live in Texas so I don't get much snow or mountanous driving, but I can tell you that a Limited Slip Differntial (LSD) avaialable for 2wd Rangers would be a minimum. You might get by without 4wd as long as you've got several sacks of sand of kitty litter in the bed and over the rear axle. But avoid the one wheel drivetrains, unless you like wheelspin.
Wait until cpounser checks in, he's a Colorado resident I believe.
There's no substitute for 4wd - limited slip diff or not. especially in a pickup with its light rear end. I'm not from colorado, but if I was spending anytime in the snow I wouldn't hesitate to get 4wd.
Don't forget Tacoma's cross-eyed headlights and silly grill. Oh and I must include the Atari joystick for an automatic trans shifter. How easy is it to read the eighty dollar clock while driving? Also saw a Crew Cab Taco with a cap on the short bed, and it was an eyesore... Even a tonnau (sic) cover would of been wierd looking.
Yeah, you have a good point about the grill. Looks funky, I like the 1999 more. And as far as Atari joystick (hey, its not Atari! Its Spectrum!), I can't tell you, I'm buying a manual. And I think that trucks should not have a cap (want a cap, buy an SUV), but Taco owners are not the only one guilty of capping their trucks. I've seen Rangers like that.
I've got a 4x4 Taco in Colorado. The state does a good job of keeping the roads in the high country clear but it all depends on timing. If stuck out on the roads during a major snow storm I would want 4x4.
Limited slip would help but with the light rear end you will be fighting with it a lot. I would rather have a front wheel drive car with good tires on snow packed roads than a 2-wheel drive truck. Tires make a huge difference though.
The downside with 4x4 is it can lull you into a false sense of security. I've found myself on more than one occasion going too fast for conditions. Around Denver you usually see some type of 4x4 in some type of accident every snow storm. Just my .02.
The grille - You're not supposed to like it. You're a Ranger owner. ;-)
I always thought the crew cab cap on the DC Taco brought it closer to looking like a 4 Runner and improved it's overall appearance. Pretty nice if you ask me.
I'll take my "cross eyed", silly grilled, Atari shiftin Taco over a gear grindin, fluid leakin, paint chippin rattlin Ranger any day.
Well, I agree with jholc, there are a lot of idiots around here that think 4X4's are the cure all for snow. The drive em fast in 4X4 mode and flip them with ease. \ 4X4 is not REQUIRED, here or in the mountains, but it is nice to have when the heavy storms hit. It is NOT a good idea to use it on very icy roads while going fast, a spinout could happen.
I DO sometimes engage my 4X4 high on the roads when snowpacked. It does add a bit of stability but I do keep it around 45mph or lower.
I did get caught in a snow strom coming back from Sante Fe earlier this year. Snow parallel to the ground, 8-10 inches on the road. I cut through it like butter in 4X4 high at a steady 45 mph. But it took 10 hr to make the normally 6-7 hr trip.
Chains: Well no real restriction, use em if you need em, but sometimes the chain law is in effect in the pass areas. That means they check your snow tires, if the State Patrol does not think the tires are good enough you do not go on without chains. I have used chains 3-4 times in 27 years here.
Studded snow tires: Well, I do not own any, but some like em. I think they wreck the roads.
You will use a 4X4 more to visit the beautiful mountain 4X4 passes and trails more than you will in snowy weather here. If you come here to live, buy a 4X4 to explore, not survive a winter. If you have no desire to explore, I would advise against a 4X4 as you will rarely use it.
I must admit, the first time I saw a 2001 tacoma with the redesigned grill I thought it was pretty bad. However, they have grown on me. Now I don't mind them at all, in fact I kinda like 'em. I do agree that the auto shifter looks funny. -should be on the steering column, like every other truck. I'd get the 5 speed, so it's not an issue. don't know what you mean by the cross-eyed headlights though...
To defend my cross-eyed headlights opinion, it's just the way the front fascia looks to me. If the headlights can be perceived as eyes, it looks like a cross-eyed vehicle. Maybe it is just the interplay with the grill...
Here are some pros and cons: 1. I4 gets a hell of a lot better gas milage. 2. If you buy an I4, I'd suggest getting a reg cab. It's smaller and lighter. 3. V6 has 40 horses more. AND, if you decide that you want more horses, you can get a 50hp charger on top of that for $2K. I've not heard of a charger for the 4banger, or at least it wouldnt be as cheap.
Overall, it depends what you are buying the truck for. I'm getting a V6, this way I don't have a cap on the horses, that way if I want to race a 16yo in souped-up Honda Civic, I know I can beat him. If you want more info, go to www.tacomaterritory.com
There are a lot of differences between the two but here's the short, short version:
1) If you plan to do any towing, get the V6. 2) If you want to see the difference, test drive the 4banger. Then test drive the V6. While in 2nd gear, floor it till you hit 55. It won't take long.
Well I was agonizing between Ranger and Tacoma until tonight. I drove a truck that kicked both their asses soundly. It's called Dakota. So I have found a truck for me, and just to let you guys know what i decided, I thought I would post again.
...come join us over in the Dakota owners forums. Lots of good info over there. Would like to hear about your truck. I made the switch from the Mazda B3000 4x4 to a Dakota just over a year ago and have been very pleased with the Dak. I'm not knocking the B3000, I drove it hard for the 11 months I had it (17,000 miles) and never had a lick of trouble with it. Lots of tough off-roading included in those miles. I just needed a stronger engine for my road trips back and forth from AZ to CO. At the time, I was holding out for the SOHC 4.0L in the Ranger/Mazda. On the spur of the moment, I test drove the Dakota with the 4.7L V8 and that was all she wrote. Just got back from a long road trip and the Dak and averaged 19MPG. Not bad for a 4x4 with a V8. Anyway, enough for now. Hope to see you in the Dakota forums...
My preference would be the manual shifter. That was one of the reasons I opted for the Toyota. I've always liked the manual shifter as opposed to a push button. Its a personal preference, but I simply like shifting into four wheel drive. Also, I've been told that the manual shifters have fewer problems then push button shifters (no, I don't have any data to back that up, it is just what I've been told by friends and other 4wd owners). Take care and I'll see you in the woods during deer hunting season (yehaa! it's almost here)................STEELMAN.
I personally like the push buttons its the convenient and gives a little more room in the cab. And besides nowadays even the manual shifters are nothing more than a switch when you shift into 4H.
Can you tell from my description that I went for the button. When it get's icy, I didn't want to have to remember the shift pattern.
Overall it works pretty smoothly and if it wasn't for the green light on the dash and the small tug, you wouldn't know anything changed while going 45 mph. I think the max speed for engaging it is 62 mph.
From the looks of the last few posts, you people who seem to prefer the button haven't driven a 4x4 with a shift lever lately. On my Tacoma, the shift from 2wd high to 4wd high is a simple tug on the shift lever (toward the rear of the vehicle). I believe this is a direct linkage to the transmission and not a switch as somebody alluded to in a previous post. In any case, this is a pretty simple procedure and can be done on the fly up to 55 mph (per the owners manual). I have personally shifted many times from 2wd high to 4wd high on the fly (anywhere from 10 to 40 mph) and it works really slick. Believe me, the truck is instantly in 4wd as soon as I shift (there is no lag time). Again, I personally like the shift lever and I can appreciate those who like the button. However, using the shift lever certainly does not require a college education and can be done on the fly and results in instantaneous 4wd traction. Any question? Good, I'll see you in the woods on the hunt for the big old gray buck........Steelman.
How long has it been, guys? 3 years or so and still nobody's given in or left yet? Man, you guys are something.
I've got an A4 now, so I don't need to argue here anymore. Didn't use the 4Runner offroad as much as I though I would, so I got rid of it. Loving the Audi...
But CP, come on, I took my 4Runner on some hairy trails (Imogene, Ophir, etc). The Tacoma will go anywhere the Ranger will and probably vice-versa. All this "spoog will get in over his head" BS (unless you were talking about his driving skills, in which case you would probably be right).
They are both great trucks. Buy whichever one you want more.
just look at the doors. tacoma's are thin, crappy metal. interior on tacoma is cheap and old looking. the ford is a lot safer, more powerful with the new 210 horse sohc 4.0, and has a more sophisticated 4x4 system. i could go on and on, but i won't. the ranger is not the best selling compact truck in the USA for nothing. they last forever. i have a 2001 ext cab 4x4 with the 4.0 sohc engine, off-road pkg, and bf goodrich all-terrain tires in the same size as tacoma (265/70/16) free from Ford. plus i have a 6 disc cd changer in dash, along with every other option. compare this with a tacoma equipped equivalently, and the toy will easily be 3-4 more grand. the safety and longevity of the body and other parts just aren't there on the tacoma. they're made cheap, and sold overpriced. TRD 4x4 pkg looks good, although it will never haul, tow, climb, or pull anything out in the woods when the wheeling gets serious when the Ranger waves bye-bye. the Ford is the serious off-road worker. the toy is just all looks. put a decent set of tires on any ranger 4x4, like i did, and there isn't any other compact that can compete with it. especially the 2001's, the new headlights and grille treatment, along with the most powerful V6 in any compact truck is unbeatable.
Interesting how your OPINION on the Tacoma is the direct opposite of all the major 4x4 magazines' reviews and my personal experiences with my 98 Tacoma TRD.
Get your facts straight. The TRD package doesn't come with the tires you mentioned; rather, it is equipped with with 31.5" 10 R15 Wrangler GSAs. It also has the Bilstein shocks, oversized fenderflares, heavy duty suspension, thicker sway bar and most importantly (which you don't have, I believe), a rear locker. So no, it's not all looks, the important features on the TRD are the ones you don't even see. I like BF tires too, I just bought a set of their all terrain TA KO tires after 50K miles on my Wranglers.
Big deal you have 210 horses versus Tacoma's 190. The HP war is always raging, and the Tacoma is slated for a more powerful V6 in the near future as well. I still wouldn't trade my engine for yours, though. Sophisticated 4wd system? The staple has always been a lever-actuated system (don't tell me you have the push-button!), and the Toyota's transfer case has been the best one on the market for some time.
As is stands now, the consensus among the magazines and the compact 4x4 p/u community is the Tacoma TRD is the one to beat, and it has been for several years running now.
BTW, my drive-out price on my truck was $22,500, hardly 4 grand over a similarly equipped Ranger. And I would like to see your Ranger, or any non-locker equipped vehicle for that matter, do better on the trails in the woods better than one WITH a locker.
My truck is almost 4 years old now. Funny that only now Ford is making something that might give it a run for its money! But I'm not holding my breath...
Sounds like you own the same truck, mines a 5spd auto. I wasn't as luck to get the ko's for tires, I had to settle for goodyear rt/s. I now have over 10k on my truck and it runs great, I'm very pleased with it. I took mine on a hunting trip and put about 200 miles on it while using the 4wd. The roads were pretty bad, they beat the hell out of me and the truck. Guess what, not one rattle or squeak. the toejoe owners don't know what they're talking about. They need an excuse to justify spending 2 or 3k more. No offense though, I think the toyota is a great truck, just quit knocking the ranger.
I don't think the Ranger's a bad truck, either. As far as knocking goes, well, if someone like Tblunder wants to pop in here with his garbage, he can expect to have it returned right back!
While us Toyota guys pay more initally for our truck, we are rewarded in the long run with what I believe is a longer lasting, more reliable vehicle with MUCH better resale value. Toyotas do have some of the highest resale values around. The newspaper classifieds show my truck is now being sold for around $19K, and that's without the TRD package. Not bad at all, almost 4 years of use and I've lost $3,500. Compare that to the domestics, there's a big difference. Every Toyota I've had has easily gone 200K miles and was sold within one week of advertisement, for a good price. My experience with Ford products, unfortunately, has been much different. In my mind, that more than justifies the price difference when buying a Toyota.
"YOU need to get your facts straight. run down to your local tinyota dealer and look at tires on trd trucks. they will read 265/70/16. toyota doesn't build a trd truck anymore with 31's on it." -This might be the bonehead quote of the year. 265/70/16 IS a 31" tire.
"my ranger DOES have a rear locker on it, and it works all the time, not just when you push a button." -I spoke too soon. Unless you put something on aftermarket, you have a limited slip diff. THIS IS NOT A LOCKER.
"also, my transfer case does not let the front hubs and c/v joints spin all the time like your ancient toy does (if its even a 4x4). the wheels are free to spin by themselves until the tc is actuated. its called pulse-vacuum hub locking..." -what?? you have good 'ol part-time 4wd just like everyone else.
"duh. think before you post inaccurate info." -I hope the irony is not lost on you...
I too am from Iowa and it's ashame this guy has to ruin it for everyone here. This Ranger must be his first 4x4, especially if he doesn't realize that all compact trucks have part-time four wheel drive. NOT full-time! LOL! It is good this guy does not represent the majority of Ranger owners, alteast Vince made half way intelligent points. I bet when the car dealership met this guy they were just slightly over joyed!
Today I went to Uwharrie national forest for some off road riding (dirt bikes).. It was my first time there and I found the trails fairly easy, even the ones marked 'most difficult'. The most challenging trails involved some short uphills with large loose rocks.. There were a few trucks doing the trails as well.. I saw no Tacomas nor any Rangers. Most of the trucks were Jeeps of various types. Most of the trucks doing this were also modifed with slight lifts, larger tires and I'm sure other stuff that isn't as obvious.. The most 'stock' looking vehicle was a Ford Explorer of all things.
So, it looks like that folks who want to do serious off-roading have vehicle specifically built for this purpose. I don't deny that a new Ranger or Tacoma could do these trails, but it doesn't look like folks want their daily driver vehicle to be put through this punishment..
I would ignore tbunder as he really doesn't seem to accurately represent Rangers or Tacomas.. We all know that both trucks can be easily modifed for the more extreme off-road circumstances. We also know that both vehicle are similar in quality.. Now with Ford offering a similar factory package(fx4) to Toyota's TRD, everyone can have fun..
It is nice that the Ranger has 4 doors, making it easy to get your dry gear in and out..
For those folks who just want a good truck to haul stuff around, and drive it to and from work everyday, it would appear the Ranger has the advantage..
Don't worry! I know some good guys from Iowa, and some good guys who have Rangers too. Tblunder in no way represents your typical Iowan or Ranger owner. But he does a very good (and vocal) job of representing your everyday idiot found in all parts of the world.
bess, the Ranger is a good value if you use it as you stated. But if you want something that is more capable on the trails in stock form, and want better resale value, the Tacoma TRD is the only choice. It's still the only truck to come stock with a true locking rear differential, which makes all the difference in the world. It just depends on your needs...
Pluto--->FYI, Pulse Vacuum Hublock, is just a method of (dis)engaging the hubs on the front axle, on the fly. I don't know about the Toyota hubs, if they are manually locked or not, but since you seem to be ridiculing the Ranger, I thought you might want to know what your being sarcastic about.
Per Edmunds: 1993 Toyota Half Ton 2 Dr STD Standard Cab SB Trade In $2,518 1993 Ford Ranger 2 Dr XLT Standard Cab SB Trade In $2,493
Of course the Tacoma Nameplate didn't exist back in 93, but in my case, I would be saving 25 bucks if I went with the Toy. Woopie. Of course you would be a fool to think that a value written down in a book or on a website is set in stone. However use these figures for a generalization of what the actual amount may be. Offset that by the higher "add-on" costs for toyota to offer the same standard equipment found on Ranger, in additional to the added financing, it only makes financial sense to go with Ford Ranger.
Also the Locker isn't God's gift to compact trucks. It sure can get you up a slippery incline, but if highway and on-road manners is what you want (and will be driving over 95% of the time) you might want to test drive a Ranger with a LSD. At least the manual says you can drive faster than 15mph with it. Also a detroit locker can be had for under 500 bucks. Well under the price difference on Ranger vs. TRD.
I've said this before, and you somewhat said the same thing above: NADA, Edmunds, Kelly Blue Book, etc. are GUIDES, NOT GOSPEL. In the real world, Toyotas command a significantly higher resale price. My 98 Tacoma has been selling for around $19K in the San Antonio Area. Comparably equipped 98 Rangers are selling for a whopping $13K, and there's a million of them for sale. I would get more money back from my Tacoma TRADING IT IN AT A DEALERSHIP THAN SELLING A RANGER AS A PRIVATE PARTY. If you really want to see a HUGE difference between documented resale values and real world values, look at Hondas. You can't even come close to buying a used Honda in good shape for less than $3500 over the documented resale value. Furthermore, if you like to run your vehicles into the ground with a bazillion miles, instead of trading them in every couple of years, the long term cost of ownership is going to be less with Toyota. Some people lease or trade in their vehicles every year or two, if that's the case, it probably would make sense to go with a cheaper Ranger that has more options. But what a waste of money, paying perpetual payments on vehicles you will never own...
Funny story. Years ago, I had an 84 VW Scirocco that was totaled in an accident (not my fault). Being that I had no collision insurance, I had to fight the other driver's insurance company for a settlement. They offered me $800 because that's what NADA and KBB said it was worth; they also said if I wanted more, I would have to provide proof that the car was being sold for more than $800 in the real world. As it turned out, a friend of mine worked in the classified ads department of a large newspaper and printed every ad for 84 Sciroccos advertised for sale the last two years. Average price was $4300, and that's exactly what the insurance company wound up paying. The point is NADA and KBB can be WAY off the mark.
Stang, your comments on the locker's upsetting a truck's highway manners are COMPLETELY erroneous, at least when we talk about the Tacoma. The Tacoma's rear locker can be be engaged at will by the driver only when needed, then turned off. The rest of the time it's good old LSD, so you get the best of both worlds. I assure you, there's no hopping and tire chirping going around corners in my truck; the locker is turned off. I understand and can appreciate your point, however, on trucks with full-time lockers.
Tblunder, you've proven to be TOO UNKNOWLEDGEABLE to have an intelligent conversation with. You can't even tell what tire sizes you have, the difference between lockers and LSDs, what swaybars do, ETC.
I am currently on 3 month study-abroad in England. Im having an awesome time, but I can't help thinking about my baby... whether she's being washed regularly, if my parents are getting her out on the highway at least once per week, whether I should have thrown in an extra oil change before I left.
Everybody needs to take the time to appreciate all trucks, whether it's a Tacoma, Frontier, Ranger, full sized pickups, etc... Take it from someone who has been exposed to nothing but tiny micro-hatchbacks and the occasional wierd looking, oddly proportioned,dough-nut tired cube van and has not seen one real American style pickup in quite some time.
Comments
In todays world auto manufacturing processes, all of the top manufactures use similar processes in design and production..
I've been looking for more information on your tire slashing story, is it a case of bad quality control or just vandalism?
And now to top it off, it's being discovered that the new Explorers have a roll-over problem in the event of a blown tire. Hmmm, let me think, rollover problems, slashed tires...not good. Ford has already discreetly settled numerous multi-million dollar lawsuits involving people getting killed in these vehicles. To my knowledge, there is almost 300 more lawsuits pending against Ford as a result of these accidents.
However, I also did more searching on your claim that 2002 Explorers have a rollover problem but have not found anything yet..
But, this is not Tacoma vs Explorer, its Tacoma vs Ranger.. Facts remain that both the Ranger and the Tacoma are good high quality trucks..
http://members.aol.com/navchief1/hancock5.jpg
Heading down the mountain. . .lead truck, me in the white shirt.
http://members.aol.com/navchief1/hancock6.jpg
8^)
spoog, pictures?
Even though Firestone is owned by Bridgestone a Japanese owned company the Ford tire specs on their tires were/are not the same as those spec'd by Japanese auto companies. The jury is still out on the tire issue but you have to ask yourself why so many rollovers/tire failures on the Explorer? (I think it was a combo of poor tire design and quality control by Firestone) U.S. auto makers still cut corners on parts. It's not so much a problem with poor engineering by U.S. auto makers it has to do more with keeping costs down.
Having said all that, my brother owns a 1986 Ford Ranger Ext. Cab with 150,000 miles on it. It's beat to heck but it still runs. My 91 Nissan p/u had 129,000 miles when I sold it. Still has the orginal clutch and as I mentioned the brakes front and rear made it 100k. I know several people with Ford/Dodge/Chevy vehicles that were replacing brakes after only 40k.
Unfortunately the Ford Sport Trac was too Explorer like for my taste and it will be 2004 before the Ranger is in a 4 door crew config. similar to Nissan/Dodge/Chevy/Toyota.
http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=8623
1. deckplate mod.
2. Amsoil air filter.
The above two are by far the cheapest ways to get more performance out of the stock Taco.
As for the Ranger vs. Taco..in my personal opinion, Ranger blows chunks
. Sure, bigger engine, but to me the truck looks like an oversized hotdog with all its curved body structure 
Wait until cpounser checks in, he's a Colorado resident I believe.
Also saw a Crew Cab Taco with a cap on the short bed, and it was an eyesore... Even a tonnau (sic) cover would of been wierd looking.
And I think that trucks should not have a cap (want a cap, buy an SUV), but Taco owners are not the only one guilty of capping their trucks. I've seen Rangers like that.
Limited slip would help but with the light rear end you will be fighting with it a lot. I would rather have a front wheel drive car with good tires on snow packed roads than a 2-wheel drive truck. Tires make a huge difference though.
The downside with 4x4 is it can lull you into a false sense of security. I've found myself on more than one occasion going too fast for conditions. Around Denver you usually see some type of 4x4 in some type of accident every snow storm. Just my .02.
The grille - You're not supposed to like it. You're a Ranger owner. ;-)
I always thought the crew cab cap on the DC Taco brought it closer to looking like a 4 Runner and improved it's overall appearance. Pretty nice if you ask me.
I'll take my "cross eyed", silly grilled, Atari shiftin Taco over a gear grindin, fluid leakin, paint chippin rattlin Ranger any day.
Doh!
John
\
4X4 is not REQUIRED, here or in the mountains, but it is nice to have when the heavy storms hit. It is NOT a good idea to use it on very icy roads while going fast, a spinout could happen.
I DO sometimes engage my 4X4 high on the roads when snowpacked. It does add a bit of stability but I do keep it around 45mph or lower.
I did get caught in a snow strom coming back from Sante Fe earlier this year. Snow parallel to the ground, 8-10 inches on the road. I cut through it like butter in 4X4 high at a steady 45 mph. But it took 10 hr to make the normally 6-7 hr trip.
Chains: Well no real restriction, use em if you need em, but sometimes the chain law is in effect in the pass areas. That means they check your snow tires, if the State Patrol does not think the tires are good enough you do not go on without chains. I have used chains 3-4 times in 27 years here.
Studded snow tires:
Well, I do not own any, but some like em. I think they wreck the roads.
You will use a 4X4 more to visit the beautiful mountain 4X4 passes and trails more than you will in snowy weather here. If you come here to live, buy a 4X4 to explore, not survive a winter. If you have no desire to explore, I would advise against a 4X4 as you will rarely use it.
1. I4 gets a hell of a lot better gas milage.
2. If you buy an I4, I'd suggest getting a reg cab. It's smaller and lighter.
3. V6 has 40 horses more. AND, if you decide that you want more horses, you can get a 50hp charger on top of that for $2K. I've not heard of a charger for the 4banger, or at least it wouldnt be as cheap.
Overall, it depends what you are buying the truck for. I'm getting a V6, this way I don't have a cap on the horses, that way if I want to race a 16yo in souped-up Honda Civic, I know I can beat him.
If you want more info, go to www.tacomaterritory.com
1) If you plan to do any towing, get the V6.
2) If you want to see the difference, test drive the 4banger. Then test drive the V6. While in 2nd gear, floor it till you hit 55. It won't take long.
John
So I have found a truck for me, and just to let you guys know what i decided, I thought I would post again.
Tim
Overall it works pretty smoothly and if it wasn't for the green light on the dash and the small tug, you wouldn't know anything changed while going 45 mph. I think the max speed for engaging it is 62 mph.
John
How long has it been, guys? 3 years or so and still nobody's given in or left yet? Man, you guys are something.
I've got an A4 now, so I don't need to argue here anymore. Didn't use the 4Runner offroad as much as I though I would, so I got rid of it. Loving the Audi...
But CP, come on, I took my 4Runner on some hairy trails (Imogene, Ophir, etc). The Tacoma will go anywhere the Ranger will and probably vice-versa. All this "spoog will get in over his head" BS (unless you were talking about his driving skills, in which case you would probably be right).
They are both great trucks. Buy whichever one you want more.
Get your facts straight. The TRD package doesn't come with the tires you mentioned; rather, it is equipped with with 31.5" 10 R15 Wrangler GSAs. It also has the Bilstein shocks, oversized fenderflares, heavy duty suspension, thicker sway bar and most importantly (which you don't have, I believe), a rear locker. So no, it's not all looks, the important features on the TRD are the ones you don't even see. I like BF tires too, I just bought a set of their all terrain TA KO tires after 50K miles on my Wranglers.
Big deal you have 210 horses versus Tacoma's 190. The HP war is always raging, and the Tacoma is slated for a more powerful V6 in the near future as well. I still wouldn't trade my engine for yours, though. Sophisticated 4wd system? The staple has always been a lever-actuated system (don't tell me you have the push-button!), and the Toyota's transfer case has been the best one on the market for some time.
As is stands now, the consensus among the magazines and the compact 4x4 p/u community is the Tacoma TRD is the one to beat, and it has been for several years running now.
BTW, my drive-out price on my truck was $22,500, hardly 4 grand over a similarly equipped Ranger. And I would like to see your Ranger, or any non-locker equipped vehicle for that matter, do better on the trails in the woods better than one WITH a locker.
My truck is almost 4 years old now. Funny that only now Ford is making something that might give it a run for its money! But I'm not holding my breath...
While us Toyota guys pay more initally for our truck, we are rewarded in the long run with what I believe is a longer lasting, more reliable vehicle with MUCH better resale value. Toyotas do have some of the highest resale values around. The newspaper classifieds show my truck is now being sold for around $19K, and that's without the TRD package. Not bad at all, almost 4 years of use and I've lost $3,500. Compare that to the domestics, there's a big difference. Every Toyota I've had has easily gone 200K miles and was sold within one week of advertisement, for a good price. My experience with Ford products, unfortunately, has been much different. In my mind, that more than justifies the price difference when buying a Toyota.
-This might be the bonehead quote of the year. 265/70/16 IS a 31" tire.
"my ranger DOES have a rear locker on it, and it works all the time, not just when you push a button."
-I spoke too soon. Unless you put something on aftermarket, you have a limited slip diff. THIS IS NOT A LOCKER.
"also, my transfer case does not let the front hubs and c/v joints spin all the time like your ancient toy does (if its even a 4x4). the wheels are free to spin by themselves until the tc is actuated. its called pulse-vacuum hub locking..."
-what?? you have good 'ol part-time 4wd just like everyone else.
"duh. think before you post inaccurate info."
-I hope the irony is not lost on you...
The most challenging trails involved some short uphills with large loose rocks.. There were a few trucks doing the trails as well.. I saw no Tacomas nor any Rangers. Most of the trucks were Jeeps of various types. Most of the trucks doing this were also modifed with slight lifts, larger tires and I'm sure other stuff that isn't as obvious.. The most 'stock' looking vehicle was a Ford Explorer of all things.
So, it looks like that folks who want to do serious off-roading have vehicle specifically built for this purpose. I don't deny that a new Ranger or Tacoma could do these trails, but it doesn't look like folks want their daily driver vehicle to be put through this punishment..
I would ignore tbunder as he really doesn't seem to accurately represent Rangers or Tacomas..
We all know that both trucks can be easily modifed for the more extreme off-road circumstances. We also know that both vehicle are similar in quality.. Now with Ford offering a similar factory package(fx4) to Toyota's TRD, everyone can have fun..
It is nice that the Ranger has 4 doors, making it easy to get your dry gear in and out..
For those folks who just want a good truck to haul stuff around, and drive it to and from work everyday, it would appear the Ranger has the advantage..
bess, the Ranger is a good value if you use it as you stated. But if you want something that is more capable on the trails in stock form, and want better resale value, the Tacoma TRD is the only choice. It's still the only truck to come stock with a true locking rear differential, which makes all the difference in the world. It just depends on your needs...
Per Edmunds:
1993 Toyota Half Ton 2 Dr STD Standard Cab SB
Trade In $2,518
1993 Ford Ranger 2 Dr XLT Standard Cab SB
Trade In $2,493
Of course the Tacoma Nameplate didn't exist back in 93, but in my case, I would be saving 25 bucks if I went with the Toy. Woopie. Of course you would be a fool to think that a value written down in a book or on a website is set in stone. However use these figures for a generalization of what the actual amount may be. Offset that by the higher "add-on" costs for toyota to offer the same standard equipment found on Ranger, in additional to the added financing, it only makes financial sense to go with Ford Ranger.
Also the Locker isn't God's gift to compact trucks. It sure can get you up a slippery incline, but if highway and on-road manners is what you want (and will be driving over 95% of the time) you might want to test drive a Ranger with a LSD. At least the manual says you can drive faster than 15mph with it. Also a detroit locker can be had for under 500 bucks. Well under the price difference on Ranger vs. TRD.
Disagree about trucks? Fine, no problem. But don't let that lead to the name-calling and insult throwing.
Back to the trucks!
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
Funny story. Years ago, I had an 84 VW Scirocco that was totaled in an accident (not my fault). Being that I had no collision insurance, I had to fight the other driver's insurance company for a settlement. They offered me $800 because that's what NADA and KBB said it was worth; they also said if I wanted more, I would have to provide proof that the car was being sold for more than $800 in the real world. As it turned out, a friend of mine worked in the classified ads department of a large newspaper and printed every ad for 84 Sciroccos advertised for sale the last two years. Average price was $4300, and that's exactly what the insurance company wound up paying. The point is NADA and KBB can be WAY off the mark.
Stang, your comments on the locker's upsetting a truck's highway manners are COMPLETELY erroneous, at least when we talk about the Tacoma. The Tacoma's rear locker can be be engaged at will by the driver only when needed, then turned off. The rest of the time it's good old LSD, so you get the best of both worlds. I assure you, there's no hopping and tire chirping going around corners in my truck; the locker is turned off. I understand and can appreciate your point, however, on trucks with full-time lockers.
Tblunder, you've proven to be TOO UNKNOWLEDGEABLE to have an intelligent conversation with. You can't even tell what tire sizes you have, the difference between lockers and LSDs, what swaybars do, ETC.
Everybody needs to take the time to appreciate all trucks, whether it's a Tacoma, Frontier, Ranger, full sized pickups, etc... Take it from someone who has been exposed to nothing but tiny micro-hatchbacks and the occasional wierd looking, oddly proportioned,dough-nut tired cube van and has not seen one real American style pickup in quite some time.